Two highly anticipated cases involving transgender athletes -- i.e. biological men suing for the right to compete in women’s sports came -- before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, with opinions on the cases expected by the end of June. National Public Radio’s All Things Considered covered the opening arguments on Sunday. NPR’s idea of an objective reporter? Transgender (biological female) reporter Kate Sosin, who uses the "they" pronoun, and who works for the LGBTQ+ activist media outlet The 19th, previously praised by PBS. SARAH MCCAMMON, HOST: This week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments from two separate cases weighing the rights of transgender athletes. Little v. Hecox challenges Idaho's ban on trans athletes playing on women's and girls' sports teams. West Virginia v. B.P.J. challenges a similar ban in West Virginia. Kate Sosin covers LGBTQ issues for the nonprofit newsroom The 19th and has been following these cases closely. They're here to give us a preview. Welcome. Sosin misled from the start, falsely claiming Hecox and Pepper-Jackson had been “banned from [athletic] competition.” As biological males, they were only “banned” from competing against girls, where their natural biological makeup would give them an unfair competitive advantage. KATE SOSIN: So conservatives have increasingly argued that transgender women and girls have an unfair advantage in sports, that their hormone levels make them stronger and faster, and for that reason, they say, trans women should be banned from competition. These two girls, Lindsay Hecox and Becky Pepper-Jackson, were banned from playing sports in their respective states by these state bans, and 27 states have these bans. And now the question is, will the Supreme Court back these bans and find that they are constitutional or not? …. MCCAMMON: Isn't one of the concerns not just about taking spots on teams, but also a competitive advantage against their opponents, a potential advantage? SOSIN: Certainly, yes. But what we found is that the research just simply doesn't back this up. And in part because there is limited research. There's a 2021 study published in the Journal of Sports Medicine that found no basis in existing research for banning trans women from sports. And a 2021 study funded by the International Olympic Committee, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, concluded that transgender women likely had several physical disadvantages compared with their cisgender peers.... Besides the obvious truths, that men have more lung capacity, larger hearts, more muscle mass, lower body fat, etc., NPR skipped over studies showing performance advantage is retained for males even after hormone suppression. SOSIN: ….I think the bigger implication that we would see is that having your Supreme Court come back and tell you again and again and again that your rights matter less than everybody else's is a really damaging thing for a lot of transgender individuals. We're seeing a slow chipping away of transgender dignity, equality and also the law, very, very slowly. Again and again, the two trans-sympathetic reporters conflate insisting athletes compete with their own sex with a total ban on competing. MCCAMMON: And what does it mean for these athletes to be told they can't participate? SOSIN: You know, especially in grade schools or even college athletics, these are kids who are trying to join and be part of their extracurricular activities. They're not necessarily out to win a competition. You know, we have cases of transgender people where they come in fifth, and that is still seen as a negative thing. Transgender people have a right to exist and to live…. More trans-centric hyperbole: Who is arguing trans people shouldn't live? In July 2023 Sosin referred to one of the parties in the case, the Alliance for Defending Freedom, as a “hate group” while discussing a previous Supreme Court decision in which ADF successfully defended a website designer’s First Amendment right to refuse to design wedding websites for gay couples. Again, this is NPR's choice for fair "reporting" on the issue.

Earlier today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson pursuant to a warrant related to a classified documents case. Coverage on the broadcast network evening news was muted, at best.  Watch ABC’s report in its entirety, as aired on World News Tonight on Wednesday, January 14th, 2025: ABC frames raid at Washington Post reporter in Venezuela classified docs case as "rare", cites "threat to the free press" pic.twitter.com/Rruky4CKzK — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 15, 2026 DAVID MUIR: Tonight we have learned the FBI has executed a rare search warrant at the home of a Washington Post reporter seizing her cell phone, laptops and other devices. Here’s Pierre Thomas. PIERRE THOMAS: Tonight, members of the media expressing deep concern after the FBI took the rare step of going to the home of a Washington Post reporter and confiscating her phone and other electronic devices. After an early morning FBI search at the residence of reporter Hannah Natanson, the POST issuing an urgent message to the staff, quote: “This, extraordinary aggressive action is deeply concerning and raises profound questions and concern around the constitutional protections for our work.” But tonight DoJ officials pushing back, claiming that the search was necessary because the reporter had received classified information from a government contractor who was arrested last week for the unlawful retention of national defense information. A Justice Department official telling ABC News at the time of his arrest, Aurelio Luis Perez-Lugones was communicating with the Washington Post reporter on his mobile device and in the chat there was classified information. David, Washington Post leaders say they were told that the newspaper and reporter were not targets of the investigation. But, David, this action is so rare that a number of media experts are calling it an aggressive escalation to a threat to the free press. MUIR: Pierre Thomas will continue to follow this for us. Thank you, Pierre. ABC’s report was framed off of the novel nature of the warrant, and built on the Post’s statement in reaction to the warrant. However, there was very little contained within the report about either the warrant or the underlying charges.  NBC’s report delved further into these issues, and spent less time on reaction to the warrant. Watch the report in its entirety as aired on the NBC Nightly News on Wednesday, January 14th, 2025: NBC Nightly News reports on the FBI raid of a Washington Post reporter in the Venezuela leak case: frames as "highly unusual" pic.twitter.com/zuA2nlUeio — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 15, 2026 TOM LLAMAS: Okay, now to the highly unusual move from the FBI, searching the home of a Washington Post reporter today. Two federal law enforcement sources say that search was part of an investigation into a government contractor’s handling of classified information about Venezuela. I'm joined tonight by Kelly O’Donnell, who’s tracking this for us. And Kelly, the Post is slamming that move? KELLY O’DONNELL: And here’s why, Tom. This is a rare and remarkable action by the FBI. A surprise search warrant at the home of a Washington Post reporter. The Post says the reporter, Hannah Natanson, was told she and the paper are not under investigation. Despite that, the FBI director posted that the reporter was found to be allegedly obtaining and reporting classified and sensitive military information. Attorney General Bondi says the search is related to a Pentagon contractor, he is Aurelio Perez Lugones, who is charged with unlawfully retaining military secrets. Natanson is not accused of any wrongdoing in the case. The executive editor of The Washington Post called the search an extraordinary aggressive action that raises profound questions about the constitutional protections. Tom. LLAMAS: Okay Kelly, thank you. More substance from NBC, but not much more, but not as much emphasis on reaction to the case. The tidbit about classified information on the chat is wild. Remind me again how many news cycles and demands for accountability the Elitist Media devoted to Signalgate versus what we saw tonight or can expect going forward. It is also fair game to compare coverage of this raid to coverage of the actual attacks on freedom of the press that happened during the Obama Era, a season during which many bit their tongues.  The CBS Evening News did NOT run any sort of report on the leaks or the raid, which makes for an interesting omission. We’ll see whether this holds, or if they are after additional reporting before coming out with something of their own. All in all and despite the appearance of early protestations, the media appear to be in a wait-and-see mode- at least on the broadcast networks. We’ll be watching what happens as further details of this story are made public.  

CNN This Morning is on a two-day streak of Dem guests saying dumb things. Yesterday, we caught Chuck Rocha on CNN This Morning saying, "People in America are okay with somebody throwing a rock" at ICE agents. Not just dumb, but potentially putting people in harm's way by encouraging them to FAFO. Perhaps we can cut Rocha—whose cowboy-hat-wearing shtick is that of Everyman on the Range—some slack. Chuck virtually bragged of his ignorance and rough-and-tumble upbringing: "I may not be an expert on foreign policy or know what's going on with the White House every day, but I know about evading the police since I was a teenager." But Joel Rubin? With his highfalutin' college degrees from Brandeis and Carnegie Mellon, and background as a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Rubin should know better Yet, on today's CNN This Morning, Rubin said:  "Renee Good [was] interested in protecting her neighbors through civil disobedience, discourse, whatnot. That's legal." Civil disobedience is legal? By definition, civil disobedience is the breaking of law, and the willingness to accept the consequences thereof, ostensibly for a higher moral purpose. Joel, Joel--what were you thinking?! Host Audie Cornish also got into the act, playing a clip of Joe Rogan saying, "Are we really going to be the Gestapo? Where's your papers? Is that what we've come to?"  Cornish prefaced the clip by saying it was "not some radical left-wing thing." And after the clip played, Audie drove home that point, observing "not MSNBC" [sic, MS NOW.] Great point, Audie! MS NOW might air outrageous ICE/Trump analogies to the Gestapo and the Nazis, but CNN is above lending itself to that kind of partisan fear-mongering.  Thus, on CNN, you're not going to hear some screwball saying, apropos Trump's plans to increase the number of ICE agents: "America has never been a papers-please country before. We associate that with the Gestapo, or fascist Italy or the Soviet-era Iron Curtain. And there are a lot of people in America who are going to start feeling like they need to carry their passports and their birth certificates to go down to the grocery store." And certainly, on CNN's rarefied air, you won't be subjected to the same agitprop artist, saying of ICE recruitment posters: "We've seen some very strong white supremacist imagery, akin to what you saw in Nazi Germany in recruitment ads from that era." Oh, wait. That was Trump-hater supreme Garrett Graff making those statements in two separate appearances on . . . CNN! And the host of the show where Garrett spewed his bilge was--let's see--one Audie Cornish!  Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 1/14/26 6:04 am ET AUDIE CORNISH: One of the things that's interesting to me is how this is perceived by the public that is either not MAGA or, you know, not some radical left thing, but they're just watching on social media and seeing how it's coming off.  One weather vane for that, Joe Rogan on his podcast on Tuesday. I want to play this for you guys.  JOE ROGAN: We've got to take those people that got in and send them back to where they came from or do something, because if we don't, They're going to keep doing it if they get in office again in 2028.  And then I can also see the point of view of the people who say, yeah, but you don't want militarized people in the streets, just roaming around, snatching people up, many of which turn out to actually be U.S. citizens. They just don't have their papers on them. Are we really going to be the Gestapo? Where's your papers? Is that what we've come to?  JOEL RUBIN: Yeah, well, look, Audie, we don't have papers. You know, Americans do not have a national ID card. I worked on the Hill, and I remember years ago, Republicans saying that would be against the ethics of what it means to be an American citizen.  So this idea that somehow Renee Good, by being interested in protecting her neighbors through civil disobedience, discourse, whatnot, that's legal. That's fine, that's American. 

Wednesday marked another day of tiresome narratives across the broadcast networks and their flagship morning newscasts that smeared Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) agents, fixating on the “clashes intensifying” and “escalating” without explaining why federal law enforcement had deployed tear gas and other deterrents. Fireworks? Nevermind! Hitting vehicles? Not a concern! Starting with CBS Mornings, editor-in-chief Bari Weiss and her team haven’t appeared to be moved in for wholesale changes given segments like this: Wednesday’s ‘CBS Mornings’ again took anti-ICE white liberal women at their word. Zero pushback as correspondent Lana Zak touted “demonstrators fill[ing] the streets of Minneapolis” to watch “as a group of federal law enforcement detained” a man and a woman’s unverified claims… pic.twitter.com/Fi5MmxhpDY — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 14, 2026 Much of the story above sought to humanize the anti-ICE loons and, as we’d see with the others, took the protesters completely at their word (click “expand”): ZAK: Such incidents occur most every day here, affecting both immigration enforcement targets and protesters. PATTY O’KEEFE: From my cell, I could hear, like, wailing and desperate crying of people in the facility. ZAK: Patty O’Keefe says she and a friend were following ICE agents on Sunday when they were stopped, their car pepper sprayed and their windows smashed — AGENT: You are under arrest for impeding operations. ZAK: — before being taken to a federal detention center. O’KEEFE: Three ICE agents that were in the car with me immediately started taunting me. The driver of the car said, “You guys have got to stop obstructing us. That’s why that lesbian is [EXPLETIVE] dead.” LANA ZAK: O’Keefe says she was held for eight hours before being released without charges. [TO O’KEEFE] What do you say to people who feel like these agents are doing what they need to do, they’re following the law, and you and other protesters are on the wrong side of history? O’KEEFE: The law is not always the best barometer of what is moral and just. ZAK: We asked DHS for comment on O’Keefe’s detention and accusations, but have not heard back. Today marks one week since Renee Good was killed here. When we asked O’Keefe if she’d continue protesting, she said that she knows that there’s risks, but that it is “worth it”[.]  Because it’s ABC, Good Morning America didn’t take a day off from the anti-Trump and anti-ICE hate. Co-host Robin Roberts teased coverage on the “anger in Minneapolis” with “[c]lashes intensifying in Minneapolis between federal agents and residents as the fallout grows over the deadly shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent[.]” Co-host Michael Strahan also continued the liberal media’s pattern of refusing to delineate between observing versus obstructing law enforcement: But we’re gonna begin a busy news morning with the latest in Minnesota, where clashes between federal agents and residents have been intensifying amid the Trump’s administration immigration crackdown. President Trump telling Minnesota “the day of reckoning and retribution is coming.” ABC called on correspondent Faith Abubey to forward the daily, dubious slop painting ICE as suddenly attacking people without warning: This is how the elite, liberal media are framing the scene in Minneapolis — ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ claiming ICE is on the prowl for anyone and everyone, firing flash bangs and tear gas at will for no reason. Aside from a brief nod to snow balls, not mentioned are the… pic.twitter.com/Kvg2sNsYda — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 14, 2026 “Overnight, flash bangs lighting up the Minneapolis skies as the fight to push ICE out of Minnesota intensifies. Agents seen descending on protesters forcing them back. [SCREAMING] Earlier Tuesday, federal agents seen dragging people out of their cars, and spraying others directly in the face with chemicals. Protesters throwing snow balls and slamming into an ICE vehicle,” she declared. Over on NBC’s Today, co-host Craig Melvin touted the “escalating protests in Minnesota overnight” with “confrontations between residents, demonstrators and federal immigration officers...only growing.” Saturday co-host Laura Jarrett acknowledged ICE’s notation they’ve arrested “around 2,400” since first going into the metro area in November, but refused to go any further in detailing the kinds of people ICE took off the streets. Correspondent Shaq Brewster was on scene and, while they were the only network to note the far-left crowd has taken to hunting for ICE agents at hotels, they threw in with the incendiary rhetoric toward law enforcement: NBC’s ‘Today’ touts Joe Rogan referring to ICE as the “gestapo” and, while they were the only network morning show Wednesday to point out “a crowd gather[ed] outside a motel where protesters thought ICE agents were sleeping,” it too took the anti-ICE white women at their word… pic.twitter.com/Tkr44FjEFE — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 14, 2026 To see the relevant transcripts from January 14, click here (for ABC), here (for CBS), and here (for NBC).

MRC Watchdogs churn out breaking news on a daily basis. Don't miss Today's Highlights, where you can keep up with the top MRC content, whether it's the latest study on media bias, a glaring omission from the elitist media, or how the Big Tech companies are serving up the same leftist spin as the media.  Top Stories: PolitiFact: You Can't Call Renee Good a 'Domestic Terrorist,' Just Jan. 6 Rioters Liberal Journalists LOSE THEIR NOODLES Over CBS’s Dokoupil Interviewing Trump Big Four News Apps Push Elitist Media Narrative on Minn ICE Shooting Only 4 of 840 Stories: Google News’s Six-Week Blockade of Minn Fraud   PolitiFact: You Can't Call Renee Good a 'Domestic Terrorist,' Just Jan. 6 Rioters PolitiFact's Selective Outrage on "Domestic Terrorism" Labels: While PolitiFact harshly criticizes Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for calling Renee Good a "domestic terrorist" for obstructing ICE agents, it remains silent on FBI Director Christopher Wray labeling the January 6 Capitol riot as domestic terrorism, exposing a clear double standard in how the term is applied based on political alignment. Bias in Expert Reliance and Downplaying Activism: PolitiFact leans on left-leaning experts from organizations like the Brennan Center—who have previously defended against labeling groups like Antifa as terrorists—to portray Good as an innocent "mother of three and a poet" with no activist ties, ignoring video evidence of her deliberately blocking a street to impede ICE operations. Inconsistent Defense of Good's Character: In rushing to rate claims of Good's child abuse record as "FALSE" and emphasizing her clean background and family testimonials, PolitiFact overlooks her apparent role in anti-ICE activism, turning the fact-check into a sympathetic narrative rather than objective analysis.            2. Liberal Journalists LOSE THEIR NOODLES Over CBS’s Dokoupil Interviewing Trump Liberal Media Freakout Over Civil Interview Elite journalists melted down after CBS's Tony Dokoupil gave President Trump a respectful, fact-based 13-minute interview on real issues—calling it a "Dokoupil Dud" and "Fox News-style" because it wasn't aggressively hostile. Accusing Neutral Journalism of Being "MAGA Shill" Critics like Oliver Darcy and Peter Rothpletz branded Dokoupil a "toady" and CBS "MAGA-friendly" under new ownership for not constantly interrupting or confronting Trump—revealing they see balanced, professional reporting as betrayal when it involves Trump. Immature, Over-the-Top Hysteria The backlash turned petty and personal—mocking Dokoupil's height, questioning his self-respect, dragging in his wife's past, and labeling the interview a "disaster"—showing liberal media critics prefer partisan rage over letting viewers judge for themselves.         3. Big Four News Apps Push Elitist Media Narrative on Minn ICE Shooting The Dominance of Left-Leaning News Aggregation The Big 4 News Apps — Apple News, Google News, MSN, and Yahoo News—utilize their massive reach to disproportionately promote left-leaning media outlets. In covering the MN ICE shooting, these "Big Four" apps featured 20 left-leaning articles compared to only three from right-leaning sources, effectively creating a "news vacuum" that excludes conservative viewpoints from the primary public square. Narrative Framing Through Selective Story Placement Beyond just the quantity of articles, news aggregators exert influence by consistently pinning left-leaning coverage to the top of their apps and featuring emotionally charged imagery, these platforms pre-condition how the public interprets an event before they have even read the facts. This editorial control allows aggregators to frame government actions and law enforcement incidents through a partisan lens, often ignoring conflicting evidence or official statements that don't fit the preferred storyline. Highlighting Radical Outlets Over Mainstream Balance News apps are increasingly elevating content from radical, highly partisan outlets like Salon and The New Republic while simultaneously suppressing or ignoring established right-of-center publications. This shift transforms "news apps" into tools for activism, where headlines focus on "conspiracy theories" and "chilling warnings" rather than objective reporting. When platforms prioritize sensationalist, radical content over balanced journalism, they contribute to a fractured information environment where millions of Americans are only presented with one side of the national conversation. Only 4 of 840 Stories: Google News’s Six-Week Blockade of Minn Fraud Extreme Blackout on Major Scandal Over six weeks (Nov. 28–Jan. 9), Google News featured just 4 stories on the exploding Minnesota fraud scandal out of 840 total in its top 20 morning editions—less than 0.5% coverage—effectively burying widespread allegations of fraud tied to Gov. Tim Walz's administration. Ideological Gatekeeping Exposed None of the four stories came from right-leaning sources; three instead vilified Trump administration enforcement actions, while Google delayed coverage (e.g., four-day lag after a New York Times exposé) and placed pieces on low-traffic days like Dec. 30 and Jan. 1 to minimize visibility. Digital Suppression with Real-World Impact Despite escalating developments—including dozens of arrests, federal probes, viral videos, 2,000+ agent deployments, and Walz suspending his re-election bid—Google News acted as a "digital gatekeeper," throttling information that could have informed millions and potentially influenced political outcomes.