Some major news broke out of Southern California as a local mayor was busted for acting as an agent of the communist Chinese government. The story was completely omitted from the Elitist Media broadcast evening news, and what coverage is  out there is an invitation to play “guess the party ID.” Watch as NBC News Now carried a story inexplicably unfit for broadcast on the Nightly News: embed TOM COSTELLO: We want to get to some breaking news out of California. The mayor of a small town just outside of L.A., facing federal charges now for acting as an illegal Chinese agent. The 58-year-old mayor will plead guilty for working at the behest of the Chinese government officials. She is accused of promoting propaganda that included dismissing alleged forced labor camps in her country, and her alleged coconspirator is on a 20 month sentence and she faces up to 10 years in prison. A thirty-second brief doesn’t always allow for fullness of details, but how do you not even mention the mayor’s name or partisan ID? Not only does the story get buried, but on top of that it’s a deliberate vaguepost missing the mayor’s name and partisan ID. I’m pretty certain that the story would’ve made it to network air had the mayor been a Republican, with full disclosure of the mayor’s name and partisan ID at the start and end of the item. A quick scan reveals that partisan ID was also magically missing from written reports on ABC, NBC, CNN, The Guardian, The New York Times, The San Francisco Chronicle, and The Los Angeles Times, among many others. And those weren’t the only things missing from Tom Costello’s vague report. Per the DoJ indictment: Wang and (her advisor) Sun worked together to operate U.S. News Center, a website that purported to be a news source for the local Chinese American community. Wang and Sun received and executed directives from PRC government officials to post pro-PRC content on the website. For example, in June 2021, a PRC official contacted Wang and other individuals via the WeChat encrypted messaging application with pre-written news articles, including a PRC official-written essay in the Los Angeles Times that stated: “China’s Stance on the Xinjiang Issue – There is no genocide in Xinjiang; there is no such thing as ‘forced labor’ in any production activity, including cotton production. Spreading such rumor to do defame China, destroy Xinjiang’s safety and stability, weaken local economy, suppress China’s development[.]” Minutes later, Wang posted the article on her own website and responded to the PRC official with a link to the article on her website. The others in the group chat did the same. The PRC official responded: “So fast, thank you everyone.” In August 2021, Wang and three other members of the same group chat shared links to the same article on their respective “news” websites, after which the PRC official thanked them for their “reporting.” At the PRC official’s request, Wang made edits to the article, sent the official a link to the article reflecting the requested change, then sent the official a screenshot showing the article had been viewed 15,128 times. In response, the official messaged, “Great!,” Wang replied, “Thank you leader.” In sum, the mayor (and her now-convicted advisor) spread Chinese propaganda fed to them directly by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The advisor’s indictment is even more frightening: “As an agent for the PRC, [Sun] worked covertly in the United States with his primary co-conspirator John Chen, a/k/a ‘Chen Jun,’” prosecutors argued in a sentencing memorandum. “Chen was a high-level member of the PRC intelligence apparatus, who regularly attended elite [Chinese Communist Party] functions, including military parades…[and] met personally with PRC President Xi Jinping . . . . Per his own report, and other communications between Chen and PRC officials, [Sun] served as Chen’s right-hand man in the United States for decades.”  This seems to be part of an ongoing Chinese effort to meddle in our domestic affairs at a city level. This begs the question: how many more cities? How many other agents might there be out there? What other narratives are they trying to put out there? A non-Trump-deranged media would endeavor to get those answers. Sadly, that’s not the media we have.  

There's a ludicrous talking point being shopped by the Democrats, that somehow blacks have been denied their "voting rights" unless they're allowed to be represented by a black Democrat. If you end "majority-minority" districts, their votes no longer count. MS NOW has been a hourly cesspool of leftists crying "Jim Crow" and "Dred Scott" and "most racist Supreme Court ever" over their decision against racial gerrymandering. Elie Mystal, Basil Smikle, and so on. On CNN on Sunday, Scott Jennings was making the usual point in rebuttal, that in Memphis, the blacks have long elected a white Congressman, Steve Cohen, and no one's going to say that blacks didn't exercise their right in picking him for 20 years.  Jennings spurred Democrat pundit Ashley Allison to shoot back about Memphis: “Black people are allowed to elect people that don't look like them?” That's exactly his point. Then she tried to claim that blacks vote for those who “have their best interests at heart” (Democrats). This isn't about voting rights. Blacks have had voting rights for the last 60 years. It's about the Democrats thinking they have the right to a majority. On the Left, some celebrated a Michigan State professor proposing an authoritarian solution with the Virginia Supreme Court throwing our the Democrat gerrymander. There is “a simple – and lawful – solution: Send the entire court into early retirement.” They could set “the mandatory retirement of justices and judges after they reach a prescribed age, beyond which they shall not serve, regardless of the term to which elected or appointed.” The current retirement age is 73. “Make it 54 for Supreme Court justices – the age of the youngest justice, Stephen McCullough, who joined the majority opinion – and make it take effect immediately.” Former DNC chairwoman and current ABC contributor Donna Brazile joined outgoing GOP congressman Dan Crenshaw and HBO Real Time host Bill Maher to show an amazing display of hypocrisy. In the span of only a couple of minutes, the short-tempered Brazile would claim that Republican redistricting efforts are “immoral,” but that Democratic efforts are what “voters decided.” Maine’s Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner got a Nazi tattoo in Croatia in 2007 while serving in the Marines – not just a swastika tat either, but a special skull and crossbones “Totenkopf” tattoo, similar to those worn by Hitler’s SS. He had the tattoo covered with new ink in late October 2025 -- after it became a campaign controversy.  New York Times writer Frank Bruni wrote an article headlined: “If Democrats Have Appropriate Fear of Trump, They Will Elect Platner.” This is now the paper covered Pete Hegseth’s Christian tattoo, or Elon Musk’s supposed Nazi salute, or even the use of the “OK sign.” The New York Times posted an article on Saturday on ABC and The View being in a “free speech battle” with the FCC. They quoted me, but not about the show’s dramatic liberal tilt. They also cited Nick Fondacaro’s latest study: “Conservatives accuse the show of interviewing mostly Democrats. This spring, the Media Research Center released a report titled, ‘The View Kicks Off Midterm Year With 27 Liberal Guests to 1 Republican.’” There is no "free speech" or "democracy" on that show. It's a one-sided sinkhole of misinformation. Enjoy the podcast below, or wherever you listen to your podcasts. 

On Sunday and Monday, ABC and NBC have been engaged in faux outrage over Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy’s upcoming reality series on YouTube to mark America’s 250th anniversary, discarding its very intermittent filming amid Duffy’s public-facing role in the administration and private funding to call it a “side project” falsely at the expense of crises such as the TSA shutdown and rising gas prices. Duffy and wife Rachel Campos-Duffy announced The Great American Road Trip series on Friday’s Fox & Friends, so it was on NBC Nightly News by Sunday with anchor Hallie Jackson boasting of a “new controversy over a road tripping reality show featuring a former reality star: the transportation secretary, who’s been filming the new series with his family over the course of the last seven months.” Sunday’s ‘NBC Nightly News’ falsely suggested @SecDuffy and @RCamposDuffy’s Great American Road Trip was filmed amid soaring gas prices and took away from the “number of crises during Duffy’s tenure, including record TSA lines and the recent Spirit Airlines shutdown.”… pic.twitter.com/SKqPcaGrcL — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 11, 2026 Correspondent Julie Tsirkin boasted Duffy was “going back to his reality TV roots...but this time, it’s not The Real World, the hit 90s show.” Despite her acknowledging it was filmed over seven months, she painted it as tone-deaf given the war on Iran even though it only launched on February 28: “But this road trip is facing backlash...at a time when many Americans are struggling with high prices at the pump...and amid a number of crises during Duffy’s tenure, including record TSA lines and the recent Spirit Airlines shut down.” Fact-check: Along with TSA being under the Department of Homeland Security and not the Transportation Department, the crisis with the airport security agency was created by Democrats. Also, Spirit Airlines was shuttered because it ran out of money and thus had nothing to do with Duffy. If Tsirkin wants to tell viewers who caused it, perhaps she should ask Elizabeth Warren or those who ran the Biden Justice Department. Tsirkin also made sure to tout as though it were fact a clapback from white liberal darling and Duffy predecessor, Pete Buttigieg (click “expand”): TSIRKIN: Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg calling the show “brutally out of touch.” Duffy did conduct official government business paid for by taxpayers in some of the same locations where filming took place. But he’s pushing back on critics, arguing production happened “in short...windows — such as weekends and the kids spring break.” He said zero tax dollars were spent on his family. The show’s nonprofit production company, Great American Road Trip Inc., lists 17 sponsors on its website, including Boeing and United Airlines, which are companies regulated by the Department of Transportation. NBC’s parent company Comcast is also a sponsor. Amid questions about a possible conflict of interest, a DOT spokesperson tells NBC News that production company is “an independent organization. How and who they accept donations from is their decision.” PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: What a beautiful family DUFFY [TO KIDS]: Can you say hi to President Trump? Over on Today, chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles tried to frame the family road trip YouTube series as something done amid the war in Iran with Americans struggling to pay for gas even though Nobles played a soundbite of Duffy noting this was done in short spurts over seven months. NBC’s ‘Today’ on Monday tried to frame the @SecDuffy family road trip YouTube series as something that was done amid the war in Iran with Americans struggling to pay for gas, even though they admitted this was done over seven months pic.twitter.com/7Ib7oFXv8I — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 11, 2026 “Amid the conflict, China has called for the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway critical to those rising oil and gas prices, a major concern for Americans, just ahead of the summer travel season. And with the Trump administration under pressure, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is facing backlash for his latest project,” he insisted. Like with Tsirkin, Nobles had to have been pained to admit NBC’s parent company was one such sponsor of this independent nonprofit outfit that conducted the filming: Duffy says all of the show’s production costs were covered by a nonprofit group instead of taxpayers. That group’s sponsors ranging from airlines to corporations like Google and Boeing. Comcast NBC Universal, the parent company of NBC News, is also listed of one of the sponsors. Nobles framed Buttigieg and Democrats as having “rais[ed] concerns” before sharing “the Transportation Department [said] that Duffy has worked to make cars more affordable, and [told] Democrats to ‘sit this one out.’” Disney-owned ABC was its usual self, dripping with hate for the Trumps. “As gas prices soar…backlash this morning over Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy’s series being called The Great American Road Trip,” said co-host Michael Strahan, purposefully using partisan “backlash” as proof of news. Co-host Robin Roberts also used this deceptive framing as though the Duffy’s filmed this entire project during the war. Congressional correspondent Jay O’Brien boasted he’s “facing criticism as out of touch” for “defending his seven-month side project” and supposed crime of traveling. ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ had a full story Monday dismissing @SecDuffy’s Great American Road Trip series as a “seven-month side project” and deemed “out of touch” with a lengthy parroting of former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg ABC at least pointed out @USDOT… pic.twitter.com/5JY1546xax — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 11, 2026 O’Brien sang many of the same tunes as NBC’s Nobles and Tsirkin, but at least conceded at the very end that the Transportation Department’s ethics officials approved it (click “expand”): At a time when gas prices are skyrocketing and the average cost of a gallon of gas exceeding four dollars amid the war in Iran, Duffy’s critics calling the series tone deaf. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg slamming his successor, saying, “I love a good road trip, but this is brutally out of touch: a Trump cabinet member making a documentary about himself while regular families can’t afford road trips anymore because Trump and his war put gas prices through the roof.” Duffy, who shot the series over seven months with his family in tow, responding to critics claiming “zero taxpayer dollars were spent” on his family to participate, adding, “The series was filmed in short, one to two day production windows — such as weekends and the kids spring break.” In the works since last year, Duffy says ethics and budget officials from DOT reviewed and approved his participation in accordance with federal rules. On its website, The Great American Road Trip, Inc. lists sponsors including Boeing and United airlines, companies Duffy is in charge of regulating. As you heard there, this project was funded through a nonprofit. It’s called The Great American Road Trip, Inc. It says it’s partnering with the Transportation Department on this. The family isn’t being paid to participate, the secretary’s wife says, and they did it to celebrate the country’s 250th anniversary[.] “Alright, if they say so, Jay,” a snide Strahan replied. To see the relevant transcript from May 10, click here (for NBC). To see the relevant transcript from May 11, click here (for ABC), and here (for NBC).

Last week, the Virginia Supreme Court overturned an unconstitutional referendum effort by state Democrats to gerrymander the state’s national House seats 10-1. During Monday’s edition of The View, the ABC News hosts carried water for the liberal extremists as they completely ignored the substance of why the court overturned the results in favor of just lobbing incendiary claims that the justices just didn’t like the result and were following Trump’s orders. They even accused the justices taking part in an election “cheat” plot. Ignoring how Democrats violated the Virginia Constitution when it came to the process of amending it (which was needed to enact their redistricting scheme) and that a lawsuit was filed, moderator Whoopi Goldberg introduced the subject as the justices just unilaterally deciding to undo the referendum: And then this happened, there was another seismic shift in voting rights last Friday after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down a redistricting map that had been approved by Virginia voters. Okay? They said, ‘this is what we want.’ They came and said, ‘no, that's not what you want, we changing it.’   The View falsely claims Virginia Supreme Court told voters this about redistricting: "They came and said, no, that's not what you want, we changing it." In reality, Democrats violated the state's Constitution. pic.twitter.com/PgZ9GoYktv — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   What she was doing was pure disinformation. The voters did not approve a “map,” they approved deceptively vague language about redistricting efforts. “This feels like a cheat,” Goldberg claimed as she suggested it was designed to suppress voter turnout, “And what this is supposed to do is make you think, ‘Ugh, it's not even worth voting.’ It is always worth voting. It is always, always, always worth voting.”   "This feels like a cheat." Still ignoring how Democrats violated Virginia's Constitution, Whoopi suggests Republicans are the ones cheating in elections and claims it's voter suppression: WHOOPI GOLDBERG: I mean, it's kind of crazy when the party says, 'you know, we care about… pic.twitter.com/LUdNtVVje3 — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin proved yet again just how empty of a suit she was as the purported “Republican” on the panel. Without mentioning that the court overturned the redistricting effort on constitutional grounds, she asserted, "this was a technicality that the Supreme Court decided to get hung up on." She also suggests the court was following Trump's orders: And Donald Trump has been conveying for the last decade that he plans to do this, that he wanted state assemblies to redraw their congressional maps to create more Republican seats. What it becomes is a race to the bottom, and right now Trump and his team are playing three-dimensional chess and it feels like the Dems are just not playing that well. There was also some whining from her about how, “it just feels like Democrats once again getting out maneuvered and - I think it's why people throw up their hands and feel like their vote doesn't count.”   Of course, faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin describes the Virginia Supreme Court invoking the state's Constitution a "technicality that the Supreme Court decided to get hung up on." She suggests the VA Supreme Court was following Trump's orders. pic.twitter.com/zsSOiT79dN — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   Pretend independent Sara Haines did note that there was more nuance to the ruling than they were describing, but never actually explained that Democrats violated the constitution. Instead, she openly argued that Democratic efforts to gerrymander were inherently better than Republicans’ And the thing I also noticed is, we talk often about how both parties do it. The difference is the Republicans often do it -- and this happened in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Florida, and Tennessee -- they do it through the officials at the top, the GOP. When the Democrats have done it they at least throw it out to the people and say what do you think of this? And I tend to think if there is a lesser evil that's the one, you want the voters doing this.   Sara Haines admits that the court's overruling the Democrats gerrymandering was foreseeable, but then argues that the Democrats' gerrymandering is inherently better than Republicans' which is "evil." "The difference is, the Republicans often do it -- and this happened in Texas,… pic.twitter.com/yQfqpaFo9h — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   Again, there was no actual mention that the Democratic referendum in Virginia was unconstitutional. Using more incendiary rhetoric, fake Republican Ana Navarro lashed at Texas and claimed Republicans “drew first blood” with gerrymandering: So, I don't know that we should be both-siding this or I know we shouldn't be both-siding this because this would have never happened but for Texas being the first to draw blood and redistricting to give Republicans five new seats. Democrats have been left in a position of having to react to that first stupid thing and trying to catch up, which they are not doing and they just don't have the -- you know, they don't -- they just are not doing it.   Using incendiary rhetoric that could incite more political violence, fake Republican Ana Navarro claims it was Trump and Republican who were "first to draw blood" in gerrymandering and redistricting. She claims Democrats would never gerrymander if it wasn't for Republican doing… pic.twitter.com/JCyeNMayaq — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   Fact check: false. History didn’t start with the Texas redistricting and the first party to gerrymander was the Democratic-Republican Party, the predecessors to today’s Democratic Party. There was also the existence of states like New Mexico, where Republicans make up 44 percent of the electorate but there were no Republican majority districts, which long predated the Texas redistricting. Of course, chronically aggrieved co-host Sunny Hostin played the race cared and insisted that all the redistricting was about disenfranchising black voters: I hope that's true. I think it's tough when you do gerrymander. I think it's tough because you do dilute the black vote. And people are saying -- I've read places where people are saying, ‘well, this is not about race.’ If race is sort of -- if black people are the backbone of the Democratic Party and you're gerrymandering on a partisan basis for the Republicans, of course, it's about race. It's about diluting the black vote. That's 100 percent what it's about.   Of course, Sunny Hostin plays the race card claims redistricting is all about racism and disenfranchising black voters. She falsely claims Republican "don't have a lot" of legislatures where they're the majority. In reality, they control the legislatures in 28 states (a majority… pic.twitter.com/elgD6k98WB — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   As they were nearing the commercial break, Hostin and Farah Griffin teamed up to call on Democrats to do more gerrymandering to eliminate Republican representation in other states: HOSTIN: So, you know what I think Democrats need to do? They need to go to New York and get those extra seats. They need to redirect. They need to redirect in a couple of states - FARAH GRIFFIN: Illinois HOSTIN: - in New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland. Redirect, redirect. Get your 10 to 20 seats and then we will get the oversight that we do need! Because the Republicans are not playing fair, and now it's time to meet them where they are!   Hostin goes on to call for MORE Democratic gerrymandering to disenfranchise Republicans and remove their representation entirely. pic.twitter.com/NAegVt8ayY — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 11, 2026   The former federal prosecutor also took a swipe at the Virginia Supreme Court by claiming the justice were working on behalf of Republicans. “What I do appreciate about the Democrats is they're finally realizing that the Republicans are not playing by the rules, that they're drafting their own rules … the Republicans decided to overturn the rule of the people,” she attempted to shout but her damaged throat kept her horse. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 11, 2026 11:02:46 a.m. Eastern WHOOPI GOLDBERG: And then this happened, there was another seismic shift in voting rights last Friday after the Virginia Supreme Court struck down a redistricting map that had been approved by Virginia voters. Okay? They said, ‘this is what we want.’ They came and said, ‘no, that's not what you want, we changing it.’ So, the ruling now gives Republicans a big boost as we approach the midterms, and Democrats are a little pissed. (…) 11:04:01 a.m. eastern GOLDBERG: I mean, it's kind of crazy when the party says, ‘You know, we care about voters' rights and, you know, people are cheating and we are in there, we're going to make sure they don't,’ and then they kind of cheat. This feels like a cheat. So, how much is this ruling going to impact future elections? It should remind everybody that your state makes the decision about what goes on. And what this is supposed to do is make you think, ‘Ugh, it's not even worth voting.’ It is always worth voting. It is always, always, always worth voting. [Applause] So, I'm sorry, go ahead. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I come from the place of I 100 percent always, any day of the week oppose partisan gerrymandering. I think it's bad for America. I think we talk a lot about democracy and the importance of representation. And I think when both sides get in the mud and decide to play nobody wins and both decide to get into this. But here’s the problem with me, I think Ted Liu hit it in the clip. This was foreseeable. This was a technicality that the Supreme Court decided to get hung up on. He even kind of eludes to the fact that they maybe wouldn't have brought it up in the first place because it wouldn't pass. And Donald Trump has been conveying for the last decade that he plans to do this, that he wanted state assemblies to redraw their congressional maps to create more Republican seats. What it becomes is a race to the bottom, and right now Trump and his team are playing three-dimensional chess and it feels like the Dems are just not playing that well. In my opinion, no one should be doing it. I think it's bad. I’m going to reiterate that over and over. It's why you have hyper-polarized, partisan districts where you can't vote people out. But it just feels like Democrats once again getting out maneuvered and - I think it's why people throw up their hands and feel like their vote doesn't count. SARA HAINES: Well, the issue here was the state Supreme Court though. When I first read the headline on the heels of the loss a week ago with the - Louisiana - when they used race - they said you can't use race when counting - and it felt like it was absolutely disenfranchising tons of voters. I went and saw the headline a thought, ‘here we go again!’ But then you read into the weeds on this one it actually -- it was foreseeable. So, the lower courts had already ruled that this was not going to be able to pass and the Supreme Court of the state overruled it and said, ‘no, no, no, let it go forward.’ Courts are allowed to do that. The problem with that is the optics are awful right now, as we're watching partisan divide and gerrymandering! And the thing I also noticed is, we talk often about how both parties do it. The difference is the Republicans often do it -- and this happened in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Florida, and Tennessee -- they do it through the officials at the top, the GOP. When the Democrats have done it they at least throw it out to the people and say what do you think of this? And I tend to think if there is a lesser evil that's the one, you want the voters doing this. ANA NAVARRO: And you see - So, the issue in this Virginia-specific issue is the Supreme Court. But the real issue here is that Donald Trump is a terrible precedent [sic] who most Americans disapprove of right now, his approval ratings are in the basement. He knows he's going to lose the House, so he started last year telling Texas expressly to redraw their congressional map. So, I don't know that we should be both-siding this or I know we shouldn't be both-siding this because this would have never happened but for Texas being the first to draw blood and redistricting to give Republicans five new seats. Democrats have been left in a position of having to react to that first stupid thing and trying to catch up, which they are not doing and they just don't have the -- you know, they don't -- they just are not doing it. But the reason this is happening is because Trump knows he's going to lose the House, which means that there will finally be oversight and accountability of the abuses of power by his misadministration. And that is why he's trying to change the rules in the middle of the game and give himself more Republican districts, and it's going be a backlash because the voters don't have to take it and are not going to take it. And they can redraw everything, but they can't redraw is what voters do with their God-given right to vote. So, we're going to show up in record numbers and we're not going to let them rig these elections. [Applause] SUNNY HOSTIN: I hope that's true. I think it's tough when you do gerrymander. I think it's tough because you do dilute the black vote. And people are saying -- I've read places where people are saying, ‘well, this is not about race.’ If race is sort of -- if black people are the backbone of the Democratic Party and you're gerrymandering on a partisan basis for the Republicans, of course, it's about race. It's about diluting the black vote. That's 100 percent what it's about. And when it comes to -- you say it's a race to the bottom. It is a race to the bottom but the Republicans started that race. They started that race in Texas and then they continued it and continued and continued it. And we just saw it in Tennessee. What I do appreciate about - NAVARRO: And in Florida. HOSTIN: And in Florida. What I do appreciate about the Democrats is they're finally realizing that the Republicans are not playing by the rules, that they're drafting their own rules and it's time for the Democrats to play by those new rules and that's what they have tried to do. So, instead of going, as Sara, you say, to sort of the top because they don't have a lot of states where they are -- especially in the south -- where they rule sort of the legislature, they decided to take it to the people. I think that's the right way to try to fight. HAINES: Absolutely. GOLDBERG: It’s the only way. HOSTIN: You go to California, you go to Virginia and now the Republicans did something that I don't think the Democrats expected, the Republicans decided to overturn the rule of the people. So, you know what I think Democrats need to do? They need to go to New York and get those extra seats. They need to redirect. They need to redirect in a couple of states - FARAH GRIFFIN: Illinois HOSTIN: - in New Jersey, Illinois, Maryland. Redirect, redirect. Get your 10 to 20 seats and then we will get the oversight that we do need! Because the Republicans are not playing fair, and now it's time to meet them where they are! (…)

The New York Times believes they really scored an “own” against the right by taunting Republicans with the idea they might lose elections if they continue trying to outlaw the murder of pre-born babies.  The NYT's Molly Jong-Fast thinks Republicans supporting a ban on mail-order abortion drugs will hurt them electorally. Newsflash lady abortion is murder and it's still wrong regardless of how people vote. Video by @Justine_Brooke pic.twitter.com/p82NhzVN0d — MRC Video (@mrcvideo) May 11, 2026 In a four minute rant riddled with mental gymnastics, contributor Molly Jong-Fast gloated that banning abortion pills is a “no-win situation" for Republicans, who are trying to win on an issue that is wildly unpopular.”  Given that modern day progressivism is a self-consumed ideology that employs “any means necessary” as a winning strategy, it’s no surprise its subscribers can’t understand why others would prioritize a win for human lives over a win for politics. If banning pseudo-doctors from ending those lives is so “wildly unpopular,” then pro-aborts like Jong-Fast should have no problem with the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe Vs. Wade, which leaves the decision up to voters in every state.  Nevertheless, she continues lamenting how hard a post-Roe America will be for mothers to end their child’s life with drugs like mifepristone and misoprostol. If SCOTUS reverses their temporary ruling that allows nationwide access to the deadly cocktail, she complains “it can still be pulled from the market” despite being FDA-approved, because “ideologically, this government doesn’t like what it does.”  Correct… it kills people.  But according to Jong-Fast, “making abortion illegal doesn’t stop abortions; it just stops safe ones.” In other words, making murder illegal doesn’t stop people from being murdered… It just stops them from being murdered safely.