Oran Alexander Routh faces two federal charges

The U.S. hosted a summit at Camp David with Japan and South Korea just over a year ago, so this is a timely opportunity to reflect on the strategic significance and imperative of making trilateral cooperation more pragmatic, especially in enhancing economic security and freedom partnerships. The summit on Aug. 18, 2023, paved a path forward in geopolitics as the leaders of the three longtime allies refreshed their commitment to a forward-looking trilateral partnership to take on global challenges. Indeed, now is the time for Seoul, Tokyo, and Washington to take their pivotal alliance to the next chapter with steadfastness, particularly through elevated partnerships in the private sector. In a joint statement issued Aug. 17 to mark the first anniversary of the trilateral summit, the three leaders unambiguously said: “We hold an unshakeable belief that cooperation [among] Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States is indispensable for meeting today’s challenges and will set the stage for a prosperous future.” These words reflect the three nations’ shared interests and strong desire to work together. During the summit, President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yoel agreed upon a comprehensive package of cooperation initiatives encompassing high-level consultations, avenues for greater security cooperation, economic and technology cooperation, and people-to-people exchanges. The renewed collaborative spirit and reaffirmed commitment to forge greater cooperation among the three nations are more critical than ever, especially at this critical juncture of challenging global security and economic environments. That’s what really matters, and that’s why the three allies should work together more closely to ensure these positive developments live on and are institutionalized further at the practical levels of government and business leaders. The trilateral summit at Camp David—highlighting a shared recognition of the imperative to move beyond historical grievances to meet common challenges—affirmed and expanded allied cooperation on wide-ranging security, diplomatic, and economic topics. This deepening relationship among Seoul, Tokyo, and Washington is the path forward for a greater future together. Washington should build on it regardless of who wins the Nov. 5 presidential election. South Korea and Japan, which next year will commemorate the 60th anniversary of the normalization of their diplomatic relations, have a viable path forward together. However, it will not be without challenges. The United States must remain proactively engaged by maintaining forward-deployed forces in Asia and seeking ways to promote reconciliation between Seoul and Tokyo. Washington shouldn’t take these critical alliances for granted. It’s notable that since the summit last year, the evolving economic partnership has focused on reducing supply chain vulnerabilities, particularly in critical technologies such as semiconductors. South Korea and Japan, both key players in the global chip industry, have worked more closely with the U.S. to safeguard supply chains. But more that can and should be followed through on.  The U.S. has critical national interests in Asia but can’t preserve and advance them alone. It must work with indispensable allies such as Japan and South Korea to achieve mutually beneficial policy goals that will enhance peace and prosperity in the region. Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., who recently led a bipartisan congressional delegation to South Korea and Japan, underscored this by saying: My firm belief is that deeper economic ties among our three nations will reinforce and strengthen our shared economic and national security interests. As a senator and former U.S. ambassador to Japan, I know firsthand how critical our alliances with Japan—the world’s third-largest economy and host to some 55,000 U.S. service members—and South Korea—the world’s 14th-largest economy and host to nearly 29,000 U.S. troops—are to advancing the security and prosperity of the American people and to countering Communist China’s growing threats to the free and open Indo-Pacific. Indeed, forging greater strategic partnerships for economic security between South Korea and Japan in advanced technology, particularly initiated and shaped by the private sectors in the three nations, would augment allied deterrence and defense capabilities among other key fronts. Such forward-looking collaboration based on the challenging geoeconomic reality would not only boost the economic resilience of the three nations but strengthen their shared influence in reconfiguring and guarding the rules of the global economy. Looking ahead, the Camp David summit’s real success will depend on the ability of Japan, South Korea, and the United States to sustain and deepen their practical cooperation amid evolving challenges. The summit laid a strong foundation. Building a durable trilateral alliance, however, will require continued political will, more focused strategic clarity, and greater private sector support in all three countries. Now is the time to act on that. The post Time to Forge Greater Private Sector Partnerships to Strengthen US-Japan-South Korea Cooperation appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Pennsylvania may be the most hotly contested state in the Nov. 5 presidential election. And four years ago, it was the most controversial state for its lack of mail-in ballot standards.  In the closing weeks of the 2024 election, Republicans have sued the office of Pennsylvania Secretary of State Al Schmidt for what they say are inconsistent standards for allowing voters to correct—or “cure”—ballots.  The Republican National Committee and the Pennsylvania Republican Party both sued Schmidt as the state’s top election official.  Earlier this year, Schmidt announced that voters who don’t follow instructions for completing and returning mail-in ballots may cast provisional ballots.  However, the GOP plaintiffs note, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held in 2020 that voters who choose to vote by mail don’t have the legal right to cure defects in those ballots. “Secretary Schmidt’s policy ignores the law and has caused great confusion to Pennsylvania voters,” Michael Whatley, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said in a public statement last week.   The Republican National Committee has filed 120 lawsuits in 26 states for the 2024 election cycle. “This clearly undermines election integrity, diminishes fairness for voters, and threatens to erode public confidence in our elections,” Whatley added. “We have filed suit to force election officials to follow the law in the Keystone State.”  Under Schmidt’s directive, county election officials may adopt what the RNC calls “a patchwork of unlawful curing policies.” In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs note that the Pennsylvania Constitution says: “All laws regulating the holding of elections by the citizens, or for the registration of electors, shall be uniform throughout the state.” Pennsylvania often uses the word “electors” to refer to voters. Schmidt’s office did not respond to inquiries from The Daily Signal for this report.  The Pennsylvania Department of State issued “Guidance Concerning Civilian Absentee and Mail-in Ballot Procedures” on Sept. 10.  “If the voter is listed in the poll book as requesting a mail-in or absentee ballot but cannot surrender their balloting materials, or if the voter is listed in the poll book as having returned a mail-in or absentee ballot, then the voter may only cast a provisional ballot,” the guidance says.  Voting by mail is safe and secure, and no evidence exists of widespread mail voting fraud in Pennsylvania. After every election, counties conduct two audits to ensure the accuracy of all results. Learn more about voting by mail in PA by visiting our fact-checking webpage:… pic.twitter.com/1AvfoS0WGe— PA Department of State (@PAStateDept) September 9, 2024 Pennsylvania had the fourth-closest state outcome in the 2020 presidential election, with about 80,000 votes boosting Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump.  As described in my book “The Myth of Voter Suppression,” the controversy in 2020 dealt largely with postmarks and the deadline for absentee ballots.  Under then-Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, and the state Supreme Court, with its elected Democrat majority, the law covering mail-in ballots was changed to count ballots that arrived three days after the statutory deadline close of Election Day. Ballots also no longer had to be postmarked before Election Day.  The changes came despite objections from the Republican-controlled state Legislature.  A new cast is running elections in 2024, however.  Schmidt is a Republican, but was appointed to the office by Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, in January 2023.  That same month, President Joe Biden presented Schmidt with a Presidential Citizens Medal at a White House ceremony marking the two-year anniversary of the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.   Biden said he did so because Schmidt, as a Republican election official in Philadelphia, resisted efforts by the Trump campaign to challenge the outcome of the 2020 election. Schmidt had a record of tackling voter fraud when he was a member of the Philadelphia City Commission, which supervises elections in the city. In that job, Schmidt made a referral to the U.S. Justice Department, which eventually led to the convictions of Michael “Ozzy” Myers, a former Democratic member of the U.S. House, and Domenick J. Demuro, a Philadelphia election judge, in what prosecutors called an election fraud and bribery scheme. In 2017, while he was an election commissioner, Schmidt reported to the Pennsylvania Department of State that at least 317 noncitizens were registered to vote in the city, although many of those noncitizens had self-reported. The post Here We Go Again? Standards for Counting Mail Ballots in Pennsylvania Illegal, RNC Alleges appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Teachers in Chicago are the latest to voice their concerns over how illegal immigration is changing the landscape in America. Or in this case, how it’s shaping what’s happening in the classroom. According to WGN Radio, teachers in the city have revealed that “they were instructed by school administrators to give their migrant students a 70% in every subject and pass them on to the next grade … even if their migrant students displayed severe academic deficiencies.” It appears “Chicago Public Schools CEO Pedro Martinez assured that migrant students were held to the same standards as Chicago’s American students.” However, it was only last month that a study from the University of Illinois System proved there was not much of a standard to live up to. Even beyond the migrant students, many of whom reportedly do not speak English, numerous students throughout the city of Chicago “are still struggling to catch up academically from the learning loss that occurred when schools were forced to close” due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As the study found, “[O]nly about one-fourth of all public-school students are back to pre-pandemic performance levels in English language arts, while even fewer have returned to pre-pandemic levels in math.” So, while it’s not looking good for the Chicago public schools as it is, teachers have further admitted that part of their orders to pass migrant students has led to “deliberately falsifying grades”—which applies to both classroom grades and academic standardized testing scores. Sylvia Snowden, a reporter who spoke with several Chicago teachers, explained, “When the tests have been proctored, after they’ve been evaluated, the teachers are able to see the scores. And when the teachers saw the scores, they saw that the students were not at grade level, yet they were instructed to give them 70% in every single class, which is the minimum C and pass them on to the next grade.” When asked for an explanation, the Chicago Public Schools responded with this vague statement: Chicago Public Schools aims to provide a rigorous, welcoming, inclusive pre-K through 12 environment for all students, including those who are newly arrived in Chicago with their families from around the globe. As a district, we have high expectations for all students and policies and promotion guidelines in place that are modified to serve the specialized needs of our English language learners, and offer in-school, after-school year-round interventions developed with the principal/counselor/teacher and parents to target the students’ described deficiencies. As Meg Kilgannon, senior fellow for Education Studies at the Family Research Council, told The Washington Stand, “This report of teachers being instructed to pass students should invoke concern, regardless of the type of student involved.” She emphasized that “moving underperforming students through the system robs them of their education” because “they are denied the chance to understand, comprehend, and build understanding and command of facts that build culture and the ability to contribute to society and one’s own success.” But amid the ongoing learning issues at hand and the concerns that go with them, a quick glance at what Chicago has endured in recent years demonstrates how its education department is not the only area tainted by the border crisis. Millions of illegal immigrants have flooded into the country, and Chicago, being the self-designated sanctuary city that it is, has taken in nearly 50,000 migrants since 2022. In only two years, $400 million have gone toward funding the migrants, which has put a significant dent in the city’s money and resources. Nearly all aspects of life in Chicago have been affected by the newcomers. “People are angry about the lack of resources in their community,” said Richard Wallace, a man involved with organizing community affairs. “People are angry about joblessness. People are angry about the cost of living skyrocketing.” Evidently, the decisions affecting the American education system and overall quality of life are not free from having long-lasting consequences—particularly for the younger generations, Kilgannon emphasized. Considering the failing test scores and poor learning environments, she concluded, “When Gen Z ‘quietly quits,’ they are simply following the example that was set for them by a public school system that quietly quit teaching them.” Originally published by The Washington Stand The post Chicago Teachers Instructed to Pass Migrant Students Despite ‘Severe Academic Deficiencies’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

'Shame on Her': Harris Backs Ending Filibuster to Codify Roe, Manchin and Sinema React

Senator J.D. Vance (R-OH)  told podcast host Shawn Ryan that a Trump-Vance administration is ready and willing to tell government censors ‘You’re fired!’  Vance joined Ryan for a recent sit-down conversation, during which the pair discussed what a Trump-Vance administration’s policies on censorship might look like. Ryan asked whether there would be repercussions for those in administrative agencies who have actively worked to censor Americans, to which Vance responded with a resounding “yes.” He said, “We are going to fire the people who censored. We are going to fire the people who were telling  Mark Zuckerberg and all the other technology companies they needed to censor.” Vance also explained how he and Trump would approach promoting free speech internationally. The vice presidential candidate also noted that many of the 51 former intelligence operatives who said the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation “still have security clearances.” He suggested that a Trump-Vance administration would “strip every single one of those people of their security clearances, fire every single person.” He added “[y]ou cannot lie, take your position of public trust and lie to the American people for political purposes. It’s disgraceful and people will have to suffer consequences for it.”      FLASHBACK: WATCH: Joe Rogan’s Scathing Rebuke of Kamala Harris’s ‘CRAZY’ 2019 Censorship Plan When asked about the rise in censorship imposed abroad, Vance shared some potential foreign policies that could protect free speech. “We've got to be willing to be able to use American soft power to promote a free speech society,” he said. Vance gave the example of leveraging NATO  to defend free speech. “What America should be saying is ‘If NATO wants us to continue supporting them and NATO wants us to continue to be a good participant in this military alliance, why don't you respect American values and respect Free Speech?” Vance said.  He continued, “It’s insane that we would support a military alliance if that military alliance isn't going to be pro-free speech. I think we can do both but we’ve got to say American power comes with certain strings attached, and one of those is, respect free speech. Especially our European allies.”  ICYMI: And Another One Gone: Top EU Censor Resigns After Jordan Challenge Vance argued that European allies of the United States “should theoretically share American values especially when it comes to very basic things like free speech. However, in many places that is not the case, as Vance and Ryan made sure to note. For example,  Thierry Breton, who formerly served as Commissioner for Internal Market for the European Union sent Musk what some have referred to as a ‘harmful content’ letter. Following the disclosure of the letter he quickly resigned, facing pressure from European governments. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Women’s Fencing is the latest sport to be corrupted by gender-deluded men snatching the win. A 39-year-old male named “Annika Rose” Suchoski has only been fencing for nine months, but still placed second in Ontario’s Fortune Fencing Regional Championships. He came out of left field, beating biological women who had been competing for years, according to the Daily Mail. This was Suchoski’s first tournament since taking up the sport. He reportedly began “transitioning” to a female in 2018, and underwent sex change surgery only two years ago. Fans online expressed outrage, describing how Suchoski’s height and features as a (still) biological male give him the advantages of longer reach and more upper body strength. Related: FX's 'English Teacher’ Brings Drag Queen to School to Teach Male Students How to Perform in Drag He was also called out as a “cheat” multiple times, the Daily Mail reports. But Suchoski merely called it a “tough competition,” patting himself on the back for winning a “difficult” tournament.  Perhaps he should ask all the experienced women he stepped on how “difficult” it was for them.  But Suchoski isn’t the first male to disrupt a women’s fencing competition. American fencer Liz Kocab won his eighth title as a man in a women’s competition last October. This comes after the sport's official organization, Fencing USA, vowed to support “transgender” and “nonbinary” athletes as both a “moral and ethical imperative.”  It appears no sport is safe anymore from the moral superiority of virtue-signalers who will place women at a disadvantage once again, all in the name of "social progress." Follow MRCTV on X! Judo athlete banned from competing for making the sign of the cross. https://t.co/GVc6R8VMOG — MRCTV (@mrctv) September 24, 2024  

Remember that infamous George Soros-backed group exposed by the Media Research Center for controlling race-obsessed Soros-backed prosecutors? A damning new report now accuses them of hypocritically fostering racism within their own office. The Daily Wire Investigative Reporter Luke Rosiak spoke with Fair and Just Prosecution employees about how their executive director, Miriam Krinsky, reportedly runs the office in an “authoritarian” manner, hypocritically embracing the very tactics and rhetoric in the office that she denounces publicly. The sources accuse Krinsky of being “racist and abusive” in the office, Rosiak reported in a Sept. 20 article. “The FJP staff’s experience corresponds with what conservatives have long said about the Soros judicial philosophy: that it pushes lax policies against traditional crime but draconian enforcement against critics and political opponents,” Rosiak wrote. The sources’ remarks were damning. “The workplace culture under Miriam’s leadership is oppressively authoritarian,” an employee affirmed in an interview. “Miriam manipulates a predominantly young, minority staff—exploiting their inexperience and the existing racial dynamics within the organization to tighten her grip on power.” As cited by Rosiak, the MRC Report detailed how notoriously leftist groups like FJP control and direct prosecutors to implement billionaire George Soros’s anti-police philosophy. Soros has succeeded in electing 126 leftist prosecutors across the country. The MRC acquired nearly 8,000 internal documents demonstrating how FJP and other groups push these Soros-funded prosecutors to sign their petitions, accept their staff recommendations and attend “mandatory” meetings.  According to Rosiak’s sources, current and former employees are afraid of exposing FJP over retaliatory actions, including wrongful termination and even legal threats. “Disturbingly, the organization has even orchestrated fake wellness checks as a means to weaponize the police—the same police they advocate should be defunded,” Rosiak wrote.  FJP’s hypocritical attitude—ignoring alleged internal racism while reportedly using police for intimidation—contrasts jarringly with the organization’s fixation on defunding the police. As noted by Rosiak, this hypocrisy is also a microcosm of how the FJP’s pet prosecutors approach justice in their communities, providing leniency to criminals and persecution to normal people and political enemies.  FJP is viciously anti-cop. One of FJP’s policy recommendations for its “New Vision For Justice” directly calls for state and local officials to defund their respective police departments and reallocate the resources elsewhere. In addition, FJP has sent celebratory emails at least twelve times after one of their pet prosecutors indicated or convicted a police officer.  Under Krinsky’s leadership, FJP is now at odds with one of these pet prosecutors. After FJP asked Soros prosecutors to promote their group on social media, DeKalb County District Attorney Sherry Boston, a Soros-backed prosecutor, dutifully followed these instructions, posting a sample tweet nearly verbatim. Rosiak highlighted Krinsky’s subsequent treatment of Boston after the DA  complained about being excluded from a New York City event.  “Krinsky, who is white, replied by disparaging Boston and saying she was excluded from events because of merit, not race,” Rosiak wrote. “Krinsky appeared to suggest that Boston, a black Democrat, had failed to advance ‘racial justice’ by prosecuting too many crimes.” Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they report Soros’ connections to radical district attorneys throughout the country.

Having seen World News Tonight anchor David Muir and streaming anchor Linsey Davis put on the horribly biased debate performance and correspondents Mary Bruce and Rachel Scott frequently shoveling anti-Trump drivel and pro-Kamala propaganda, ABC’s Good Morning America crew decided to do its part for the left on Tuesday by continuing to promote Trump-Russia collusion through the lens of a new book by two of the probe’s top lackeys.     Co-host and former Clinton official George Stephanopoulos swooned: We are back with the first look at the new book Interference: The Inside Story of Trump, Russia, and the Mueller Investigation. Two of the co-authors — Aaron Zebley, who was Mueller’s top deputy and Andrew Goldstein, a lead prosecutor — are here talking for the first time about how they investigated President Trump and the dangers of election interference right now. He first went to Zebley with a softball: “And, Aaron, why don’t you start and talk about why it was so important for you to write this book. Because we all saw the report several years ago.” Zebley gave the resistance wine moms what they wanted, which was continuing to rehash the 2016 election and, with a wink and a nudge, question Trump’s legitimacy: We thought it was important right now because there are — there are two key messages in the book. One that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. And, with recent public reports, we think they’re continuing to do that now. And then, it’s also very important that there be a mechanism to investigate presidents and the book describes how we did that. Stephanopoulos — an ardent liberal who’s publicly and privately called for Americans to reject Trump — reacted with childish lament that Americans still “call” the Mueller probe “the Russia hoax.” Goldstein took this one, declaring “it wasn’t — it wasn’t a hoax” and argued “Russia interfered in the election in 2016 in sweeping fashion” and that it’s happening in 2024 (meaning Trump has a chance to win). Goldstein dropped the funniest line of the whole segment: “[I]t’s important for American elections to be decided by Americans and not by foreign adversaries.” So, by “Americans” did Goldstein mean the corporate media and intelligence agencies? Stephanopoulos continued to help sell this grift of a book, boasting it “take[s] aim at William Barr, the attorney general” for his summary of their report. Stephanopoulos used some of the remaining time to rehash the report with Goldstein noting that, while they didn’t find an official “criminal conspiracy between the President, or his campaign, and Russia”, they unearthed “many links and outreach that the Russian government made.” The devout partisan wrapped with questions about this “important book” by worrying another probe of a president along the lines of what Mueller’s team did couldn’t happen again thanks to the Supreme Court and what Americans should “know...about...foreign interference” (click “expand”): STEPHANOPOULOS: Since — since the report came out and in this election cycle, we saw the Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity. Given the findings of the Supreme Court, the conclusions of the Supreme Court, could an investigation like the one you conducted even happen today? GOLDSTEIN: It may not be. And one of the reasons we think the book has special relevance now is we document how we conducted what we think was a fair, fast, principled investigation and that kind of investigation into potential misconduct by a president might not be able to be done again. STEPHANOPOULOS: And what’s the most important thing for Americans to know right now about what foreign — what kind of foreign interference is taking place and what we can do about it? ZEBLEY: To be aware of it. It — it is happening. Andrew just said that the Russia election interference scheme was not a hoax. It really happened. It’s happening now. There are other adversaries who appear to be interfering. Iranians. There are reports as recently as today — that people need to be aware that it’s happen. To see the relevant ABC transcript from September 24, click “expand.” ABC’s Good Morning America September 24, 2024 8:36 a.m. Eastern [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: First on GMA; Mueller Prosecutors Talk New Book; “The Inside Story of Trump, Russia and the Mueller Investigation”] GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We are back with the first look at the new book Interference: The Inside Story of Trump, Russia, and the Mueller Investigation. Two of the co-authors — Aaron Zebley, who was Mueller’s top deputy and Andrew Goldstein, a lead prosecutor — are here talking for the first time about how they investigated President Trump and the dangers of election interference right now. Thank you guys both for coming in. And, Aaron, why don’t you start and talk about why it was so important for you to write this book. Because we all saw the report several years ago. AARON ZEBLEY: We thought it was important right now because there are — there are two key messages in the book. One that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. And, with recent public reports, we think they’re continuing to do that now. And then, it’s also very important that there be a mechanism to investigate presidents and the book describes how we did that. STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s the story you want to tell. One of the thing we’ve heard from former President Trump and his allies for the last several years — and it’s become almost a cliche — they call this the Russia hoax. ANDREW GOLDSTEIN: And it wasn’t — wasn’t a hoax. The — Russia interfered in the election in 2016 in sweeping fashion. We document that both in the report and in the book. And we know that it is happening now and it’s important for American elections to be decided by Americans and not by foreign adversaries. STEPHANOPOULOS: Part of the reason this ended up the way it did is what happened is immediately after you all released your report and the attorney general basically came close, he didn’t use the word exoneration, but said he wasn’t going to continue to prosecute former President Trump — President Trump at the time and you take aim at William Barr, the attorney general in this book. ZEBLEY: Yeah, we do. What happened when we delivered the report is that the attorney general did not release our report immediately and instead released his own summary, which we think mischaracterized the full extent of our work. And we think that led to some confuse about what we had actually done and what we had actually found. STEPHANOPOULOS: We keep hearing this word — the President uses the word no — no collusion. He calls it — he calls this a hoax. What exactly did you document about the ties between Donald Trump and Russia? GOLDSTEIN: We were looking to see whether there was a criminal conspiracy between the President, or his campaign, and Russia. We did not establish that there was a conspiracy, but the report — in our book, we document the many links and outreach that the Russian government made while they were conducting their interference campaign. They were reaching out to the Trump campaign to let them know they were helping. STEPHANOPOULOS: Is there anything you believe you could have done differently in order to prevent the mischaracterization of what happened in the report? ZEBLEY: If we had to do it over again, I might think through how we delivered the report and do that in a different manner. Maybe deliver it ready for — for release immediately. It’s contrary to how prosecutors typically document results of an investigation, but I might do that differently. STEPHANOPOULOS: Since — since the report came out and in this election cycle, we saw the Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity. Given the findings of the Supreme Court, the conclusions of the Supreme Court, could an investigation like the one you conducted even happen today? GOLDSTEIN: It may not be. And one of the reasons we think the book has special relevance now is we document how we conducted what we think was a fair, fast, principled investigation and that kind of investigation into potential misconduct by a president might not be able to be done again. STEPHANOPOULOS: And what’s the most important thing for Americans to know right now about what foreign — what kind of foreign interference is taking place and what we can do about it? ZEBLEY: To be aware of it. It — it is happening. Andrew just said that the Russia election interference scheme was not a hoax. It really happened. It’s happening now. There are other adversaries who appear to be interfering. Iranians. There are reports as recently as today — that people need to be aware that it’s happen. STEPHANOPOULOS: Thank you both for coming in. It’s an important book. It’s called Interference: The Inside Story of Trump, Russia, and the Mueller Investigation. It’s out now.

The days of the legacy media are numbered, and Piers Morgan is here for it. “Generally speaking, people no longer perceive CNN as the voice that people go to for utterly impartial news coverage, and that is a shame for the brand,” Morgan tells Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report.” “They’ve got an identity struggle, which is ironic given how much they bang on about identities,” he adds. “Do you think it matters anymore in a certain respect whether CNN or anything from the mainstream media survives?” Rubin asks. “I know we’re all going off into our own little corridor, and there’s some danger there, but does it really matter whether the New York Times or Washington Post or CNN survive this thing?” Morgan doesn’t believe it matters in the slightest. “It’ll be like every jungle, survival of the fittest,” he tells Rubin, adding that none of his sons — who are 31, 27, and 23 — watch legacy media. “None of them watch linear television. If they do, they do it through the YouTube app. I read the other day that 10% of American television watchers who have a TV set, a smart TV, they watch television through the YouTube app. And only 23% watch network television on their smart TV,” Morgan explains. “In five years' time, YouTube is highly likely to be the number one thing that people use as an app on their smart TV,” he adds. Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.