During Monday's Morning Joe, so-called ‘conservative’ writer Matt Lewis alleged ICE was “buying” local police forces across the country through the federal 287(g) program in order to serve as a “paramilitary” force for a possible plot by President Donald Trump to steal the midterm elections. The federal program referred to by Lewis, titled ICE’s 287(g) program, was a cooperation partnership between ICE and local police agencies that allowed local police to help ICE carry out immigration enforcement in a limited fashion.  In return for joining the program, local police departments may receive reimbursements for money spent on local immigration enforcement.  During his MS NOW appearance, “conservative writer” Matt Lewis alleged participation in the 287(g) program decreased trust in police, even though the program had existed for decades: And look, maybe you look at this and say cooperation is a good thing. Maybe you look at it and say, there's some perils to this, right? For example, there could be an erosion of trust in local police. Like if you're an immigrant, are you going to want to cooperate with the local police? But all of those things, I think, are interesting debates.     Then, while saying he didn't want to be a conspiracy theorist, Lewis suggested an ulterior and diabolical motive for the program: For me, my concern, and I don't want to sound conspiratorial here, but, you know, recently Steve Bannon said that ICE should be used during the midterm elections. If you are concerned that ICE could be a paramilitary, private police of Donald Trump, then I think this takes on kind of an added dimension in terms of its importance. Without any pushback on his outlandish claims, former ESPN personality, and now apparent MS NOW resident sports analyst, Pablo Torre continued spreading the notion of ICE “buying” local police: But like the notion that local government, different from the federal government, money being a way to get what you want. Could you just spell out that effective conflict of interest that I think lots of people are probably only now learning and hearing about. Lewis then implied if the federal government gave you money, you have to do what they tell you, or else: The fact that ICE is paying for the salaries, the benefits, the equipment, the overtime for these local police officers. What happens is - I've just grown up believing that whoever pays you money ultimately becomes your boss, and you will do what the person paying you money does. (...) And they’re doing it with - they're basically buying off these police departments. The whole idea of the 287(g) was grounded in the idea of local governments choosing to help federal authorities. Lewis even mentions that the program was created in 1996 during the Clinton Administration. It is also an absurd idea to claim that all federal grants to localities are bribes. If that is the case, then what was the point of federal funding for state government if it’s all a big bribe. Even worse from Lewis was enflaming the idea of ICE being Trump’s “private police” or “paramilitary” force. With statements like this, it was no surprise why liberals are forming ‘resistance’ and ‘revolutionary' groups against ICE. The transcript is below. Click to expand: MS NOW’s Morning Joe February 9, 2026 7:42:22 AM Eastern JONATHAN LEMIRE: And on this subject, conservative writer Matt Lewis contends that ICE is buying America's local police forces. In a new piece on Substack, Matt writes about a financial arrangement that, he argues, raises the sort of eyebrow arching questions usually reserved for lobbyists and free steak dinners. Matt joins us now. Matt, good to see you. An important piece. So explain for us, if you will, what these 287(g) partnerships are and why they matter. MATT LEWIS: So these are partnerships between ICE and state and local governments. And they ask for help from the state and local government police departments. It's optional, but if you go along with it, if you cooperate with ICE, they will reimburse your salaries, benefits, overtime and equipment. So effectively there are, according to the DHS, 40 states that are cooperating and over around 1,300 local police departments that are taking money from ICE to cooperate with them. And, you know, look, I think depending on how you look at it, this could be fine, right? And there you see this chart. It has dramatically increased during Donald Trump's first term. This policy has actually been in place since 1996 but it has become, as you can see, just dramatically ramped up. Many, many more local police departments are taking money from ICE to cooperate.  And look, maybe you look at this and say cooperation is a good thing. Maybe you look at it and say, there's some perils to this, right? For example, there could be an erosion of trust in local police. Like if you're an immigrant, are you going to want to cooperate with the local police? But all of those things, I think, are interesting debates. For me, my concern, and I don't want to sound conspiratorial here, but, you know, recently Steve Bannon said that ICE should be used during the midterm elections. If you are concerned that ICE could be a paramilitary, private police of Donald Trump, then I think this takes on kind of an added dimension in terms of its importance. PABLO TORRE: Yeah. Matt, The notion of the separation of powers. I don't want to be, you know, the pedantic academic guy in this discussion. But like the notion that local government, different from the federal government, money being a way to get what you want. Could you just spell out that effective conflict of interest that I think lots of people are probably only now learning and hearing about. LEWIS: Right, Pablo. I am blown away that this story is not a bigger deal. Like in the past week, we have seen states like Virginia and Maryland try to roll back these programs, but most people don't understand the money involved, right? They just think, Virginia, because Virginia elected a Democratic governor, she no longer wants to be complicit with what ICE is doing. She doesn't want her local police to be helping them, right. To round up migrants, some of whom may or may not be illegal. But most people don't know about the money. The fact that ice is paying for the salaries, the benefits, the equipment, the overtime for these local police officers. What happens is - I've just grown up believing that whoever pays you money ultimately becomes your boss, and you will do what the person paying you money does. And some of these local police departments, and I'm sitting here in West Virginia, these small counties, they may not have a lot of tax revenue. They're relying now increasingly on money from ICE and, at a certain point, you do what you're told to do by the people who are paying you and who are funding you. If you are a person, and I don't want to sound again too esoteric here, but if you believe in federalism, if you believe in separation of powers, if you believe in checks and balances, this is really Donald Trump and the federal government eroding that. Sort of tearing down that wall of separation, which – I know there's always going to be cooperation. At the end of the day, if the president wants to like nationalize, you know, somebody that he's probably going to do it. But it's happening already under our - we don't even, no one even knows that this is happening. And they're doing it with - they're basically buying off these police departments. That's how I see it. But you know, you can talk to a law enforcement officer who I'm sure would have lots of logical reasons why this is helpful. JOE SCARBOROUGH: There are a lot of conservative beliefs and values that have been completely thrown out the window. Whether you're talking about balancing budgets, we've got a $39 trillion debt, whether you're talking about federalism and states rights. Gone. And your piece just underlines it. And the new piece is online now, conservative writer Matt Lewis, we thank you so much for being with us. The article, "How ICE is buying America's local police forces." (...)

We've been chronicling Audie Cornish's adventures as host of CNN This Morning ever since she took over the post just shy of one year ago. There was never a doubt that Audie leaned left.  After all, before joining CNN, Cornish co-hosted NPR's All Things Considered for ten years. You don't get that gig unless your lefty credentials have been conclusively established. But Audie's affect has always been more temperate than that of other liberal media hosts. See and compare with the hard-edged Nicolle Wallace, the screaming Joe Scarborough -- and don't even get us started on Joy Reid! But there was apparently something about the video posted by President Trump's Truth Social account that depicted Barack and Michelle as apes that pushed Cornish over the edge. Audie would not normally express her liberal opinions outright. Instead, she would do so with a subtle suggestion, a loaded question, and by stocking her panels with a disproportionate representation of liberals. On those occasions when a conservative is permitted to appear, he or she is sure to be outnumbered by people on the left. But today, Cornish adopted a tougher tone.  She twice flat-out accused Trump of "racism," and accused his administration of promoting "white supremacist ideology." She refused to grant Trump any grace for having deleted the video in question: "You don't get points for not apologizing and saying someone else did it." And, reacting with surprise to the fact that some Republicans had criticized Trump over the video, Cornish took a nasty little shot at the only black Republican senator:  "I was surprised, honestly, to see the Republican [inaudible.] I did not know they had a line. So we found it somehow. Even Tim Scott found his way to this line." "Even" Tim Scott?  Speaking of Cornish's surprise at Republicans finding a line that Trump crossed that was too much for them: Despite the glaring evidence of his incapacity, Biden never crossed a line with Democrats or the liberal media--all devoted members of the "Biden is just fine" cult--until the utter debate fiasco of "we finally beat Medicare." Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning  2/9/26 6:25 am ET AUDIE CORNISH: President Trump refusing to apologize for a racist post on his Truth Social account depicting the Obamas as apes, and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are calling out his racism.  PRESIDENT TRUMP: I looked at the first part, and it was really about voter fraud and the machines, how crooked it is, how disgusting it is. Then I gave it to the people, so generally they'd look at the whole thing, but I guess somebody didn't.  REPORTER: President, a number of Republicans are calling on you to apologize for that post. Is that something you're going to do?  TRUMP: No, I didn't make a mistake.  CORNISH: Racism against the Obamas has been a longtime preoccupation with Trump. He launched his political career by questioning former President Obama's U.S. citizenship. This recent post was just the latest instance, however, of white supremacist ideology that's been amplified by the administration.  Joining us now in the group chat this morning, Zach Wolf, CNN senior politics writer, Francesca Chambers, White House correspondent for USA Today, and Catherine Lucey, Bloomberg News White House correspondent.  So. the reason why I wanted to do this is because I keep seeing percolating online images that then people who are experts in this will say, hey, that looks strangely familiar.  So the last one I noticed was Kristi Noem. And I don't know if we have that image. But we also have Homeland Security is like a really big proponent of this as well, using phrases like One Homeland, One People. Can you talk about why? Oh, here's some of them. Can you talk about why you think we are seeing these comments and amplification and retweeting? What are they getting out of it?  ZACH WOLF: Well, those are very, those are very specific things that were done on purpose when you look at those Homeland Security, the ICE recruitment videos. So it's hard to deny that they are, at least, trying to appeal to this segment of society, the white nationalist segment of society.  If you add on to that something like President Trump's Truth Social post, which has something that's so obviously racist that even he deleted it, which I think is the real interesting thing here, it's hard to not, kind of add those things up and see that this administration is certainly trying to appeal to these people.  CATHERINE LACEY: And I do think, as Zach said, it is notable that they took this post down. He didn't apologize. But we rarely see any kind of retreat from this White House  on any of these social media posts. You have the different kinds that you're talking about.  CORNISH: Isn't that the soft bigotry of low expectations?  LACEY: That is.  CORNISH: That's my soft bigotry.  LACEY: That is what we are getting on this.  CORNISH: You don't get points for not apologizing and saying someone else did it.  . . .  WOLF: The anti-wokeness element is still very much driving so much of what this president does.  CORNISH: But it seems like there's a red line even for the anti-woke, or else these Republicans wouldn't have been calling.  WOLF: Sure, and this is the thing that got those Republican lawmakers you mentioned frustrated and had them call out the president. But he has also referred to Somalis as garbage, and he didn't retreat from that at all. I mean, that's a patently horrible thing to do. And so the line, there is a line we have identified now, but -- CORNISH: Which I was surprised, honestly, to see the Republican [inaudible.] I did not know they had a line. So we found it somehow. Even Tim Scott found his way to this line. 

Last week at the Democratic Party State Convention in Syracuse, New York, Governor Kathy Hochul accepted her party's nomination to run for reelection this year, and she chose former New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams as her running mate. On Sunday, Hochul appeared on MS NOW's Politics Nation, where she and Host, Reverend Al Sharpton, celebrated Adam's selection, never mentioning the controversy surrounding the pick, while also attempting to portray Hochul as a moderate. Sharpton began the segment by admitting that he has a personal connection to Adams. "I want to start with your reelection race and your pick for Lieutenant Governor, former New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, who I'm proud to say is a member of National Action Network." Sharpton is the Founder of NAN.  HOCHUL ..I picked the most experienced person I could find who had an in-depth knowledge of New York City like no others. And it's a hard job to be the Speaker of the City Council, with many diverse voices and competing interests. So my job is to make sure there's a Lieutenant Governor who understands the power of government to lift people up, understands how we can continue to promote our agenda, and also knows how to fight back against Donald Trump, which does seem to be an all day long exercise. Not what we asked for, but we have to stand up for New Yorkers. So she's going to be terrific. I've seen her in action for years. We've been friends a long time, and so this is going to be great for New York. Maybe not. What both the Governor and Sharpton failed to mention was what some of the reaction has been to the selection of Adams. As noted in the link to the New York Post story above, "But some Democrats immediately revolted against the Adams pick, with the Brooklyn Democratic Party saying it would rescind its endorsement of Hochul over the choice." How did that one get past Reverend Al? Or this line: "But some, including powerful city Dems and Jewish pols and activists, disapproved of the choice."  Why? This New York Post op-ed from early 2025, when it was rumored that Adams would run for Mayor, describes her this way: "Speaker Adams as a Mayoral contender would compete for the title of candidate most in thrall to the antisemitic far left. As Speaker, she has shown her willingness to use her office to condemn Jews — and her unwillingness to safeguard them." The Post piece went on to report, "As speaker, Adams backed controversial measures to ban solitary confinement at Rikers Island jail complex and to require NYPD cops to report on all low-level stops that critics said would drown officers in paperwork...She also pushed for a housing voucher program to be implemented that has helped contribute to the city’s $12 billion budget gap.." No big deal I guess, since none of this was mentioned.  Sharpton then turned to Hochul's politics, calling her "a self-described moderate." A most generous self-description, especially since she had ripped President Trump earlier. So nice of Sharpton to repeat it. Hochul gave a brief summary of her political history, and claimed, "I have to represent everybody. And so I, I'm not going to be defined by a label... And I'm going to make sure that we have, a city and a state that can thrive and help our families. And as I've said, your family is my fight. That's personal, as the first mom Governor and actually the first grandma Governor. So I don't think it matters what we call each other. All I know is coming out of the convention, people have said they've never seen our state party more unified." Of course Sharpton didn't challenge that claim. Hochul probably could have said almost anything, and Sharpton would have proceeded to the next question. It's liberal media protocol.

On Monday’s CBS Mornings and in an article at CBSNews.com, immigration reporter Camilo Montoya-Galvez continued his penchant for putting illegal immigrants first by scoffing at President Trump’s deportation efforts, claiming “[f]ewer than 14 percent of” those arrested by Homeland Security have violent criminal convictions or charges on their record. Even editor-in-chief Bari Weiss touted this story to question whether President has been focused on the “worst of the worst,” leading to multiple points of entry for X users to lambast CBS News and sister site The Free Press. Before going any further, the following are the only crimes CBS chose to track, given the rather strict definition by the FBI for what constitutes a violent crime: “[M]urder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault offenses.” Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin blasted them for having led us to wonder whether they believe crimes like distribution of child pornography, and DUI are serious enough for deportation and if they’re comfortable with such offenders remaining in the U.S.: Drug trafficking, Distribution of child pornography, burglary, fraud, DUI, embezzlement, solicitation of a minor, human smuggling are all categorized as “non violent crimes.” Like we said, ~70% of those illegal aliens arrested under @POTUS Trump and @Sec_Noem have pending… https://t.co/4AUzxGMEhP — Tricia McLaughlin (@TriciaOhio) February 9, 2026 In a second X post, McLaughlin explained Montoya-Galvez and CBS also omitted the reality that some the Trump administration have arrested carry serious criminal records in other countries: By @cbs’s standard, Edward Hernandez, who @ICEgov arrested last week in Virginia is a “non criminal” because he hasn’t been convicted in the United States. Never mind that he is an MS-13 member & confessed to murdering 5 people in El Salvador through shooting, torturing,… pic.twitter.com/lY3VYOQGdu — Tricia McLaughlin (@TriciaOhio) February 9, 2026 “A CBS News exclusive on President Trump’s immigration crackdown. Coming up, we have a reality check on the President’s claim that those who were arrested are the ‘worst of the worst,’” featured co-host Vladimir Duthiers bragged in a tease. After a break, he continued to pull on this supposedly dishonest thread: “[T]he President says agents are going after the ‘worst of the worst,’ but a new government document obtained exclusively by CBS News reveals who exactly ICE is going after, and it’s not what we’ve been told.” WATCH: Reminder that CBS News is not conservative and still absurdly liberal -- they still oppose taking violent criminals off the streets Monday's 'CBS Mornings' downplays and dismisses the Trump administration's deportation efforts, scoffing at the notion that violent… pic.twitter.com/C183UvIDKp — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) February 9, 2026 Montoya-Galvez explained that even though the Trump administration has said “they’re mainly looking to deport dangerous and violent criminals...an internal Department of Homeland Security document shows that a vast majority of the people arrested....have not been charged with or convicted of a violent crime.” He shamelessly downplayed these arrests of violent crimes as minuscule (and thus implicitly minimized the notion of taking these individuals off the streets): Here are the numbers. Fewer than 14 percent of the nearly 400,000 undocumented immigrants arrested by ICE over the past year had charges or convictions for violent crimes. That includes crimes like kidnapping, sexual assault, and homicide, and fewer than two percent were actually accused of being gang members. Nearly 40 percent of the people taken into custody by ICE under the second Trump administration did not have any — any criminal record at all, and were detained solely for living in the country illegally or overstaying a visa, which are civil violations of immigration law.  He concluded his initial remarks by extrapolating this data to mean “roughly 60 percent did some kind of criminal charge or conviction, but again the vast majority were not for violent offenses.” CBS Saturday Morning co-host Adriana Diaz gushed: “Camilio, your reporting on this is always so good. You have so many good scoops and new information like this one. So, what’s going on here because what’s happening on the ground, based on these numbers, is not the messaging from the White House?” Montoya-Galvez shamelessly dragged out the tiresome defense of illegal immigration as a seemingly innocent crime because overstaying a visa or entering the country illegally is just “a civil offense” (click “expand”): President Trump’s promises of mass deportation arguably helped his return to power, but the numbers shared statistically speaking cannot carry out the largest deportation in operation in American history by just targeting criminals and that’s because the reality on the ground is that the vast majority of the millions of people here living illegally in violation of the law are not criminals, let alone serious offenders. Living in the country illegally, again, is typically treated as a civil offense of federal immigration law, and the millions of people who are here undocumented include very sympathetic individuals, including people who have been here for years, if not, decades. People who have American-born children, and now asylum seekers who are being arrested when they’re showing up to their court hearings, complying with the legal process. That is a question — a difficult question that our policy and lawmakers have to confront. Co-host and Democrat donor Gayle King also went down a predictable road of painting many illegal immigrants as a close friend who works at a grocery store: One of the most poignant things I’ve ever seen was a woman was saying, we want him to get the hardened criminals, but I didn’t know he meant Carol who’s been working in the grocery store for 25 years, who’s been a law-abiding citizen, who has had her children here. I think people are very shocked when you get behind the numbers to see who’s really being taken into custody and how they’re being taken into custody. Apparently, CBS decided to go harder in the paint for illegal aliens than U.S. citizens murdered by illegal aliens. Along with McLaughlin, the official White House rapid response X account sounded off as well: Fake News. Here's a few crimes categorized as "non-violent": Drug trafficking, human smuggling, child porn, fraud, DUI, burglary, etc. The article even admits 60% "had criminal charges or convictions (though it's actually ~70%). They're CRIMINALS and they're NOT welcome here. https://t.co/COngSVANsL — Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 9, 2026 The CBS News X post of Montoya-Galvez’s report was promptly raked over the coals by those outside the administration. Fox’s Bill Melugin pointed out the illegal aliens who murdered (and sexually assaulted) Rachel Morin, Jocelyn Nungaray, and Laken Riley would have been considered innocent souls in the eyes of CBS News: None of Laken Riley, Jocelyn Nungaray, & Rachel Morin’s illegal alien killers had any “violent” criminal history beforehand. https://t.co/IJF0tYfUSo — Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) February 9, 2026 NewsNation’s Bata Ungar-Sargon was blunt: “Apparently according to CBS it’s immoral to deport identity thieves, fraudsters, drunk drivers, smugglers, and human traffickers because these crimes can be committed non-violently. Needless to say, most Americans want these people deported, as they do every illegal alien. Conservative college professor Wilfred Reilly also blasted this lie peddled by Weiss and her network: I want to deport most or all illegal aliens, because they are not legally in the country, and we are a welfare state. Focus on criminals first, sure - but 60% of those being deported ARE criminals. Burglary, fatal DUI, and child porn are all non violent crimes. What about… https://t.co/3KMU3f3PdL — Wilfred Reilly (@wil_da_beast630) February 9, 2026 The same data set shows that 60% were charged with or convicted of (US) crimes, total, and ~100% were non-falsely-charged illegals. https://t.co/gK5Z5n8eWZ — Wilfred Reilly (@wil_da_beast630) February 9, 2026 Reilly also noticed a glaring gap CBS apparently thinks shouldn’t be grounds for deportation: “A very easy way to handle this point, in debates, is just asking: “Is child pornography considered a violent crime?’ Covenant Law’s Ian Speir did some math on a chart within CBS’s story and found things did not really add up: How did you guys count to 14%? When I add up the highlighted categories — which are all seriously dangerous or violent — I get 30.1%. pic.twitter.com/FBAJDdWTEj — Ian Speir (@IanSpeir) February 9, 2026 A few others landed solid blows: Has Bari gone all Bunny on us? If 60.2% are accused or convicted of a crime, that's more focused than I'd expected. Everyone knows there's a policy fight in DHS over how much to focus on criminals. If you are here illegally you are subject to deportation--criminal or not. That's… https://t.co/S8SS1cXElD — Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) February 9, 2026 This is intentional obfuscation. The reality is, over 65% of illegals have pending charges or prior convictions. Among those considered "non-violent" by CBS: Child Porn DUI Drug & Human Trafficking@camiloreports, of course, waited until below the fold to mention these. https://t.co/XZcuFSLgk6 — Dan Hollaway (@DanHollaway) February 9, 2026 We don’t know how many crimes illegals commit. 1) Sanctuary cities, counties, & states don’t collect immigration status of perps. 2) Not all victims report crimes, from rape to property crimes esp. 3) Not all data gets reported to the Feds. This whole debate is flawed. ⬇️ https://t.co/xyh6JT8mBz — BDW (@BryanDeanWright) February 9, 2026 Why do we have to wait for them to hurt or kill someone before we remove them? Do we have borders and laws, or don’t we? https://t.co/nRy1Z402vV — Elizabeth Barcohana (@E_Barcohana) February 9, 2026 To see the relevant CBS transcript from February 9, click here.

A new Media Research Center study is raising fresh concerns about how Apple News curates information for millions of Americans, and MRC President David Bozell says the implications stretch far beyond media bias. In a Friday interview on The Derek Hunter Show on WMAL radio, Bozell pointed to Apple’s own admission that its news curation relies heavily on human editors rather than neutral algorithms. “Apple publicly acknowledged that its curation system is human driven,” Bozell explained. “There’s a lot of editorial decision making going on at Apple, certainly a lot more than some of the others.” According to the MRC study, Apple News continues to sideline right-leaning outlets while elevating leftist media sources in its daily national headlines. Bozell noted that although users can technically customize their feeds, the practical options are limited. “You are subject to the digital subscribers that Apple provides,” he said, adding that “the right wing ecosystem that exists to subscribe to on Apple is almost non-existent.” Apple News is run and curated by human editors; it's not an algorithm. It's an intentional manipulation of information by showing only left-wing sources to its users.@DavidBozell with @derekahunter pic.twitter.com/sVmyL4Lyhb — Media Research Center (@theMRC) February 6, 2026 The consequences, Bozell warned, are political as well as cultural. Many Americans — particularly older users and busy workers who rely on quick headline scans — depend on these aggregators as their primary news source. “They’re just going to pop on Apple and see what’s happening,” he said. “And it’s always negative against the President and this administration.” The Big Four News apps are force-feeding anti-Trump propaganda to millions of Americans everyday. If something doesn't change, there will be consequences come November.@DavidBozell @derekahunter pic.twitter.com/zd2XCJ1Wq9 — Media Research Center (@theMRC) February 6, 2026 For Bozell, the study is a call to action for conservatives to demand fair treatment — or begin building alternative media ecosystems of their own. Listen to the full interview here.