HBO’s John Oliver waited until Sunday to kick off the 2026 season of Last Week Tonight and quickly fell in with the rest of the late night comedians in going after ICE. During his denunciation ritual, Oliver would praise Democrats for shutting down the Department of Homeland Security and call for ICE to be defunded and done away with. Oliver cued up a video by lamenting ICE’s recent budget increases, “Because DHS’s resources are now being pointed at immigration more heavily than ever before to the point it’s being called ‘a veritable Department of Deportation.’ ICE alone was handed an extra $75 billion to spend over Trump's term, tripling its annual budget and leading to this startling fact.” In the video, the narrator joined Oliver in mourning, “Overnight, it became the highest-funded law enforcement agency in U.S. history. If ICE was a military, it would be the 17th richest in the world, worth about the same as Canada's entire armed forces.”   John Oliver kicked off his 2026 season by declaring "whatever the appropriate budget for ICE is—and they're making a pretty compelling argument for it being zero right now" while later praising Democrats for shutting down DHS, "So what can we do? Well, first, and most… pic.twitter.com/wNKtsFIw5U — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) February 17, 2026   Oliver reacted by echoing the Canada analogy while also suggesting ICE should be defunded, “It's true! And whatever the appropriate budget for ICE is—and they're making a pretty compelling argument for it being zero right now—one thing it should definitely not be is the same as the entire Canadian military. Though to be fair, that's not a perfect one-to-one, as I'm pretty sure the Canadian military doesn't totally eat shit on slightly slippery sidewalks.” ICE receiving roughly the same amount of money as the Canadian military says more about Canadian politicians than it does ICE. Nevertheless, Oliver was far from finished. Later, Oliver praised Democrats for their partial government shutdown, “So what can we do? Well, first, and most immediately, with DHS in partial shutdown over its funding, Democrats have to use every ounce of leverage they've got to get major concessions. Bernie Sanders has proposed an amendment that would repeal the $75 billion in additional funding that ICE received, and I don’t know if they'll be able to get all the way to that. They should at the very least get as many hard, enforceable limits on immigration agents' activities as possible.” While Oliver wants the men and women of FEMA, the Coast Guard, and the TSA—not to mention any American travelers who may have to deal with TSA delays—to suffer so that he can stomp his feet on TV, he also doubled down on the idea that ICE has got to go: Now, second, we need to get rid of ICE, period. Public trust in it right now is hovering somewhere between Purdue Pharma and the Titan submersible. It is just not salvageable. And if you're thinking, who will enforce immigration law if ICE is gone? I don’t know, maybe the agencies that did it for decades before 2003. As for DHS as a whole, I would argue it's no longer tenable in its current form. And while maybe there's an argument for having a larger agency coordinating different federal departments, it should probably be redesigned from the ground up, and deliberately this time, not by suddenly gluing together org charts in a blind panic. Interestingly, Oliver would later concede that even if ICE went away and a DOJ-led INS was brought back, immigration laws would still be on the books, which raises the question: if John Oliver had his way, what would immigration law look like? On Sunday, that was a question Oliver was unwilling to consider. Here is a transcript for the February 15 show: HBO Last Week Tonight with John Oliver 2/15/2026 11:41 PM ET JOHN OLIVER: Because DHS’s resources are now being pointed at immigration more heavily than ever before to the point it’s being called “a veritable Department of Deportation.” ICE alone was handed an extra $75 billion to spend over Trump's term, tripling its annual budget and leading to this startling fact. NARRATOR: Overnight, it became the highest-funded law enforcement agency in U.S. history. If ICE was a military, it would be the 17th richest in the world, worth about the same as Canada's entire armed forces. OLIVER: It's true! And whatever the appropriate budget for ICE is—and they're making a pretty compelling argument for it being zero right now—one thing it should definitely not be is the same as the entire Canadian military. Though to be fair, that's not a perfect one-to-one, as I'm pretty sure the Canadian military doesn't totally eat shit on slightly slippery sidewalks. … So what can we do? Well, first, and most immediately, with DHS in partial shutdown over its funding, Democrats have to use every ounce of leverage they've got to get major concessions. Bernie Sanders has proposed an amendment that would repeal the $75 billion in additional funding that ICE received, and I don’t know if they'll be able to get all the way to that. They should at the very least get as many hard, enforceable limits on immigration agents' activities as possible. Now, second, we need to get rid of ICE, period. Public trust in it right now is hovering somewhere between Purdue Pharma and the Titan submersible. It is just not salvageable. And if you're thinking, who will enforce immigration law if ICE is gone? I don’t know, maybe the agencies that did it for decades before 2003. As for DHS as a whole, I would argue it's no longer tenable in its current form. And while maybe there's an argument for having a larger agency coordinating different federal departments, it should probably be redesigned from the ground up, and deliberately this time, not by suddenly gluing together org charts in a blind panic.

Unlike their January 26 interview with our friend and conservative talk radio host Dana Loesch, Monday’s CBS Mornings brought on House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN) for what became seven minutes of hits from the left on the Epstein files, voter integrity, and demands for Republicans “compromis[ing]” to the Democratic position on Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) “reforms.” Featured co-host Vladimir Duthiers also did the Loesch segment, but this time he came loaded for bear, first arguing “Congress appears to be in no hurry to end the latest partial government shutdown” with Republican refusing to acquiesce to Democrat proposals for “major changes” to ICE. His first question to Emmer was asking what point(s) are Republicans willing to give to Democrats: “Democrats are asking for ICE agents to show I.D.s, to wear body cameras and stop wearing masks, among other reforms. What are Republicans willing to compromise on?” Along with dispatching with the body cameras demand by noting it’s already been funded, Emmer addressed the demands for officers to be identified by acknowledging Democrats want ICE agents to be found out, “but they don’t think people should show an ID to vote.” WATCH: Today's example of how CBS News has yet to really change under Bari Weiss. Here was seven minutes on 'CBS Mornings' of GOP House Whip Tom Emmer (MN) being berated about Epstein, voting, and demanding the GOP "compromise" to the Democratic position on warrants to arrest… pic.twitter.com/bzvB6CjZCP — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) February 16, 2026 Not said by Emmer was also the fact that being able to identify officers without masks and adding names would allow lefty protesters (i.e. CBS viewers) to search for ICE agents and protest outside their homes, harass their families, or worse. Duthiers defended this ask because “when [Democrats are] asking for IDs they don’t mean identification in the way that we as ordinary Americans carry them” and instead want “badge number that a police officer would have, not wearing a mask, because there is no way to know an officer who is arresting you who they are, just if they are showing a face.” Duthiers next wondered what Republicans are doing to get Democrats to negotiate, again framing the shutdown as belonging to Republicans and Democrats not needing to budge (click “expand”): DUTHIERS: So do you know what was in the White House’s proposal that the Democrats have rejected? And are you part of the meetings to work through this with the Democrats? Is The White House telling you what is in the bill? EMMER: Vlad, the House did our job. We have an agreement. My position is the Senate should pass the bill that we already passed. The federal law enforcement issue involving Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, they are already funded based on the bill that was signed into law last July through 2029. All the Democrats are doing right now is trying to shut down TSA, the Coast Guard, FEMA, disaster relief. DUTHIERS: Are you talking to them? It sounds like you’re not talking to them? EMMER: Are — the White House? DUTHIERS: To the Democrats. EMMER: The President is the chief negotiator and is working directly with Senate Democrats. DUTHIERS: So, you’re not talking to Democrats. EMMER: We’ve done our job, Vlad. DUTHIERS: Okay. EMMER: I mean, that would suggest that there’s more to do on the House side. Again, this was an agreement between Democrats and Republicans on the House side that the Senate Democrats decided they were not going to honor. DUTHIERS: Right. EMMER: So, that’s an issue that the President and the Senate Democrats have been negotiating. The CBS liberal shifted to the Epstein files which, through Saturday, CBS’s flagship newscasts have spent 309 minutes obsessing over since July. Here again, Duthiers set up the discussion on Democratic terms by wondering if he’s “satisfied with” the release of the files and if “enough has been done by the Justice Department.” When Emmer replied this level of focus was nowhere to be found in the first Trump administration or the Biden administration, Duthiers discounted that by citing Epstein files cheerleader Ro Khana (D-CA) having expressed regret. Emmer then continued: [W]ell, if you let me finish on this, so if this is the only administration that has been pushing to release it all, this is the ultimate transparency. All of these documents that have been put out, I think millions of documents the DOJ has been doing their best job to make sure that victims are protected, while at the same time, the American public have access to everything that’s in those. I think everybody agrees, regardless of your political persuasion, that Jeffrey Epstein was an awful human being and that these victims deserve to be — they need to be verified. Duthiers predictably cited Republican Thomas Massie (R-KY) as suggesting “more investigations” must be done “into people whose names were protected in...redactions,” but Emmer wasn’t having any of it by demanding Massie be specific and not continue to be vague. Duthiers’s final two topics concerned voter integrity and blaming the lack of faith in government on the operations of ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Minneapolis (click “expand”): The President has spoken about elections being nationalized, meaning moving control of elections from the states to the federal government. Do you think that that is a constitutional policy? And where do you stand on that? (....) Last question, you and I were talking backstage a little before we came on the air, the President’s claims, the false claims about fraud in America, the tragic deaths of two Americans at the hands of federal agents, the questions about using the Justice Department for personal retaliation. We were talking about, is there a point where you can see this country coming together again the way that perhaps we were? Do you feel that the general public is losing faith in our government institutions? While bringing Emmer on could be cited as proof of diversity amongst guests, the response would be there’s a long way to go on that and, if that were to be achieved, perhaps the Bari Weiss-led network would be well deserved to press Democrats in the same way Republicans like Emmer are as opposed to tripping over themselves to sing the praises of liberals (like last week with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson). To see the relevant CBS transcript from February 17, click here.

The Department of Justice belatedly released a massive trove of documents related to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein last month. The documents provide damning insights into the dead pedophile as well as his network of former business associates and friends.One of the affluent individuals whose name comes up repeatedly in the Epstein files is Thomas Pritzker — cousin of Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker — who has served as executive chairman of the Hyatt Hotels Corporation since August 2004.'Good stewardship also means protecting Hyatt.'The 75-year-old billionaire revealed to the board of the hotel chain on Monday that he was retiring, effective immediately, to protect Hyatt from the fallout of his relationship with the dead pedophile.In his letter to the board, which was reviewed by the New York Times, Pritzker said that "good stewardship also means protecting Hyatt, particularly in the context of my association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, which I deeply regret."Pritzker noted further that he "exercised terrible judgment in maintaining contact with them, and there is no excuse for failing to distance myself sooner."The retiring Hyatt executive chairman appears to have maintained a friendship and remained in frequent contact with Epstein long after the sex offender pleaded guilty to procuring a child for prostitution.In the newly released Epstein files, the email address accompanying Pritzker's name is frequently redacted. However in some cases, it is crossed out but still visible.RELATED: 'Smoking Gun': Yale prof nearly blown up by Unabomber defends his Epstein emails Photo by Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty ImageRichard Tuttle, chair of the Hyatt board's nominating and corporate governance committee, said in a statement, "Tom’s leadership has been instrumental in shaping Hyatt’s strategy and long-term growth, and we thank him for his service and dedication to Hyatt."Mark Hoplamazian, Hyatt's president and CEO, has stepped into the role left open by the Epstein associate.Pritzker is among a growing list of individuals whose relationships with Epstein have earned them heightened scrutiny and professional consequences. After new details about their relationships and/or communications with Epstein came to light:Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem resigned as chairman and chief executive of the global ports operator DP World;David Gelernter, a Yale University computer science professor who lost a few fingers opening a package sent by the Unabomber, defended a controversial correspondence he had with Epstein and was barred from teaching classes at the university;Peter Mandelson, a prominent Labour Party figure who was appointed Britain's ambassador to the U.S. in 2024 by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, resigned in disgrace from the House of Lords while his protege stepped down as Starmer's right-hand man;Kathy Ruemmler said she was resigning as Goldman Sach's chief legal officer;Brad Karp resigned as chairman of the top U.S. law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP;U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was grilled in a Senate hearing about his 2012 meeting with Epstein at the pedophile's island;New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch, who NFL commissioner Roger Goodell indicated might ultimately face an internal investigation, admitted to a "brief association where we exchanged emails about adult women, and in addition, we discussed movies, philanthropy, and investments";Letty Moss-Salentijn was stripped of her administrative duties at Columbia University's College of Dental Medicine;Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York and former wife of ex-prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, saw her charity, Sarah's Trust, shuttered; andThorbjørn Jagland, Norway's former prime minister, was charged with aggravated corruption.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

In an important development in the investigation into Nancy Guthrie's disappearance, investigators have cleared several people from the suspect list — including one person who had been heavily scrutinized since Guthrie was first reported missing on February 1. The New York Post reported on Monday that investigators have ruled out Nancy Guthrie's family from any suspicion in connection with her disappearance. 'The family has been nothing but cooperative and gracious and are victims in this case.'“The Guthrie family — to include all siblings and spouses — has been cleared as possible suspects in this case,” Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos said Monday, according to Post.“The family has been nothing but cooperative and gracious and are victims in this case,” he added. “To suggest otherwise is not only wrong, it is cruel. The Guthrie family are victims, plain and simple.”RELATED: 'It's never too late': Savannah Guthrie posts gut-wrenching video update two weeks after mother's disappearance Photo by Jan Sonnenmair/Getty ImagesInvestigators have thus ruled out Nancy's children, Savannah, Annie, and Camron, as anything other than victims.Also included on this list is Annie's husband, Tommaso Cioni, who was reportedly the last person to see Nancy Guthrie alive on January 31. Prior to this development, Nanos said that he "understands" that Cioni would be subject to suspicion but warned people not to jump to rash judgments without evidence. “I understand the pundits are out there. They’re gonna say, 'Well, he’s the last one to see her alive.' We understand that stuff. But, my goodness, you’re putting a mark on somebody who could be completely innocent. And more important than that, he’s family," Nanos said, according to the New York Post. Cioni last saw Nancy around 9:45 p.m. on January 31 after he and Annie had dinner with her, according to reports. Though a few people were detained by a SWAT team near Nancy's house in Tucson, Arizona, in connection with the investigation late last week, no one has yet been a named as a suspect. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The song, featured prominently in the 1972 thriller, was used without the permission of its composer. There's actually only one banjo used. The post ‘Dueling Banjos’ From ‘Deliverance’: An Unlikely Hit appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

The 20-date run includes 19 arena shows and one stadium concert in the nation's capital. The post Bruce Springsteen Sets 2026 ‘Land of Hopes and Dreams’ Tour With E Street Band appeared first on Best Classic Bands.

And Here We GO! Harmeet K. Dhillon Shares Her New, Shiny List of States About to FAFO With Voter Rolls

Beloved Georgia Teacher Killed by an Illegal Alien Who Was Fleeing ICE—Guess Who's Getting the Blame

Stephen Colbert Has His Newest Censorship Claim, and This One Might Be the Dumbest Yet

Outrage: Chuck Schumer Now Aims to Give Pride Flag Federal Protection