Global warming has gone cold as an issue. Despite decades of panicked predictions of doom, it’s never been a high priority for voters, and Trump’s bold expressions of “climate denial” went unpunished by voters. The media still sound allied with the Green New Deal pushers, but the thrill is gone. Last November, leftists blasted ABC, CBS, and NBC for barely touching the “COP30” global climate summit in Brazil. (PBS gave it nearly 16 minutes, and ten of it was a John Kerry softball interview.) Now Axios.com posted an analysis by Amy Harder on this trend, titled “The world's great climate collapse.” Greenpeace gang, beware: “The last year has seen an epic reversal that spread quickly from governments to boardrooms to pop culture.” Not only has Trump dismissed climate panic, Harder noted Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney, once one of the world's most vocal “climate advocates,” is now repealing some of his country's climate policies. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair also issued a memo questioning the wisdom of pursuing "net zero" emissions policies. Then there’s billionaire Bill Gates, an unelected global leader. He circulated a memo criticizing the climate movement while shifting much of his money and focus back to public health — just four years after publishing the book "How to Avoid a Climate Disaster,” a best-seller that drew gushy reviews from AP, CNN, USA Today, and Oprah Daily magazine. With Trump in office, Ford pulled back sharply from its electric-vehicle plans, shifting focus to more popular and profitable hybrids and gas vehicles due to slowing EV demand. Europe scaled back its plan to ban gasoline-powered cars in the next decade and softened climate disclosure rules, which The New York Times captured with a dejected headline: "Europe Begins to Tiptoe Away From Key Climate Policies." The Axios analysis even claimed even Hollywood is tiptoeing away, “swapping climate angst for oil swagger, as seen in the current hit TV show Landman." That’s not entirely true. In December, the CBS drama Fire Country featured a firefighter lecturing like Al Gore: “We all know damn well there is no fire season anymore. Thanks to climate change, it's all year round. Just keeps getting worse,” and concluding “We’re at war.” Also in December, Daily Show star John Stewart brought on New Yorker writer Elizabeth Kolbert to uncork the usual panic. Manhattan used to be an ice sheet like Greenland, she said. Stewart then quipped, “See, what I hear from that story is, if we keep this up, we could turn Greenland into Manhattan.” Kolbert jumped on the panic button: “That is absolutely true. Keep it up, but there's 20 feet of sea level rising. So Manhattan will not be here.” This is not a new shtick. In 2008, ABC News showed a picture of New York City vanishing underwater in its prediction of what will happen by 2015. Ooooops. Never forget that in 1989, leftist scientist Paul Ehrlich narrated a segment on NBC’s Today predicting that global warming would trigger a flood to completely cover Washington D.C., which obviously never happened.   After eco-leftists predicted certain climate-change doom by 1995, or by 2000, or by 2015, and now we’re still doom-less in 2026, the public should be skeptical that they’re the most credible experts on predicting what the future holds. If the perpetual climate panic machine has collapsed, it’s because the facts never lined up to prove any reason to panic. Their authoritarian “solutions” – banning everything from gas-powered cars to gas stoves and grills – needed the fuel of panic to be forced on the public. The bloom is off their poisoned rose. 

Tuesday’s PBS News Hour covered the Supreme Court taking up two cases involving the rights of biological males to compete alongside females in high school and college athletics. The News Hour performed its usual pro-LGBTQ+ propaganda, even with its previously most active ideological stuntwoman on the issue, Laura Barron-Lopez, now ensconced at left-wing MS Now. The pro-trans favoritism and word choice remains (the segment appeared under the on-screen rubric "Trans in America"), though perhaps a little defeatism has crept into the tone. Amna Nawaz: One of the most hotly debated political issues in recent years made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court today. At issue, can transgender athletes compete alongside women and girls? The conservative majority seemed skeptical of striking down sports bans already in place in over half of all states. But, for over three hours, the justices examined the constitutional arguments over science and whether trans athletes are competing on an equal playing field…. Liz Landers: Becky Pepper-Jackson says she's not much different than other teenagers. She plays multiple instruments and likes to spend time at home with her pets. But the West Virginia high school student has spent years at the center of a political firestorm, because, as a transgender girl, she's looking to stay on her school's track team. That's despite a state law that bars transgender girls from playing on girls sports teams at public schools and colleges. So biological male Pepper-Jackson was forbidden to compete for a spot on the boy’s track team? Landers: Both Pepper-Jackson and [24-year-old track athlete Lindsay Hecox at Boise State University] Hecox live in one of the 27 states that have a law or regulation that prevents transgender girls and women from participating in sports based on their gender identity. And both have fought years-long legal battles to maintain the right to compete in track and field, while Republican leaders fought them in court. President Trump also signed an executive order last year threatening to withhold federal funding from programs that allow transgender women and girls to compete in women's sports. Joshua Block, ACLU: All that we're asking for is basic fairness and letting Becky have the same childhood experience as anyone else…. Landers: Joshua has represented Pepper-Jackson for several years for the ACLU. He says she doesn't have an unfair physiological advantage against other girls her age because she's been taking puberty-blocking medication since the third grade. While Landers did quote collegiate soccer player Lainey Armistead, a sympathetic opponent of males competing in women’s sports, Landers still slipped into pro-trans, anti-scientific talking points. Landers: There's been little scientific research on if transgender women actually have an advantage against their competitors. Perhaps there’s been “little scientific research” because scientists have been warned away from the controversy by a left-wing academic edifice that treats any hint of dissent from the transgender line as dangerous bigotry. (Though there’s been some.) Dr. Bradley Anawalt: The caveat to all of this is that we don't have a lot of high-quality data. Landers: Dr. Bradley Anawalt is an endocrinologist and professor at the University of Washington who has advised athletic associations on hormone use in sports. He says that transgender girls who were prescribed puberty-blockers like Pepper-Jackson have few biological differences from their teammates. Anawalt: The ability to do something, a feat of strength over a short period of time, speed or endurance events, all of those advantages that might occur with testosterone don't occur with these people that are started on gender-affirming hormone therapy and specifically puberty blockers shortly after the development of puberty. Certain biological advantages like superior male lung capacity and a larger heart don’t recede, even after so-called “gender-affirming” actions. And once again, a previously taxpayer-funded outlet can find a “conservative” group to label --Alliance Defending Freedom -- but not a liberal one like the ACLU. Kristen Waggoner, Alliance Defending Freedom: It will be women and girls that suffer the most when biological distinctions are not recognized in the law when those distinctions matter. Landers: Kristen Waggoner is the president of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group that's worked alongside Idaho and West Virginia in both cases. After quotes from oral arguments from Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson, contributor Amy Howe of the SCOTUSblog tossed unfriendly ideological labels around. Landers: News Hour Supreme Court analyst and SCOTUSblog co-founder Amy Howe says it's likely the court's conservative majority will side with the states based on today's arguments. Amy Howe: This is a conservative court, and conservative groups and conservative plaintiffs see the opportunity to bring these kinds of cases to the court because they believe they will find a receptive audience. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 1/13/26 7:20:26 p.m. (ET) Amna Nawaz: One of the most hotly debated political issues in recent years made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court today. At issue, can transgender athletes compete alongside women and girls? The conservative majority seemed skeptical of striking down sports bands already in place in over half of all states. But, for over three hours, the justices examined the constitutional arguments over science and whether trans athletes are competing on an equal playing field. Liz Landers has a closer look at the legal and political fight before the nation's highest court. Liz Landers: Becky Pepper-Jackson says she's not much different than other teenagers. She plays multiple instruments and likes to spend time at home with her pets. But the West Virginia high school student has spent years at the center of a political firestorm, because, as a transgender girl, she's looking to stay on her school's track team. That's despite a state law that bars transgender girls from playing on girls sports teams at public schools and colleges. Becky Pepper-Jackson, Transgender High School Athlete: Letting these awful laws and bills just stand is not something that should happen. Liz Landers: Her case is one of two before the nation's highest court, as justices weigh if statewide bands against transgender students from participating in women's sports are constitutional. Some female athletes have stepped in to support bans, saying it's an issue of fairness. Lainey Armistead, Former Soccer Captain, West Virginia State University: I love soccer and it opened up opportunities for me that I never would have had without it. Liz Landers: Lainey Armistead played soccer at West Virginia State University. She intervened in the case to defend the ban in 2021 while she was a student. Lainey Armistead: The West Virginia law doesn't exclude anyone from playing sports. It just promotes a safe and fair category for women. Liz Landers: In the years since, Armistead has dedicated her time to fight for the bans in court and at a United Nations event. Lainey Armistead: This stance is about preserving biological reality and saying women deserve a fair place to play, a safe place to play and not be put at risk. Liz Landers: The second case before the court today centers around Lindsay Hecox, a young woman who previously competed in track at Boise State University in Idaho The "News Hour" spoke to her in 2021 at the start of her legal battle. Lindsay Hecox, Transgender Athlete: Gender dysphoria just sucks. You don't get to be the person you were meant to be just because of some random luck when you were born. Liz Landers: Both Pepper-Jackson and Hecox live in one of the 27 states that have a law or regulation that prevents transgender girls and women from participating in sports based on their gender identity. And both have fought yearslong legal battles to maintain the right to compete in track and field, while Republican leaders fought them in court. President Trump also signed an executive order last year threatening to withhold federal funding from programs that allow transgender women and girls to compete in women's sports. Joshua Block, ACLU: All that we're asking for is basic fairness and letting Becky have the same childhood experience as anyone else. My name is Josh Block. Liz Landers: Joshua has represented Pepper-Jackson for several years for the ACLU. He says she doesn't have an unfair physiological advantage against other girls her age because she's been taking puberty-blocking medication since the third grade. Joshua Block: So, that's one of the fundamental problems with laws like this, these sweeping bans, is that they refuse to look at the individual, that the whole point of our civil rights laws and the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause is that people should be recognized as individuals and not just part of amorphous groups. Liz Landers: There's been little scientific research on if transgender women actually have an advantage against their competitors. Dr. Bradley Anawalt: The caveat to all of this is that we don't have a lot of high-quality data. Liz Landers: Dr. Bradley Anawalt is an endocrinologist and professor at the University of Washington who has advised athletic associations on hormone use in sports. He says that transgender girls who were prescribed puberty-blockers like Pepper-Jackson have few biological differences from their teammates. Dr. Bradley Anawalt: The ability to do something, a feet of strength over a short period of time, speed or endurance events, all of those advantages that might occur with testosterone don't occur with these people that are started on gender-affirming hormone therapy and specifically puberty blockers shortly after the development of puberty. Liz Landers: While it may be the first time the court has weighed in on transgender athletes, it's one of a series of recent cases focused on transgender students. Just last year, a majority of justices upheld Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors. In the court's majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court will leave the issue to -- quote -- "the people, their elected representatives and the democratic process." That ruling could signal how the court might decide this case. Kristen Waggoner, Alliance Defending Freedom: It will be women and girls that suffer the most when biological distinctions are not recognized in the law when those distinctions matter. Liz Landers: Kristen Waggoner is the president of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group that's worked alongside Idaho and West Virginia in both cases. Kristen Waggoner: There are hundreds of girls and women who have been displaced, and let's be clear about what that means. It doesn't just mean that they don't get podiums. It actually means that they do lose scholarships, which then means that they don't have access to higher education in the same way that they should. Liz Landers: In oral arguments, Justice Brett Kavanaugh expressed those same concerns about displacing women in sports and how different courts have ruled on the issue. Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice: And so one way to resolve it, as you say, is the facts, try to figure out, is there really a competitive advantage? I think we're going to get a lot of scientific uncertainty about that, a lot of debate about that, a lot of different district courts. Liz Landers: Block and the ACLU acknowledge Pepper-Jackson may face an uphill battle. Joshua Block: Athletics is so unique. There really is no justification for West Virginia and Idaho to try to use this really unique context to establish a sweeping principle that the government can freely discriminate against transgender people. Liz Landers: It's a point that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also made in arguments today. Ketanji Brown Jackson, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice: I guess I'm struggling to understand how you can say that this law doesn't classify on the basis of transgender status. The law expressly aims to ensure that transgender women can't play on women's sports teams. So why is that not a classification on the basis of transgender status? Liz Landers: "News Hour" Supreme Court analyst and SCOTUSblog co-founder Amy Howe says it's likely the court's conservative majority will side with the states based on today's arguments. Amy Howe: This is a conservative court, and conservative groups and conservative plaintiffs see the opportunity to bring these kinds of cases to the court because they believe they will find a receptive audience. Liz Landers: Until that ruling, the political firestorm over fairness in women's sports will continue on and off the field. For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Liz Landers.

Today The White House announced its healthcare plan. ABC’s World News Tonight was the sole broadcast network nightly newscast to cover the announcement. However, ABC’s coverage consisted of a litany of talking points seemingly aimed at rebutting the announcement, more in line with a Democrat press release. Watch the report in its entirety, as aired on ABC World News Tonight on Thursday, January 15th, 2026 (click “expand” to view full transcript): DAVID MUIR: Tonight, with more than 20 million Americans seeing their health insurance premiums skyrocketing, with Republicans blocking any extension of the Affordable Care Act subsidies, tonight President Trump now unveiling what he says is his plan, but there are many questions. Here’s Mary Bruce. BRUCE: As millions of Americans watch health insurance premiums skyrocket, tonight, after promising his own health care plan for more than a decade, President Trump finally unveiling what he calls his great health care plan. But health care policy experts tell us it leaves more questions than answers. DONALD TRUMP: The government is going to pay the money directly to you. It goes to you and then you take the money and buy your own health care. BRUCE: He did not explain how that would happen. His plan light on details. Just a few paragraphs on the White House website. Officials calling it a “framework” and a “broad direction.” How exactly would this work and can the president assure Americans this will be enough to cover their healthcare costs? White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt implying Congress would flesh out the specifics. KAROLINE LEAVITT: Congress and The White House are going to work together to put this plan into action. BRUCE: The president also wants Congress to turn into law deals he already struck with pharmaceutical companies to bring down the cost of prescription drugs. And he wants insurance companies to be more transparent about their rates. In a new poll, 52% of voters say President Trump has hurt the cost of health care. This month, insurance premiums have soared for more than 20 million Americans after Republicans let subsidies in the Affordable Care Act expire. Astrid Story, a graphic designer and mom from Denver, Colorado who is battling thyroid cancer, saw her monthly premium rise 35% from 1,400 to $1,900. ASTRID STORY: How is that fair? How is that fair to a cancer patient that their first thought has to be am I going to be able to afford the treatment that is going to keep me alive? BRUCE: And again, David, there are very few details in the president's plan about how much money Americans would get and whether this would cover their healthcare costs. And all this as 20 million Americans are seeing their insurance premiums soar right now. David. MUIR: Mary Bruce back with us tonight. Thank you, Mary.   The report begins, as is quite often the case at ABC, with an overwrought David Muir introduction that could have well served as its own brief. In a single sentence, Muir establishes that premiums are skyrocketing, that it’s the Republicans’ fault, and that Trump’s plan may not do enough to address it. And then he tosses to Mary Bruce! Bruce then rehashes all of those talking points. After knocking the ambiguities of Trump’s statement, Bruce goes back to blaming Republicans for insurance premium hikes. Bruce then elicits victim testimony from someone who had a rate increase, before going back to knocking the ambiguity of the press release and blaming Republicans again for the rise in premium costs. Not once did Brice cite the document, or delve into the reasons premiums increased. For that matter, she didn’t mention that Democrats just shut the government down in order to force a House vote on subsidy extensions. Neither is there any mention of why there were subsidies in the first place or why they were allowed to sunset, or who voted for the sunset provision.  All of these things would’ve blown up the underlying premise of Mary Bruce’s report, which is to blame the Bad Orange Man for all the current suck in our healthcare system. Instead we get her at her Mary Bruciest- the Democrats’ most reliable water carrier.   

A week ago, MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell happily replayed Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) telling ICE to "get the f--k out of Minneapolis." He wasn't criticized as a "vulgarian." But that's exactly how O'Donnell began his show on Wednesday night, with eight minutes trashing the "Vulgarian-in-Chief." O'Donnell repeatedly claimed Trump was the first president in American history to give the middle finger to anyone in public.  In Detroit, an auto worker yelled at Trump that he was a "pedophile protector," and Trump responded by flipping the bird. O'Donnell editorialized "Donald Trump had no idea that the problem on display in that moment was his tiny brain and his unrelenting vulgarity."  Mediaite summarized that "O’Donnell went comically over the top in his praise for Sabula as he trashed Trump with equal fervor." Sabula was suspended for his outburst, or as Larry summarized, "Ford Motor Company, apparently, in an effort to lose sales from coast to coast, suspended that worker pending an investigation." Arrogant liberals always pretend that a vast majority of Americans think just like the primetime lecturers of MS NOW.  Don't feel bad for Sabula. Trump-haters dumped cash on him in support:  “’I don’t feel as though fate looks upon you often, and when it does, you’d better be ready to seize the opportunity,’ Sabula said. ‘And today, I think I did that’.” And apparently America agrees, two GoFundMe accounts launched to, quote, “support T.J. and help him pay some bills” have raised over $809,000 in less than 24 hours, at which point T.J. Sabula issued a statement saying, “We greatly appreciate the outpouring of support. At this time, we are closing donations to this campaign and encourage you to look for other causes and organizations to support. We appreciate every single donation, comment, share, and sign of support.” And so factory workers around the country have now been alerted to how easy it is to get a payoff from an encounter with Donald Trump without going through any of the agony porn star Stormy Daniels had to go through to get her $130,000 from Trump. “I don’t feel as though fate looks upon you often, and when it does, you better be ready to seize the opportunity.” T.J. Sabula seized history. T.J. Sabula provided future historians with a vivid look at who Donald Trump really is.  Sabula "seized history." Trump created a "national hero." And when Juli Briskman flipped the bird at Trump's motorcade in the first term, she became a "national hero" to the liberal media. Vulgarity can be glorious -- except when Trump does it.  And in giving that little finger yesterday, Donald Trump created a national hero who takes his place in history now with more dignity than Donald Trump has ever mustered. When Donald Trump walks by, everyone in America has a First Amendment right to say “pedophile protector.” When Donald Trump walks by, everyone in America has a right to say whatever they want. And only Donald Trump among our presidents could decide to make a factory worker who criticizes him world famous and a bit richer by Donald Trump indulging his childish anger and delivering a childish public performance of Trumpian vulgarity.

Thursday’s CBS Mornings included a remarkable assertion from correspondent Lana Zak, which was that, despite “the video” of the January 7 incident between an ICE officer and Renee Good (when there are actually multiple vides), “it is not clear whether or not the car made contact with him and — and how forceful it may have been” and it’s debatable whether the officer actually suffered internal bleeding. The hot take came at the end of her report from Minneapolis:  WHAT?! On Thursday’s ‘CBS Mornings,’ correspondent Lana Zak says “it is not clear” based on all of the videos “whether or not” Renee Good’s “car made contact with” the ICE officer or, if it did, “how forceful it may have been”... “And, as for Jonathan Ross, the agent who shot… pic.twitter.com/6ZWlPy4tUg — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2026 On Monday, fellow correspondent Nicole Sganga asserted on the CBS Evening News the officer had “murdered” Good, but must have been called the principal’s office as her report was quickly corrected for the west-coast edition. Rewinding to the beginning, co-host Nate Burleson started with the vague lament of “another shooting involving ICE” as “this time, the man was shot in the leg” and triggered “a new round of protests last night and  federal agents once again used controversial tactics against the demonstrators. Notice what Burleson was missing, which was any details about what took place. Because it’s the Trump administration, better to assume it’s a lie and downplay it than...consider they’re right? Based on the skepticism from Zak and what went down on ABC and NBC, these liberal journalists might be just as convinced the ICE agent was the one wielding the shovel. “Well, honestly, there’s a lot we still don’t know, but federal officials say a migrant was shot in the leg after attacking an agent with a shovel. We have yet to confirm that story, but it’s just the latest in a city that is still reeling just about a week after the shooting of Renee Good. I spoke with her attorney about what comes next,” Zak reported. Zak touted the incendiary video from Governor Tim Walz (D-MN) as merely having “urged Minnesotans to protest peacefully and document what he called ICE agent’s atrocities.” This Walz soundbite sure didn’t seem like it was peaceful: “They are pulling over people indiscriminately, including U.S. citizens...They’re breaking windows, dragging pregnant women down the street. This long ago stopped being a matter of immigration enforcement.” She also spoke with Good’s family attorney (click “expand”): ANTONIO ROMANUCCI: The mission that we’ve been told about for over a year is that it’s to get the worst of the worst. I can tell you that Renee was the best of the best. ZAK: We spoke to Renee Good’s family attorney, Antonio Romanucci. [TO ROMANUCCI] Did Renee weaponize her car? ROMANUCCI: Looking at the video, the way — the speed of the car, the direction it was turned and what she said to those officers beforehand, the totality of the circumstances would indicate that she did not weaponize her car. ZAK: On, Tuesday six federal prosecutors stepped down amid pressure, sources say, to treat Good’s killing as an assault on the ICE officer. Now, the family is pursuing its own separate investigation. ROMANUCCI: The thought that there is only a one-sided investigation is really not palatable to the family nor should it be to the government or the American people. Over on the virulently anti-Trump ABC, Thursday’s Good Morning America started with more of the same vague but incendiary rhetoric. Co-host Robin Roberts lamenting the “tensions rising in Minneapolis” and “[d]emonstrators clash with police after another shooting by an ICE agent.” Only then did Roberts note “Homeland Security says the officer shot a man who fled during a traffic stop and then began attacking the officer with two other people.” Correspondent Faith Abubey decided to accept new marching orders from Walz and fellow far-left kook, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) to tell viewers that the mobs harassing ICE have been up to no good: Now that Jacob Frey and Tim Walz have come out and told the Minneapolis protests to stop being violent, ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ now branded the mobs as “angry crowds” with “the situation devolving into chaos, people throwing rocks and fireworks” at ICE officers That said,… pic.twitter.com/UbZFNsLXP4 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2026 It took until the fourth sentence for Abubey to go from simply referring to “a man” shot by ICE to pointing out he was “a Venezuelan man who they say fled traffic stop and then attacked the officer.” ABC also continued its absurd fixation on being horrified at the sight of a battering ram (click “expand”): ABUBEY: Violent scenes playing out on a daily basis. Agents firing pepper spray and dragging people from cars. This newly released video shows the frantic moment as heavily-armed agents used a battering ram to enter an immigrant family’s home in Minneapolis. WOMAN: Can you put the guns down? There’s kids in this house. There’s kids in the house. Show the warrant first. ABUBEY: 37-year-old Garrison Gibson, an immigrant from Liberia, was facing removal for a decade-old drug conviction, but his lawyer says he has been checking in with authorities for years. GIBSON’s LAWYER MARC MROKOSCH: So, if he’s this dangerous person, then why are they letting him walk around? NBC’s Today also must have realized the coast was clear as correspondent Shaq Brewster made clear to viewers that the anti-ICE crowds have maybe, possibly been violent toward law enforcement: NBC’s ‘Today’ followed the marching orders from Frey and Walz, now admitting the anti-ICE crowds have been “setting off fireworks and throwing rocks” at law enforcement, but both-sides-ed it by arguing “the situation here just continues to intensify” and had been calm “with a… pic.twitter.com/biUYsQSnra — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 15, 2026 Brewster also ran the cartoonish soundbite from the Good family lawyer that Good was she “was the best of the best” in America, but died while ICE was going after “the worst of the worst.” To see the relevant transcripts from January 15, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).