Deep down, most of our lawmakers, interpreters and political commentators are truly frustrated theatre kids at heart. Leave it to our DEI judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, who's supposed to uphold justice on the Supreme Court to turn that role into nothing more than a court jester.  Broadway decided what better way to perform their new feminist rendition of “Romeo and Juliet,” than by rewarding the judge, who doesn’t even know what a woman is, with a cameo?! But in a way, her broadway debut is kind of symbolic. Both in fiction and real life, our most vocal leftists, those same theatre types, have turned justice on its head.  Tune into this episode of “Woke of the Weak!”

The PBS NewsHour was in full panic on Monday evening after ABC settled a defamation lawsuit by Donald Trump, offering scaremongering with this online headline: “ABC News settlement with Trump raises concerns about press freedom in his 2nd term.” PBS’s guest, New York Times business investigations editor David Enrich, mourned ABC’s decision “sends a really chilling message.” Both PBS and Enrich hyped a "crackdown on unfavorable news coverage." Geoff Bennett: Mr. Trump also weighed in on a defamation lawsuit he settled with ABC News for $15 million. The suit followed an ABC segment earlier this year in which George Stephanopoulos said Mr. Trump had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. A New York jury found him liable for sexual abuse. Amna Nawaz: The $15 million will be contributed to Trump's future presidential foundation and museum. Mr. Trump was asked about the settlement and whether he plans to file similar suits against other news outlets or individuals. Donald Trump: I think you have to do it because they're very dishonest. You need a fair press….I'm doing this not because I want to. I'm doing this because I feel I have an obligation. Nawaz: Following this all closely is New York Times reporter David Enrich, whose upcoming book Murder the Truth explores challenges to press freedoms…. That upcoming book sounds like liberal catnip. Full title: “Murder the Truth -- Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful.” The first promotional blurb comes from Trump-trashing academic Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a PBS favorite. Enrich’s piece on the front of Monday’s Business section was ominously headed “Message Sent With a Rise in Threats of Libel Suits.” The online headline deck was even more so: “Trump and His Picks Threaten More Lawsuits Over Critical Coverage -- The small flurry of threatened defamation suits is the latest sign that the incoming Trump administration appears poised to do what it can to crack down on unfavorable media coverage.” Enrich wrote: “The deal set off criticism of ABC News by those who perceived the network as needlessly bowing down to Mr. Trump. And it led some legal and media experts to wonder whether the outcome would embolden Mr. Trump and others to intensify their assault on the media, at a moment when many news organizations are struggling with declining public trust and deteriorating finances.” As usual, this ignores how the media can't intensify their assault on Trump -- since it's been at full intensity since 2015. The discussion continued with no mention of “discovery,” the legal term for the exchanging of evidence between opposing parties before trial, which in this case would risk uncovering potentially embarrassing internal communications from ABC News that would confirm the news network’s inexorable hostility toward Trump. Instead, the journalists played dumb about why ABC settled, though other networks had ideas. Attorney Andrew Stoltmann was quoted by Fox News about the potentially embarrassing discovery process: "There likely would’ve been a tsunami of bad emails and text messages that would’ve been revealed that would’ve fed into the incoming president’s argument that it is biased against him.” Amna Nawaz kept it vague:  Nawaz: My understanding is, the bar for defamation in particular is high for public figures. So what do we know about why ABC did decide to settle? Enrich: That is a very good $15 million question right now. And it seems like -- based on the reporting we have done and just talking to people, it seems like they were just very reluctant to have a long legal battle with the president of the United States…. Enrich went on to warn the decision “potentially sends a really chilling message to anyone who wants to not only scrutinize or criticize the president, but really anyone else who is influenced by Trump.” This paranoid segment was brought to you in part by Consumer Cellular. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 12/16/24 7:27:18 p.m. (ET) Geoff Bennett: Mr. Trump also weighed in on a defamation lawsuit he settled with ABC News for $15 million. The suit followed an ABC segment earlier this year in which George Stephanopoulos said Mr. Trump had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. A New York jury found him liable for sexual abuse. Amna Nawaz: The $15 million will be contributed to Trump's future presidential foundation and museum. Mr. Trump was asked about the settlement and whether he plans to file similar suits against other news outlets or individuals. Donald Trump: I think you have to do it because they're very dishonest. You need a fair press. And the press is — no, I see others. I have a few others that I'm doing. I'm going to — as an example, we're bringing — I'm doing this not because I want to. I'm doing this because I feel I have an obligation. Amna Nawaz: Following this all closely is New York Times reporter David Enrich, whose upcoming book "Murder the Truth" explores challenges to press freedoms. David, welcome to the "News Hour." Thanks for being with us. David Enrich, Author, "Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful": Thanks for having me. Amna Nawaz: So let's start with that ABC News settlement. They're paying $15 million in that settlement, plus a million dollars for Mr. Trump's legal fees. They also added an editor's note on the interview page Web site. It reads thusly: "ABC News and George Stephanopoulos regret statements regarding President Donald J. Trump made during an interview by George Stephanopoulos with Representative Nancy Mace on ABC's 'This Week' on March 10 of 2024." David, how strong a case did Mr. Trump have in this lawsuit? And how usual is a lawsuit like this in the first place? David Enrich: Well, lawsuits like this have become increasingly common. And this is a tactic that Trump decades ago began pioneering. And he has just been banging this drum more and more loudly ever since. And it's a tactic that's caught on, especially in MAGA circles, but really, politicians, business leaders, companies, big organizations are increasingly using defamation threats and defamation lawsuits as kind of a cudgel to attack unfavorable news coverage. And the reality in this case is that, according to everyone I have spoken to, Trump's case against ABC News seemed not great. And there are very strong protections built into the First Amendment and how it's interpreted by the Supreme Court that give the media and others a lot of leeway when they are scrutinizing powerful individuals, no more so than the president-elect of the United States. And it's basically meant to prevent exactly this type of lawsuit. So I think ABC had a pretty good chance of prevailing in court if they had wanted to let it go that power. Amna Nawaz: My understanding is, the bar for defamation in particular is high for public figures. So what do we know about why ABC did decide to settle? David Enrich: That is a very good $15 million question right now. And it seems like — based on the reporting we have done and just talking to people, it seems like they were just very reluctant to have a long legal battle with the president of the United States, which is understandable, right? But it also sets the precedent, potentially, that it really could embolden other political leaders, including Trump himself, to really double down on this tactic. So I think there are a lot of people in the First Amendment community and certainly in the media that were very surprised and quite troubled by this decision to essentially concede this to Trump so early on in what could have been a yearslong legal fight. Amna Nawaz: You also heard there Mr. Trump saying today that he might go after other platforms, other individuals, including social media influencers in the same way, not just journalists, so suggesting a much broader use of these kinds of lawsuits. What's the potential impact of that kind of statement? David Enrich: Well, I think it potentially sends a really chilling message to anyone who wants to not only scrutinize or criticize the president, but really anyone else who is influenced by Trump. I mean, already we have seen in the past couple of years a real explosion in the use of legal threats and lawsuits against not just journalists, but everyone. And it's not just people on the right going after people on the left. This is at times a bipartisan trend, where litigation is seen as a solution to shut people up. And I think that's something that we are unfortunately probably going to see a lot more of in the years ahead. And it's not something that is just the mainstream media that's going to be affected by, potentially. And we have — there's — as Trump said today, there are — it's possible he would go after people with huge followings on social media or on YouTube, things like that. So I think it's potentially — the ramifications of this are possibly quite broad. Amna Nawaz: Well, specific to news organizations, we should note that Mr. Trump has another pending lawsuit against CBS News' "60 Minutes." He said today that he might think about suing The Des Moines Register as well. Is there legal precedent that we should be thinking about or considering for how these kinds of cases might be handled? David Enrich: Well, the most important legal precedent is a Supreme Court case from 60 years ago, New York Times v. Sullivan, which basically created a very high threshold for public figures like Trump to prevail in defamation cases. The problem is that — or maybe not the problem, but the fact of the matter is that, in recent years, Trump and many of his allies, including two Supreme Court justices, have expressed a willingness, if not a desire, to reconsider that 1964 decision. And so that really — there's the possibility here that not only will Trump and his allies start bringing more and more of these cases, but that some of the historical protections against these cases having a chilling effect are going to start being chipped away at by the — by federal courts. Amna Nawaz: That is David Enrich of The New York Times, author of the book "Murder the Truth." David, thank you for your time. Really good to talk to you. David Enrich: Thanks for having me. Thank you.

It was a challenging task, but an esteemed panel led by MRC President L. Brent Bozell and MRC’s Vice President for Research and Publications Brent Baker, which included NewsBusters Executive Editor Tim Graham, MRC Director of Media Analysis Geoffrey Dickens and NewsBusters Managing Editor Curtis Houck, boiled down all the biased outbursts from lefty hack hosts, anchors, reporters and pundits in 2024 and declared a winner. This year the winner is Joe Scarborough!  The MSNBC host won for his truly laugh-out-loud March 6 take that the 2024 “version” of President Joe Biden was “intellectually, analytically” the “best Biden ever.”      MRC President L.Brent Bozell announced: “Back in March when it was apparent to everybody that Joe Biden was losing it, here comes Joe Scarborough to not only reject those claims but boldly boast that Biden was quote ‘intellectually’ and ‘analytically’ the sharpest he’s ever been. Four months later his own party dumped him. In a media landscape full of Biden excuse-makers, Scarborough’s sycophancy stood out.” This makes the Morning Joe co-host a back-to-back winner of Worst Quote of the Year! In 2023 he won for his absurd and dire prediction that if Donald Trump won re-election he would “imprison” and “execute” his political opponents. Without further ado, here is the winner (followed by the top runners-up):   WINNER   “Start your tape right now, because I’m about to tell you the truth. And f-you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I’ve known him for years. The Brzezinskis have known him for 50 years. If it weren’t the truth, I wouldn’t say it.”— Co-host Joe Scarborough on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, March 6 rejecting claims Biden was slipping mentally.   FIRST RUNNER-UP “He [Joe Biden] will be remembered as a great President. He will be mentioned in the same sentence as George Washington.”— Long-time Newsweek writer Jonathan Alter on NBC’s Morning News NOW, July 22.   SECOND RUNNER-UP  “It [bloodbath comment] scared me, honestly, you know? I didn’t think ever in my lifetime I would see that….He [Donald Trump] is using that kind of World War II rhetoric that led to the deaths of six — the murders of 6 million people.” — Co-host Sunny Hostin on ABC’s The View, March 18.   THIRD RUNNER-UP “There is an entire right wing media ecosystem that doesn’t exist on the left and it does not exist in the center or mainstream.”— PBS News Hour White House correspondent/CNN analyst Laura Barron-Lopez on CNN’s Inside Politics, November 7.

President-elect Donald Trump has taken a great deal of abuse for proposing the deportation of millions of illegal aliens, potentially as many or even more than Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush deported while in office — 12.29 million and 10.32 million, respectively if counting both formal removals and returns. Leftists and liberal publications, including some that previously tried to blame the Republican for Obama's "cages," have characterized Trump's plan not only as unprecedented but as authoritarian, brutal, costly, fascistic, illegal, racist, and xenophobic. CNN admitted Wednesday that Trump's supposedly unthinkable plan is not only business as usual where immigration enforcement is concerned — discounting the past four years — but reminiscent of the approach taken by an idol of the American left: former President Barack Obama. "While Trump's allies have floated draconian measures to detain and deport people residing in the U.S. illegally, the plans are, in many ways, consistent with the way Immigration and Customs Enforcement has often carried out operations," wrote CNN's White House correspondent Priscilla Alvarez. Not only is there a resemblance in approach, the personnel executing the plan are in some cases carryovers. Trump's border czar nominee Tom Homan was appointed by Obama in 2013 as Immigration and Customs Enforcement's executive associate director of enforcement and removal operations. Homan did such a good job kicking criminal noncitizens out of the country that the Democratic administration gave him the Distinguished Rank Award in 2015. 'They're not doing anything new.' "A lot of the same tactics are being dusted off," John Sandweg, who served as an acting ICE director under Obama, told CNN. "What Tom is talking about are Obama-esque things. He's going to have to do more draconian things to do a million deportations in a year." When accounting for both removals and returns, the Migration Policy Institute indicated Obama deported over 5.2 million noncitizens between 2009 and 2016 and sent nearly one million noncitizens (973,937) packing in his first year. If strictly counting deportations through removal orders, then Obama oversaw more than any other American president up until that time — at least 2.9 million noncitizens. While the liberal press remained more or less deferential, the Latino advocacy group National Council of La Raza (now UnidosUS), the ACLU, and other leftist groups dubbed the Democratic president the "deporter in chief." Trump, evidently held to a different standard, has previously alluded to the efficacy of President Dwight D. Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback," where the U.S. Military helped deport up to 1.3 million illegal aliens within a few months. While CNN noted a similar operation would constitute a dramatic shift in interior enforcement by recent standards, the publication reiterated that the plan so far articulated by Trump aides, again, resembles actions taken during Obama's tenure. For instance, Homan told Center Square last month the "priorities will focus on public safety threats, national security threats and fugitives." CNN noted that "ICE has generally been instructed to follow that protocol, including under President Joe Biden." Although critics have pounced on Homan for telling the Washington Examiner and indicating the same in other interviews that "in sanctuary cities, expect a lot of collateral arrests," that was similarly the case during enforcement operations under previous administrations. The use of military bases to temporarily detain illegal aliens, the return of family detention, and other elements of Trump's quickly solidifying plan were also championed, implemented, and/or expanded by past Democratic administrations. "They're not doing anything new. None of these ideas that are being tossed about are new," Jason House, former ICE chief of staff under the Biden administration, told the liberal publication. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

After many delays and much anticipation, Speaker Mike Johnson unveiled the 1,547-page continuing resolution that Congress will need to pass in order to avert a government shutdown just days before Christmas. The CR was originally supposed to be revealed before the weekend of December 14, but due to ongoing negotiations, the funding bill was not actually revealed until Tuesday night. Although the CR had already become the subject of scrutiny due to the timing and the lack of transparency, the funding bill is now expected to have even more defections after the text of the funding bill was actually made public. 'Soon they will have to face the American people and say, "We've tacked on hundreds of billions of dollars onto the debt because it was easier for us."'"I had hoped to see Speaker Johnson grow a spine, but this bill full of pork shows he is a weak, weak man," Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said in a Wednesday post on X. "The debt will continue to grow. Ultimately the dollar will fail. Democrats are clueless and Big Gov Republicans are complicit. A sad day for America.""Conservative Republicans should start an OnlyFans account considering how often we get screwed," Republican Rep. Kat Cammack of Florida said in a Tuesday post on X. "The CR is a bad deal."‘Twas three days before the gov't shutdownAnd I’m at my deskOn page 54 of this 1,547 page mess.The CR is garbageChocked full of carnage.I’ll be a hard noI won’t stoop that low.— Rep. Paul Gosar, DDS (@RepGosar) December 18, 2024 Despite having the December 20 deadline on their calendars for months, leaders left the CR on the back burner. Consequently, lawmakers are frustrated that they are now forced to vote on a funding bill just days before the deadline. "Congress has had months to negotiate a clean government funding bill to get us to Trump's term," Republican Rep. Michael Cloud of Texas said in a Tuesday post on X. "Yet, here they are again at the last second trying to jam a 1,500+ page CR that could be called for a vote before the required 72 hour rule. The DC Apparatus operates not on transparency, but behind closed doors away from the American people." "There is no strategy," Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of Power the Future, told Blaze News. "The goal here is just for them to all go home for Christmas and to promise the American people that next year they will tackle it. That's been the strategy, or the regular operations of Capitol Hill, for the last 20 years." The CR itself contains numerous provisions that are unrelated to the bare-bones approach many fiscal conservatives had hoped for. The funding bill includes the first pay raise for lawmakers since 2009 as well as an opt-out from Obamacare, $100 billion of disaster relief for hurricane victims, $30 billion of aid for farmers, and a crucial provision transferring the Robert F. Kennedy stadium to the District of Columbia. In short, Johnson threw together a Christmas omnibus for lawmakers to deal with in the 11th hour. While it's not unusual for Congress to put out a Christmas omnibus, Johnson notably said he would take it upon himself to break the tradition. US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.), U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and US House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) listen during a Hanukkah reception at the US Capitol Building on December 17, 2024, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)"We have broken the Christmas omni," Johnson said during a press conference in September. "And I have no intention of going back to that terrible tradition. So there won’t be a Christmas omnibus. ... We’re not gonna do any buses.”"People call me 'NostraThomas' for accurately predicting Speaker Johnson would use the Christmas recess to force a massive spending bill through Congress," Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky said in a Wednesday post on X. "After claiming he would not, Johnson is embracing a D.C. tradition that's nearly as old as decorating Christmas trees."The Christmas omnibus will kick the can down the road until mid-March, roughly 100 days into President-elect Donald Trump's administration. Trump's hands are tied as a result, giving him and his administration no control over the budget for the first 100 days, weakening his ability to implement the MAGA mandate Americans voted for. "It's always next year, and it's very frustrating," Turner told Blaze News. "When you see the American people gave a very decisive mandate on spending, on the cost of food, on the cost of energy, on the cost of goods and services, and still they're tacking on just absurd amounts of spending to make their jobs easier." "Soon they will have to face the American people and say, 'We've tacked on hundreds of billions of dollars onto the debt because it was easier for us,'" Turner continued. "But it's not your job to do it the easy way. It's your job to do it the right way."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Pizzeria owners in Tennessee received a barrage of hateful social media posts after they declined to cater a gay wedding.Rumors apparently began to swirl recently that Justin and Amanda Jo Bennett — who own Pizzeria Cortile in Red Bank, Tennessee, just north of Chattanooga — would refuse to cater a same-sex wedding. According to a screenshot of a direct message shared by the Daily Mail, the establishment confirmed those reports: "We do not cater same sex weddings."On Monday, the owners took to social media to clarify their position. "Recently, we made the difficult decision not to cater a wedding due to our personal beliefs," a message posted to the Pizzeria Cortile Facebook account said.The owners then indicated they knew they would soon face backlash for those "personal beliefs." "This belief comes from a place of personal conviction, one we know is not shared by everyone, and it is one we hold without judgment toward others," the message continued.The message also noted that the restaurant has served "people from all walks of life" and has attempted "to create an environment where everyone feels loved and respected." The owners further expressed hope that others would respect their personal beliefs."We hope with time we can find an opportunity to extend grace and listen to one another, and to remember that while we may not always agree, we can still treat each other with dignity and love."'Liberals want to shout love everyone and everyone needs to have their own beliefs, but they mean everyone except Christians.'Since the Bennetts limited replies on that particular Facebook post, users inundated previous posts with thousands of messages, most of which accused the owners of engaging in wanton discrimination and "homophobia.""I prefer my pizza without a side of homophobia," wrote one user."Imagine refusing money because of homophobia ... in this economy is insane to me," added another.Others went further and called the owners "bigots.""There aren’t two reasonable sides here. Nobody asked you to be gay. Or promote any kind of message. They asked for pizza. And bigots refused. That’s the whole story. It isn’t any deeper. It is black-and-white discrimination," said one."You can try to wrap this up in a pretty bow by using words like 'our personal beliefs', but what you are doing is discriminating against others. It is bigotry, plain and simple. Very, very disappointed in y’all," said another comment."I hope your business tanks," said one user, while another added, "Enjoy being broke soon." Both included smiley emojis in their respective posts.Even Hollie Berry, a former mayor of Red Bank, seemed to side with the leftists, taking to social media to post the city's mission statement, which promises to be "welcoming" to "all" and to offer "excellent and efficient services," Local 3 News reported.However, others noted that the pizzeria is a private business and that the owners have the right to their personal views, just as LGBTQ+ activists do."The Supreme Court has ruled on this, and it is in fact not discrimination. You are free to make your own choices but so are they. Who are you to force someone else to share your beliefs but then expect them not to do the same?" one user wrote.Yet another individual who claims to know the Bennetts personally defended the couple, describing them as "such a kind and sweet family" and insisting that those leveling the criticism "don't truly know them." The individual also called out leftists for their "hateful" hypocrisy:"It saddens me that Christians get so attacked. Liberals want to shout love everyone and everyone needs to have their own beliefs, but they mean everyone except Christians.""In case you were unaware, if you own your own business, you have the right to do as you please."Pizzeria Cortile did not respond to the New York Post's request for comment, and Local 3 could not reach the Bennetts for comment.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The cost of buying into the latest AMD Zen 5 ecosystem looks like it’s about to drop, as rumors are circulating about a new budget AMD Ryzen gaming CPU launching very soon. The new AMD Ryzen 5 9600 looks set to sport six cores and 12 threads, and undercut the price of the current entry-level Zen 5 chip, the 9600X. Assuming AMD gets the pricing right, this new chip could end up being the best gaming CPU for budget buyers. Given that the last-gen Ryzen 5 7600X now regularly goes for just $199, we’re hoping that this new CPU will be priced similarly, providing a solid entry-level chip that doesn’t cost a silly amount of money. Continue reading A new budget AMD Ryzen gaming CPU is about to be unleashed, according to leak MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Ryzen 7 7800X3D review, Best gaming CPU, Radeon RX 7800 XT review

XDefiant might still be shutting down, but Ubisoft has just dropped its biggest update yet with the arrival of Season 3. The struggling FPS now has multiple new factions, maps, game modes, and progression systems to get stuck into. That said, existing players still only have around six months until XDefiant is shut down forever, as the free-to-play game never quite found the playerbase it needed to survive. Ubisoft itself said XDefiant was a “high-risk, high-reward” venture, and it’s sad to know that the risk didn’t pay off. Continue reading XDefiant Season 3 is the game’s biggest update yet, but it’s about to shut down MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best XDefiant loadouts, All XDefiant factions, Best XDefiant weapons

After several years, Project Zomboid build 42 is finally playable, albeit in an early form. The long-anticipated update to one of Steam’s best-loved zombie games is a transformative overhaul packed with new features, from richer environments to animal husbandry, hunting, and a dramatic combat rework. Build 42 promises to be one of the most substantial upgrades to the survival game since its early access launch back in November 2013, and now it’s finally ready to test. Continue reading The huge Project Zomboid build 42 is finally playable after years in the making MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best indie games, Best survival games, Best zombie games

NY Times Report About Biden 6 Months Ago Aged Horribly Thanks to NEW NYT Report About Biden