Marc Tamasco at Foxnews.com reported our least favorite journalism professor – Jason Johnson, the MS NOW contributor – appeared on The Weekend on Saturday to suggest Trump-ordered strikes on terrorist on Nigeria are racist. Of course he did. "Look, if the president of the United States suddenly decided that he cared about the very same countries that he called ‘s---hole’ countries five years ago — that the president of the United States sat there with a giant chess board with Nicki Minaj and was like, ‘Where should the Barbs go?’ OK, fine. Maybe this all makes sense, but it doesn’t," Johnson argued. Instead, "We know that this is just another opportunity for this administration to engage in violence in a Brown country in order to flex their power." Of course he did: MS NOW contributor and professor Jason Johnson suggested Trump's strikes on terrorists in Nigeria were racist, "just another opportunity for this administration to engage in violence in a Brown country in order to flex their power." pic.twitter.com/Uk5WhATHtw — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) December 29, 2025 It began with co-host Eugene Daniels suggesting he’d go first to Johnson among their assembled pundits because he would be chomping at the bit to attack Trump. Johnson said Trump’s attacks failed the logic test. “"BBC did a whole investigation as to whether or not the numbers being spread by Republicans are even true. Has it been 100,000 people? Has it been 6,000 people? Are they conflating different kinds of numbers?" he asked. “And also remember that the terrorist organizations that are operating in Nigeria, they don't care if you are a Christian or a Muslim or any other religion, they're attacking everybody. So this whole thing doesn't really make any sense.” There are a whole pile of genocide-truthers on the Left who cannot acknowledge that Christians are being singled out for death. After unloading the crazy take, Johnson acknowledged that “this is not Venezuela, the government in Nigeria, Abuja, actually said, hey, we're actually working with the president on this. So if there's one vaguely bright spot, it's the fact that this isn't being done unilaterally. But we can't trust the motivations of United [States].” So wouldn’t that make it less racist in the MS NOW spin factory?

CBS chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford left a panel of liberal journalists in stunned silence during Sunday’s Face the Nation, after she called out the liberal media’s lies about the conservative Supreme Court’s purported “corruption.” She called the media’s narrative “over-reported,” “patently false,” “profoundly irresponsible,” and “dangerous” for the country. Toward the end of the show, moderator Margaret Brennan was leading the panel of CBS journalists (which included Crawford, January-6-obsessed Scott MacFarlane, chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett, and senior White House reporter Jennifer Jacobs) through a segment featuring what they felt were the under-reported and over-reported stories of the year. When it came time for Crawford to give hers, she noted that “there is a narrative that the Supreme Court is corrupt” and “in the tank for [President]Trump.” She followed up by resolutely affirming that, “Not only is that narrative over-reported, it is patently false, and it's dangerous for the institution and the public's faith and confidence in the rule of law.” “This is a conservative Supreme Court. It has been a conservative Supreme Court for 20 years. People can disagree and do disagree with their opinions, but it's profoundly wrong to call it or say corruption where there, in fact, is none,” she added. Pivoting to what was under-reported, Crawford pointed to the Supreme Court’s efforts restore “accountability and our constitutional structure.” “And I think, as we approach our 250th anniversary of this country, it's important to think about the court and their rule of law as the justices are doing, especially if we hope to keep democracy intact,” she warned.   On @FaceTheNation @JanCBS Crawford scolded the press corps in naming her “under-reported” story of the year: “There is a narrative the Supreme Court is corrupt. We saw that emerge in the wake of the Dobbs decision...and now we see it that they’re in the tank for Trump. Not only… pic.twitter.com/2rPcXbEnvQ — Brent Baker ???? ?? (@BrentHBaker) December 28, 2025   A silence fell over the panel for a moment as Brennan tried to figure out how to recover. She locked onto Crawford’s caution for democracy. However, before Brennan could twist into the media’s usual fear mongering about America’s future under/post Trump, Crawford interjected to keep the focus on reporting about the Supreme Court: BRENNAN: That's a big statement, Jan. If we hope to keep democracy in tact. CRAWFORD: If the public loses confidence in the rule of law, I don't know what that means for democracy. BRENNAN: Yeah. Um -- CRAWFORD: And that's why I think some of the rhetoric about corruption is so, so profoundly irresponsible. Crawford had long been one of the few voices of reason at pre-Bari-Weiss-CBS. In 2024, Crawford told off CBS Mornings co-anchor Gayle King who tried to fear-monger about presidential immunity and Trump possibly killing political opponents. She also pushed back against Justice Sotomayor’s “extreme language” used in her dissent to that decision. In 2025, she argued on-air that Trump’s position against national injunctions by regional judges had merit and had been criticized by both parties for many years. Even behind the scenes, Crawford was not afraid to buck her liberal colleagues. In 2024, during an editorial call, she came to the defense of CBS Mornings co-anchor Tony Dokoupil after he offered critical questions to Ta-Nehisi Coates about his pro-Hamas book. “I thought our commitment was to truth,” she declared. Hopefully, Crawford will be allowed more screen time on the network to provide that kind of level-headed, sober analysis and balance. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: CBS’s Face the Nation December 28, 2025 11:23:28 a.m. Eastern (…) MARGARET BRENNAN: Jan, under-reported. JAN CRAWFORD: You know, there is a narrative that the Supreme Court is corrupt. I mean, we saw that emerge in the wake of the Dobbs decision that over turned Roe v. Wade. And now we see it that they’re in the tank for Trump. Not only is that narrative over-reported, it is patently false, and it's dangerous for the institution and the public's faith and confidence in the rule of law. This is a conservative Supreme Court. It has been a conservative Supreme Court for 20 years. People can disagree and do disagree with their opinions, but it's profoundly wrong to call it or say corruption where there, in fact, is none. What’s under-reported is any understanding of what this court has been doing for the past 20 years. Its views of its role, vis-a- vis the other branches. How it sees the law, how it's trying in it’s focus to restore some kind of accountability and our constitutional structure. Again, this is a court that is functional. It is consistent. They are nine justices. They don't necessarily see the Constitution the same way by any means or how to interpret federal law. They’re in a struggle over the proper way to interpret the Constitution, but that's as it should be. And I think, as we approach our 250th anniversary of this country, it's important to think about the court and their rule of law as the justices are doing, especially if we hope to keep democracy intact. [Silence] BRENNAN: That's a big statement, Jan. If we hope to keep democracy in tact. CRAWFORD: If the public loses confidence in the rule of law, I don't know what that means for democracy. BRENNAN: Yeah. Um -- CRAWFORD: And that's why I think some of the rhetoric about corruption is so, so profoundly irresponsible. SCOTT MACFARLANE: And it causes threats. CRAWFORD: Oh, yes. Which again, the justices are under tremendous – and federal judges as well. BRENNAN: Well, it's all institutions, including the fourth estate. (…)

Recently, Paul du Quenoy published a necessary piece at Chronicles putting President Trump’s remark after the murder of Rob and Michele Reiner in proper context. In a Truth Social post that went viral, Trump quipped that Rob Reiner had died of “Trump derangement syndrome,” while also offering condolences and praying that the deceased would “rest in peace.”The media response was instant and hysterical. As du Quenoy notes, legacy outlets erupted in moral outrage, eager to condemn Trump as uniquely depraved. He highlights one of the ugliest examples: a sermon from David Remnick in the thoroughly politicized New Yorker, denouncing Trump as a “degraded” human being.Trump’s remark was ill judged. The media’s response was dishonest. Only one of those failures is being treated as a permanent moral indictment.Du Quenoy asks: Where was this moral sensitivity when figures on the left trafficked in venom — or worse — after the assassination of Charlie Kirk?The answer, of course, is nowhere.This double standard defines our media culture. When rhetorical excess comes from the left, it is ignored, excused, or rationalized. When it comes from the right — especially from Trump — it is proof of moral disqualification. Etiquette is enforced selectively, always against the same targets. From the BBC to the Los Angeles Times, outlets had no difficulty canonizing Reiner while casting Trump as a cartoon villain.A fair point must be made: Trump should not have said what he did. A president should observe certain proprieties, and Trump violates them all too often. I supported his policies and voted for him repeatedly, but that does not require defending every avoidable verbal misfire. This one was a mistake.What deserves closer scrutiny, however, is the media’s attempt to weaponize that mistake. In outlets like People magazine, Trump’s comment was contrasted with Reiner’s allegedly noble reaction to the murder of Charlie Kirk. Reiner, we are told, expressed “horror.” Trump, by contrast, showed cruelty.This framing collapses under minimal honesty.After seeing this contrast repeated again and again, I searched for Reiner’s public statements — not about Kirk, but about Trump. What emerges is not a portrait of an angelic figure suddenly besmirched. For years, Reiner unleashed a steady stream of invective against Trump: “mentally unfit,” “con man,” “fascist,” “lying buffoon,” along with a great many four-letter flourishes unprintable here. He pushed the Trump-Russia hoax long after it had been exposed as fantasy. His political obsession was not subtle, incidental, or private.RELATED: Glenn Beck addresses Trump’s controversial Rob Reiner message Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty ImagesYet this entire record has been scrubbed from the story. Media profiles dwell on Reiner’s filmmaking career and his role as a loving father while erasing his lifelong activism and venom toward Trump. The reason is simple: The people telling the story agree with Reiner’s politics and share his hatred of Trump. Presenting Trump’s animus as unprovoked is not journalism. It is narrative laundering.The comparison with Charlie Kirk’s murder is equally dishonest. Kirk, to my knowledge, never publicly attacked Reiner. There was no shared history, no prolonged feud. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) put it plainly: Trump should have said nothing after Reiner’s death, even if Reiner was obsessed with him. Still, pretending that Trump’s reaction should mirror Reiner’s response to Kirk ignores reality. The relationships were not the same.Nor should Reiner be recast as a purely apolitical figure whose ideology can be set aside for the sake of a tidy morality play. He embraced his identity as a committed leftist as openly as he embraced his Hollywood career. The media’s erasure of that fact mirrors older myths, such as the claim that the “Hollywood Ten” were merely innocent artists with no communist affiliations. You can oppose blacklisting without lying about politics. The left never resists the temptation to lie.So once again, we are presented with a familiar fable: a gentle, virtuous man smeared by a deranged tyrant for no reason at all. It is nonsense — but useful nonsense. It allows the media to posture as arbiters of decency while ignoring their own complicity in coarsening public life.Trump’s remark was ill judged. The media’s response was dishonest. Only one of those failures is being treated as a permanent moral indictment — and that tells you everything you need to know.

On Friday, independent video journalist Nick Shirley published a video on X that he claims shows widespread fraud involving purported day-care centers in Minnesota. Shirley wrote that he “uncovered over $110,000,000 [in fraud] in ONE day.” The video is the latest public allegation of fraud tied to Minnesota’s Somali community and comes as failed Democrat vice presidential nominee and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz faces renewed scrutiny over the issue.In the video, Shirley and his team are seen traveling Minnesota and visiting addresses where federally funded day-care centers are supposed to exist. When he arrived, he often found buildings with no children and seemingly no active day-care facilities.‘There are not enough words to describe the breathtaking failure that has happened under the watch of @GovTimWalz.’In a clip from Shirley’s video that Education Secretary Linda McMahon shared over the weekend, Shirley is shown standing outside a day-care facility identified as “Quality Learing [sic] Center.” The sign appears to misspell the word “learning.” Shirley says that when he attempted to enter the building during regular weekday hours, it was closed and its windows were blacked out. He also claims the center received $1.9 million in government funding.In sharing the clip on X, McMahon wrote, “There are not enough words to describe the breathtaking failure that has happened under the watch of @GovTimWalz.”RELATED: Somali fraud inspires Democrats to assimilate to Somalian culture Blaze Media Illustration and Getty ImagesWalz’s office pushed back over the weekend against Shirley’s allegations. Fox News Digital reported Sunday that a spokesperson for Walz said the governor has spent years working to “crack down on fraud” and has taken steps to strengthen oversight of state programs, including launching investigations into several facilities.The spokesperson also pointed to the state legislature’s role in overseeing the programs and said that at least one business highlighted in Shirley’s reporting had already been shut down by Walz’s administration.Despite the response, criticism continued. In addition to Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Vice President JD Vance praised Shirley’s work, writing on X, “This dude has done far more useful journalism than any of the winners of the 2024 [Pulitzer] prizes.” FBI Director Kash Patel said in a post on X that the bureau is aware of the allegations circulating online. Patel wrote that the FBI had already deployed additional personnel and "investigative resources" to Minnesota to address "large-scale fraud" involving federal programs, even before the issue gained widespread attention on social media. “Fraud that steals from taxpayers and robs vulnerable children will remain a top FBI priority in Minnesota and nationwide,” Patel wrote.Patel also cited previous arrests and convictions as evidence of the bureau’s ongoing efforts to combat fraud in the state.BlazeTV host Christopher Rufo disputed Patel’s characterization, calling it “misleading.” In a post on X, Rufo said Patel was taking "credit for investigations and convictions that occurred under the Biden Administration," adding that the unresolved question concerns alleged fraud that has not yet resulted in charges. “When do we see arrests, mugshots, and new prosecutions?” Rufo wrote.Rufo previously reported on alleged fraud involving Minnesota welfare and health programs earlier this year. As independent journalists such as Shirley continue to highlight the allegations, scrutiny of Minnesota officials, including Walz and U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, has intensified.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Our Gift to You This Holiday Season

Un-EFFING-Believable: Drew Holden's LENGTHY Thread of Media Actively HIDING MN Somali Fraud a MUST-Read

Our Gift to You This Holiday Season

Now There's This: China Encircles Taiwan in Record-Breaking War Games

Did the U.S. Just Strike Land in Venezuela? Trump Says We Hit a 'Big Facility' Hard

That Didn't Age Well: What Walz Said About Child Care Providers in 2024 Comes Back to Haunt Him