Arrests are coming soon in the investigation into an anti-ICE mob that crashed a Sunday morning service at Cities Church in St. Paul, according to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Noem appeared on Newsmax on Tuesday evening and said that arrests would begin “in the next several hours.” The secretary also said that ex-CNN host turned YouTuber Don Lemon could face charges for his involvement in the church protest as well. “There will be arrests tied to that, and people will be brought to justice for how they violated the law in that situation,” said Noem. Noem suggested that Lemon’s claim to have only been a bystander and journalist during the incident at Cities Church is belied by the foreknowledge he had of the demonstration and relationships has with activists involved. “The fact that ahead of time, before this even happened, he said that he had conducted some surveillance before they went into this church, he identified individuals that were going in with him that were activists in the work that they had done in the past, the fact that this entire situation was then posted on the Black Lives Matter website, all of that is something that they’re going to be responsible for,” said Noem. Arrests coming. This weekend an anti-ICE mob targeted a church, emboldened by the reckless rhetoric from Minnesota’s sanctuary politicians and the media. The First Amendment protects speech and peaceful assembly – not rioting. This administration is committed to upholding… pic.twitter.com/rBlFFiFe7U — Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) January 20, 2026 The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, led by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, has led the Trump administration investigation into what took place at Cities Church. Dhillon has been forceful in her denunciations of the activists who stormed the church, as well as in her promises for accountability. Dhillon told The Daily Wire on Monday that the disruption at the church “clearly” represented a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or the FACE Act, that “criminalizes blocking, interfering with, disrupting a house of worship.” “The only question really is who they are and what other offenses there may be,” said Dhillon.

Joy Behar complained on Tuesday that it was time to “do something” about President Donald Trump — and she argued that just getting out in the streets to protest and even voting were not cutting it anymore. Behar claimed that it was time for Trump to go, saying that Americans were just going to have to “step up” and make that happen, although she was largely unclear as to how that would work, logistically speaking. WATCH: The View calls for Congress to invoke the 25th Amendment (but they can’t). pic.twitter.com/wOFHJgGWHp — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 20, 2026 “I think this is the end of it now for [President Trump]. It has to be. And Americans need to step up now. It’s not enough to go into the streets. It’s not enough to vote,” she said. “I believe that people need to start calling their congressmen and their Senators.” “I mean, he has eroded civil rights at this point, he’s erasing history … he’s wrecking the economy, it’ll be decades before we get back to where we’re supposed to be, and he’s alienating us from our friends in NATO,” Behar claimed, as the cohosts voiced their agreement. “And all because he’s not getting his award.” “You know, the shrinks call that a narcissistic injury,” Behar continued. “And that is what will get us into World War III because his ego is involved. And the only thing that Americans can do, including us, I mean, we have a forum here and we speak out.” Behar went on to claim that people loved “The View” for exactly that reason — and she called on the audience to call their representatives and say, “It’s time to do something about this guy, because he’s leading us into World War III.” Sunny Hostin followed Behar, claiming that Trump was only after Greenland because he wanted the rare earth minerals — and that people should take him seriously when he postured about taking the island nation by force. Behar interrupted then, claiming that she blamed Congress because she believed the president was not well and held them responsible for failing to do something about it. The 25th Amendment was mentioned, but as Alyssa Farah Griffin pointed out, that would have to come from the president’s own cabinet.

The newest “Star Trek” series is apparently so awful that it got the original Captain Kirk to see eye-to-eye with one of President Donald Trump’s closest advisers. White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Homeland Security adviser Stephen Miller responded to a brief clip of the new Paramount+ series “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy” in an X post, arguing that the only way for producers to save the show would be to give full creative control to actor William Shatner. “Tragic. But it’s not too late for @paramountplus to save the franchise,” Miller said. “Step 1: Reconcile with @WilliamShatner and give him total creative control.” Shatner responded several days later, saying, “I am so on the same page with you @StephenM<! The fact that they have not [cured] Hyperopia by the 32rd Century is an abysmal oversight on the writers!” “Also @paramountplus needs to up the budget because I’m sure that a well oiled organization like Starfleet in the distant future could afford more than one pair of glasses for at least this hyperopic bridge crew,” Shatner continued, adding, “Do they pass the glasses around while piloting the ship? Shame on the line producers! That is what you meant, right?” “I am ready to assume command of the series! Call me!” he concluded. Shatner was written out of the franchise in the 1994 film “Star Trek: Generations” – a move he’s said was made because producers wanted to move on to solely using the “Star Trek: The Next Generation” cast led by British actor Patrick Stewart’s Jean-Luc Picard. Shatner said that he was told before filming began for “Generations” that Captain Kirk was going to die in the film whether he participated or not – and so he opted for an onscreen death that allowed him a heroic exit. “So the producer said, ‘We’re going to kill Kirk because we think that The Next Generation will make more money at the box office,'” he explained. Three more movies followed with “The Next Generation” cast, and the series has since rebooted with three more films, starring Chris Pine as Captain Kirk.

Grab a mug and hold on by the handle because the tea coming from a steaming member of the Beckham family is piping hot. After years of speculation, Brooklyn Beckham announced to the world this week that he is done with his famous parents, David and Victoria Beckham, and has no plans to reconcile after claiming his family tried to sabotage his marriage. “I do not want to reconcile with my family. I’m not being controlled, I’m standing up for myself for the first time in my life,” Brooklyn said. In a lengthy post on Instagram, the 26-year-old said his parents have tried to ruin his relationship with his wife, Nicola Peltz Beckham, well before the two tied the knot in 2022. “The night before our wedding, members of my family told me that Nicola was ‘not blood’ and ‘not family.’ Since the moment I started standing up for myself with my family, I’ve received endless attacks from my parents, both publicly and privately, that were sent to the press on their orders,” Brooklyn said. The Beckham’s first born continued with scathing allegations against his parents, including that they tried to bribe him to sign away the rights to his name, his mom refused to make Nicola’s wedding dress, and his parents would invite his former flings around the family to purposely make him and his wife uncomfortable. Brooklyn added that several members of his family allegedly told him that Nicola was “not blood” and “not family” ahead of their wedding day. But wait— the most public part of the allegations may be that Brooklyn claims Victoria “hijacked” the “first dance” during his wedding from his wife, Nicola, and “danced very inappropriately.” “My mum hijacked my first dance with my wife, which had been planned weeks in advance to a romantic love song. In front of our 500 wedding guests, Marc Anthony called me to the stage where the schedule was planned to be my romantic dance with my wife but instead my mum was waiting to dance with me instead,” Brooklyn said. “She danced very inappropriately on me in front of everyone. I’ve never felt more uncomfortable humiliated in my entire life. We wanted to renew our vows so we could create new memories of our wedding day that bring us joy and happiness, not anxiety and embarrassment.” Brooklyn and Nicola noticeably didn’t attend David’s 50th birthday bash last spring. Don’t worry, Brooklyn addressed this scenario as well. “We still travelled to London for my dad’s birthday and were rejected for a week as we waited in our hotel room trying to plan quality time with him. He refused all of our attempts, unless it was at his big birthday party with a hundred guests and cameras at every corner. When he finally agreed to see me, it was under the condition that Nicola wasn’t invited,” Brooklyn said. The now-obvious strain was solidified late last year when he blocked his parents and brothers on social media. “The narrative that my wife controls me is completely backwards,” Brooklyn said. “I have been controlled by my parents for most of my life.” David was asked about his son’s statements on Wednesday at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland. The soccer legend chose to be “Switzerland” on the matter and ignored the question from the reporter. Later in the day, David appeared on a talk show where he seemingly addressed the accusations by discussing the positives and negatives of social media. “It can be dangerous, but what I’ve found—especially with my kids as well—use it for the right reasons,” Beckham said on CNBC’s “Squawkbox.” He shared how he has used social media for good before adding, “I’ve tried to do the same with my children—to educate them. They make mistakes. Children are allowed to make mistakes … you have to sometimes let them make those mistakes as well.” Brooklyn doesn’t view his social media spill as a mistake, instead saying, “My wife and I do not want a life shaped by image, press, or manipulation. All we want [is] peace, privacy and happiness for us and our future family.” Though Brooklyn said he has found “peace” since parting with his once picture-perfect family, stay tuned for the next chapter in this apparent fractured fairytale.

Normally Stephen Miller, the White House homeland security adviser, spends his time focusing on major issues facing this country and the world at large — like removing illegal aliens from the United States, purchasing Greenland, deposing South American communists, and so on. But every now and then, Stephen Miller weighs in on topics that — at least on the surface, and several layers below the surface — don’t seem quite as important. For example, the other day, Miller offered his assessment of the new “Star Trek” show on Paramount+, called “Starfleet Academy.” Here’s what Miller wrote. It wasn’t exactly a flattering review. Tragic. But it’s not too late for @paramountplus to save the franchise. Step 1: Reconcile with @WilliamShatner and give him total creative control. https://t.co/HRMDcYeBnU — Stephen Miller (@StephenM) January 16, 2026 Credit: @StephenM/X.com Shatner, who of course played Captain Kirk in the original show, responded with this. ? ? I am so on the same page with you @StephenM! The fact that they have not cure Hyperopia by the 32rd Century is an abysmal oversight on the writers!? Also @paramountplus needs to up the budget because I’m sure that a well oiled organization like Starfleet in the distant… https://t.co/96MtYUGGWf — William Shatner (@WilliamShatner) January 19, 2026 Credit: @WilliamShatner/X.com Shatner writes, “I am on the same page with you Stephen Miller!”  He also called out some “abysmal oversights” by the writers, and wrote, “shame on the line producers. I am ready to assume command of the series.” Seeing this exchange, it occurred to me that this new “Star Trek” show is an ideal target for a deep dive — sort of like the one we did Thanksgiving week, with Ken Burns’ documentary about the American Revolution. That’s not because anyone should care about a new streaming show that’s complete garbage. Those are a dime a dozen. Except that these garbage streaming shows somehow cost like 100 million dollars to make, so it’s more like 1.2 billion a dozen. But I digress. The reason we should talk about the state of “Star Trek” as a franchise — and the reason Stephen Miller probably cares about Star Trek — is that it’s a useful window into what the modern Left has become, where they went wrong, and how to defeat them. And on top of that, some of the scenes in this new show are genuinely hilarious — unintentionally — and it will be highly enjoyable to mock them. As a certified Trekkie, I’m more than qualified to weigh in here. I’ve been watching Star Trek ever since the days when Frodo and Hermione were battling Dr. Doom on the Death Star, so I know a lot about this series and the lore behind it. Now, yes, it’s true that Star Trek began in the 1960s as a progressive, liberal show, by the standards of the day. And they weren’t exactly subtle with the messaging about equality. They had a black woman on the bridge, serving as a communications officer, which was unusual at the time. And by the time the movies came out, the writers decided that, in the Star Trek universe, there was no money at all. Everyone just worked for free, to improve mankind. It was a communist utopia. But in those early communist Star Trek shows, there were still some elements that you could describe as Right-wing, at least in modern times. Everyone in the crew was physically fit, which you’d expect from the crew of a military vessel. So there was no body-positivity movement. The leaders were all highly competent, decisive men. The officers talked to one another like serious people, who understood the gravity of their positions. As the author Isaac Young put it: Star Trek’s beating heart was a professional 19th century naval crew in space. It was basically a love letter to Rightwing aristocracy and professionalism with a Leftwing coat of paint, and you can literally pinpoint the exact second it died by the BMI of the cast. https://t.co/wSsFHTDu19 pic.twitter.com/z6VuodF7w7 — Isaac Young (@HariSel57511397) January 12, 2026 Credit: @HariSel57511397/X.com And more importantly, the old Star Trek shows explicitly rejected the idea that everyone is a “blank slate.” Every species on the ship was clearly distinct, in significant ways. According to my producers, who wouldn’t lie to me about something like this, the Klingons were the warriors who were obsessed with honor and violence. The Vulcans were cold and unemotional but highly logical. The Ferengi were scheming and untrustworthy. And so on. Ferengi sound to me like some kind of parasitic infection you pick up in an African jungle, but apparently they’re an alien species in Star Trek. The point is that these differences weren’t inherently good or bad. They were just unavoidable, consistent differences. That’s how liberals and most communists — including Gene Roddenberry, the creator of the series — used to view the world. They recognized differences between large groups of people, and they wrote a show about those people getting along, sometimes. But new Star Trek, like modern Leftists, takes a very different approach. They enforce the fiction of blank-slateism — meaning that everyone starts life with a blank slate. Under this worldview, no particular demographic has any inherent advantage or disadvantage over another. We’re all the same; we’re just molded by our environment. This is unscientific and factually, obviously wrong. But it’s a core tenet of Leftism. And that’s why, at every opportunity, “Starfleet Academy” on Paramount+ takes pains to push blank-slateism. For example, no longer are Klingons a warrior race that’s fixated on honor and warfare. Instead, Klingons are now into science and bird-watching: Watch: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy So, you can already see that racial diversity was very, very important to the writers of this show. Unfortunately, writing was not important to the writers of this show. A lot of people have accused Starfleet Academy of having bad acting, which it does. But you can’t blame the actors. Think about the dialogue here. One character says: “I watch birds. They’re beautiful.” And the other says: “Nice.”  What do you want an actor to do with that? You try delivering those lines in an award winning way. Daniel Day Lewis couldn’t elevate this material. It’s impossible. But at least it really subverts your expectations to have a gay birdwatching Klingon. And more to the point, it completely erases anything unique about the entire race. And of course, the people who are writing this trash — the people who are going out of their way to turn traditionally masculine characters into effeminate bird-watchers — are women. A large portion of the writing staff of this show, including the lead writer and a show runner, are women. And with this show, they’re showing us exactly how liberal women see the world in 2026. For instance, judging by this show, liberal women still haven’t recovered from Donald Trump’s first term. They’re still very upset about the fact that, when parents commit crimes, they’re separated from their children. In fact, that’s the plot device that “Starfleet Academy” uses in order to put the entire show in motion. The show begins with the villain — a white guy, of course, played by Paul Giamatti, who is way, way too talented to be here. Paul Giamatti on Starfleet Academy is like if Marlon Brando was still alive and played the villain on the 5th season of “Stranger Things,” opposite a bunch of actors who wouldn’t get the job if they auditioned for a high school play. Anyway, Giamatti, who must be working to pay off some serious gambling debts or something, plays a character who is working with an impoverished woman to commit a space robbery. And a Starfleet officer is ultimately murdered during the robbery. By any measure, this crime means that both Paul Giamatti, and the mother, should go to prison for a very long time. Instead, they throw the book at Giamatti, and the mother has to go to rehab. Yes, rehab, for committing felony murder. So already, this is an extremely lenient sentence for the mother, by any measure. She commits robbery and murder, and her sentence is to talk about her feelings. But the show immediately tells us that, in fact, that sentence is a great travesty of justice. That’s because the mother, in order to go to rehab, has to be separated from her child, who is taken into the custody of Starfleet. The Starfleet woman who issues the sentence — played by Holly Hunter, who’s extremely difficult to understand when she talks — comes to regret it. She has a full-on meltdown, actually. She quits her job in Starfleet and becomes a teacher. And that leads to this remarkable scene, where a high-ranking officer tries to convince her to go back to work. This is one of the most cliche’d kinds of scenes in shows like this, but they manage to make it even worse than normal. Watch: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy First of all, what a way to date the show. Everyone can tell that they wrote this a decade ago. The Left doesn’t pretend to care about “family separations” anymore. They’re straight-up admitting that, in their view, only Nazis enforce immigration law, period. They’ve dropped the pretext of being outraged by “family separations.” But in Star Trek, apparently, they’re still hung up about the fact that, if you murder someone, you’ll get separated from your family. If you have a child, you should be able to commit any crime you want. That’s their position. And then we learn that, in fact, the entire show is going to be a power fantasy for the white liberal woman who’s been frozen in a time capsule since 2017. The white female captain decides to track down the child, 15 years later, and offer him a career in Starfleet — even though, by that point, he’s become a criminal himself. Watch: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy This is the dream of every Leftist woman who voted for Kamala Harris. They dream of breaking oppressed, multracial illegal aliens (and other criminals) out of prison. The more crimes they’ve committed, the better.  And of course, in this show — spoiler alert — the multiracial criminal saves the ship in the end. He reprograms the villain’s goo that’s eating the ship alive, or something like that. So he’s a genius, in addition to being a criminal. He’s far smarter than any of the professional officers on the ship, somehow. All he needed was a better environment — and for his mother to get away with murder. This is the blank-slate fantasy that underlies Leftism. And at some level, they know it’s a fantasy because they don’t pretend to take anything in this show seriously. The old shows would at least try to present thoughtful, intelligent content. But throughout “Starfleet Academy,” the female captain sits in her chair like a cat lady who’s lounging at her house, watching reruns of Grey’s Anatomy. Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy She keeps the same posture even when the ship is being attacked and nearly destroyed because she decides to take a random detour. Sometimes she has her glasses on, because in the future, they’ve figured out intergalactic space travel and teleportation, but not optometry. And by the way, speaking of that “attack” on the ship — the big dramatic moment in the show — it gave us yet another insight into the IQ of the writer’s room. See if you notice anything odd about the dialogue in this scene: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy Yes, they’ve got a ton of injuries on the crew. Things are blowing up, and people are seriously hurt. Some senior officers have been impaled, in fact. But on the bright side, there are “no casualties.” Not to nitpick, but somehow, through the entire production of this show, none of the 15 executive producers, none of the 20 writers, none of the crew members, none of the actors, and none of the directors picked up on the fact that a seriously injured individual counts as a “casualty.” The show made it all the way through production without a single person noticing that the doctor of the ship doesn’t know what a “casualty” is. A few minutes earlier, when the attack began, there was another technical error. This one, admittedly, is a little harder to spot. But if you’re watching the video version of the podcast, see if you can identify it: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy They say the incoming fire is coming from the port side of the ship. And then they cut to the CGI shot, where the fire is clearly coming from the starboard side. It’s obvious what happened here. The woman writing the show — who was probably hot and bothered by all of the fan-fiction she was writing about rescuing a multiracial criminal and turning him into a Starfleet officer — quickly looked up the definition of “port.” And she learned from ChatGPT, which also wrote most of the script for her, that “port” means “the left side of the ship when facing the front.” But for this definition to work, you have to understand that you’re facing the front of the ship, while facing in the same direction as the bow of the ship. So in this diagram, “port” is the red portion of the diagram. So in this CGI shot, the weapons are hitting the starboard section of the ship, not the port. In a show with any standards, they’d be embarrassed by this. The bridge crew on this ship is supposed to consist of professional, highly trained officers. But they don’t know the difference between port and starboard. Of course, the point of modern storytelling in Hollywood isn’t to create a realistic environment, or believable dialogue. Instead, they’re contractually obligated to shoehorn as much Leftist ideology as possible into the episode. And to that end, we’re introduced to a “jerk” character among the cadets, who of course is played by a white actor. So the villain and the jerk cadet are both white men. But to the extent that white people are portrayed positively in this show, they’re either salivating over criminals, or they’re lesbians delivering DEI struggle sessions. This is from Episode 2 — it’s a viral clip you may have seen already. Watch: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy One thing you immediately notice when you watch these woke streaming shows is just how bad they look. Putting aside the atrocious ChatGPT dialogue and the wooden, lifeless acting. It just looks cheap, even though they spent more than 10 million dollars per episode. They had better sets, with more character, in the 1960s. From the looks of it, it appears that they shot the entire season of Starfleet Academy at a Chuck-e-Cheese. And hired the employees to be the lead actors in the show. The rest of Episode 2 isn’t much better. They have a telepathic species using sign language, for the first time in the show’s history, as a way to appeal to the deaf community.  Yes, in the future, telepaths — who by definition have an extremely advanced system of communication that’s beyond human comprehension — are also using sign language. They apparently retconned this, changing the way the whole species works, just for the sake of appealing to deaf people. Then they spend the rest of the episode telling us that walls are bad, and that Donald Trump is a bad man because he built a border wall. Again, parts of this show were definitely written a decade ago. Then, in a more modern touch, they also tell us that the multiracial criminal isn’t actually a bad guy, because he didn’t get “due process.”  You see, he’s just like Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Watch: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy First of all, even if you commit a crime outside of a “jurisdiction,” you can still be considered a criminal in that jurisdiction. If a high school student commits some heinous crime in Tokyo, and somehow escapes to the United States, the United States will still definitely treat him like a criminal. We certainly wouldn’t let him into West Point, which is what’s basically happening in this show. We’d arrest him and put him on a flight to Japan. And for what it’s worth, the telepathic guy actually makes a great point in this scene. We’re supposed to think he’s obnoxious, but he’s absolutely correct. He points out that Starfleet’s standards must be pretty low, if they’re letting a criminal into their highly selective academy because a liberal white woman is attracted to him. And in response, the white liberal captain explains that, actually, they didn’t lower the standards at all. You see, in this Leftist fantasy, the multiracial criminal from a broken home has a 98th-percentile test score. That’s a revealing moment, in a few ways. The writers could’ve said, “Yeah, he had bad test scores, but he brings other skills to the table.” But they insisted on keeping the line about 98th percentile scores, so they can have a girlboss “gotcha” moment where she puts the racist white man (again, another nasty white man) in his place. And they included this line because, even in their fantasies, Leftists still recognize that objective standards are important. They just imagine that, since everyone is a blank slate, all of their preferred demographic groups are capable of meeting those standards — even though it’s not remotely true. Every streaming service, across virtually every show, in virtually every genre, is now full of shows like this. To give just one more example, there’s a new Agatha Christie adaptation on Netflix, where they introduce a black character (who wasn’t in the original novel) who lectures all of the white people about how Europeans destroyed Africa. It’s just a constant stream of propaganda, and all of it says the exact same thing.  Watch: Credit: Paramount+/Star Trek: Starfleet Academy They insert dialogue like this, where it obviously doesn’t belong or make any sense, into modern adaptations of classic works of literature. You’re trying to watch a mystery series based on a novel from the 1920s, and instead of getting that, you’re informed that white people caused all of Africa’s problems. And the person telling you this is a Cameroonian scientist, not a German like the original novel, for the simple reason that the writers felt compelled to deliver yet another lecture on colonialism. They really thought that would be compelling to watch. They’ve done this to Star Trek, they’ve done it to Agatha Christie, and they do it to everything else. Streaming services are full of this garbage — most of which is based on fabricated history, bad data and anti-white feminist propaganda. We put a lot of effort into my show, “Real History,” for exactly this reason. You can make a very strong case that, if more people understood history, then streaming services would have a lot less slop. That’s because, in all of these shows, the writers see themselves as “atoning” for past “injustices.” They believe it’s their role to bring about “equity” because of atrocities that never actually happened. And audiences, for the most part, don’t know any better. Particularly if you went to public schools, then no one ever told you the truth. But even if you don’t buy that theory, the fact remains that most new streaming shows are unwatchable. They treat you like you have a Somali-tier IQ, and they beat you over the head with Leftist messaging. “Real History” — which will continue monthly, with new episodes — is my effort to combat this trend and ultimately, to end it. Let’s hope there are many more similar efforts to come.