Pundits are already putting pencils to paper about who might be the Democrats' nominee for president in 2028, and how each might fare in media coverage. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore might be the next Obama model in the race, much like previous campaigns featured people posing like the new JFK, from Gary Hart to John Edwards. Maxwell Tani, an alumnus of the leftist Daily Beast website, worried out loud about Moore in a story at Semafor that they headlined in an email “The Sinclair Sun vs. Wes Moore.” Beware, Democrats: “Investigative journalists with The Baltimore Sun and the local TV station that shares the same owner are digging into Maryland Gov. Wes Moore’s records — and keeping their owner in the loop.” Liberals worry about non-liberal outlets investigating Democrats – especially when the politicians make up details about their life story. Wait, that is the Obama model – he made up a bunch of details in his memoir Dreams From My Father. One funny Tani line suggests The Sun only recently became opinionated, that it made a “transformation from a well-known, fairly old-school, by-the-book regional newspaper to a new, more ideological local media hybrid.” More ideological? A few days before Barack Obama became president, the Sun posted a story headlined “Obama Traces Lincoln Steps On Way to Presidency.” In 2019, the Sun was the toast of the liberal media by attacking President Trump as “vermin” after he claimed no one wanted to live in Baltimore. In 2021, Sun media reporter David Zurawik suggested Fox News should be removed from the White House press corps. "Let's take them on the word, let's not let them on the plane. You want to let Proud Boys on Air Force One, no, I don't think so. These guys are doing the same thing.” Tani relayed the governor doesn’t like reporters poking around about his dishonest biography: “Moore’s team has complained both publicly and privately that the investigation is needlessly hostile and politically motivated.” Democrats are used to reporters who are politically motivated to support their election prospects, especially in deep-blue Maryland. A conservative paper in Baltimore is as undesirable as a conservative congressman in Maryland (Andy Harris). In a statement to Semafor, Moore’s team lamented the scrutiny from “ultra-wealthy, right-wing media owners using their platforms to put their fingers on the scale and protect their power while hiding behind the credibility of legacy institutions…. this is right wing propaganda wearing the masthead of a formerly trusted news brand.” Once again, liberal equals “trusted,” conservative equals “propaganda.” Then Tani suggested that while the Sun’s focus on accountability is “legitimate,” it’s not original. Moore’s biographical claims were “the subject of serious stories several years ago by The New York Times and CNN,” so “they’re following reporting broken by the mainstream media.” In August of 2024, The Times reported that Moore claimed to have received a Bronze Star for his service in Afghanistan, but he had not received the award. This came up at a very predictable time – when Moore was being considered as a running mate for Kamala Harris. Liberal outlets break out their investigative reporting when Democrats are shopping negative information on other Democrats. Moore then succeeded in having a friend and mentor (Lt. Gen. Michael Fenzel) push him for the Bronze Star again, so he obtained one – for his next campaign. In the last few months, Moore has performed interviews with CBS, CNN, and NPR, but none are like those “Sinclair Sun” people who pester Moore about his mangled biography. Semafor must think of them as “old-school, by-the-book mainstream media.” 

The Elitist Media are predictable because their Trump derangement pushes them into predictable patterns of conduct which then manifests on the air and in real time. This predictability extends to media reactions to the announcement of a two-week ceasefire in Iran, as demonstrated by CNN’s Erin Burnett.  Watch as Burnett bemoans President Donald Trump not obliterating “a whole civilization” as proof evident of “Trump Always Chickens Out:” SO PREDICTABLE: Erin Burnett proclaims TACO after Trump announces a ceasefire with Iran pic.twitter.com/jnykqC9j7x — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 8, 2026 ERIN BURNETT: And then, of course, Max, then you get to the practicality of, of, of people that will live in the moment. That's what the markets do. So the markets, of course, right now in futures trading, they have gone up because guess what, Trump has backed off. And there will be some who will call it, you know, “TACO: Trump Always Chickens Out” which is- is making way too light of it. But it is also a truth, which is that he makes giant threats that he does not follow through on. So it's one thing for everyone to say, well, nobody wanted him to do this, and it's another to say that the word of the President of the United States is now something that people do not think that they can take at his word. That they expect it just to be a quick trading opportunity every single time. We sensed that this was going to be a narrative pathway once word got out earlier in the day of last-minute negotiations. Failed MSNBC host Keith Olbermann even tried to take us to task for daring to have a little foresight: How'd this moronic tweet work out for you, Pinhead? — Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) April 7, 2026 Olbermann's Trump Derangement ultimately proved us right. like clockwork https://t.co/2hSFOX9lw4 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 8, 2026 Which leads us back to Burnett. These are the same people that spent most of Easter Sunday and Monday caterwauling over Trump’s profane social media post demanding the Hormuz Strait be opened, then going fully apoplectic when he threatened that Iran’s “civilization will die.” There is just no consistency. And so it is that the same people speculating that Trump might nuke Iran pivot to mocking him over his use of diplomacy. Trump Derangement Syndrome is very real and is a detriment to the American people in such sensitive times as these.   

The Elitist Media seem to be bothered that an ICE agent dared to defend himself against a violent gangbanger wanted for questioning related to a murder in El Salvador. Their response was to avoid reporting the story in a clean manner. Per The New York Post: Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents on Tuesday shot a gang member who tried to run them down with his car as they moved to arrest him, officials said. The ICE agents were conducting a targeted vehicle stop in the Central Valley town of Patterson to arrest 18th Street Gang member Carlos Ivan Mendoza Hernandez, who is wanted in El Salvador in connection to a murder, according to authorities. The article goes on to describe the history and dangerousness of the gang. The gangbanger trying to run the ICE agent over is, to be clear, the protagonist of this story. But the networks insisted on making ICE the protagonist. Watch as ABC’s Pierre Thomas attempts to scandalize the shooting by citing it as an example of “volatile” immigration enforcement under the Trump administration: WATCH: ABC's Pierre Thomas tries to scandalize the ICE shooting of a gangbanger who tried to run an agent over, by citing it as an example of "volatile" immigration enforcement under the Trump administration. DAVID MUIR: Also just in tonight, we have learned of an investigation… pic.twitter.com/8p3RbGDscA — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 8, 2026 ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT  4/7/26 6:40 PM DAVID MUIR: Also just in tonight, we have learned of an investigation of an ICE-involved shooting. Homeland Security saying federal agents opening fire outside San Jose, California, and what they claim the suspect was trying to do. Here is Pierre Thomas. PIERRE THOMAS: Tonight, the FBI investigating the chaotic moments seen in this video as ICE agents surround a vehicle outside of San Jose. Moments after the ICE agents approach the car it abruptly backs up, crashing into a truck and then swinging toward the agents as the driver speeds away. Those agents shooting at the car. Homeland Security officials claim that ICE agents were trying to arrest a suspected gang member wanted in El Salvador in connection to a murder. They say the driver weaponized his vehicle and attempted to run over the officers. Quote: “fired defensive shots to protect themselves, their fellow agents and the public.” The suspect identified as Carlos Ivan Mendoza Hernandez, who was taken to a local hospital, his condition unknown. It appears no agents were injured. David, this video shows just how volatile the administration's immigration enforcement campaign remains. MUIR: Pierre Thomas live in Washington. Pierre, thank you. By “volatile” immigration enforcement, of course, Thomas means to imply a connection to the unrest in Minnesota. But there is no connection between Minnesota and the shooting of the gangbanger, so Thomas just drops the hint and leaves it there for the viewer to surmise. NBC’s Maggie Vespa, however, leaves nothing to chance and makes a tenuous connection to Minnesota on the Nightly News. Her choice of case is quite interesting, too. WATCH: Unable to find fault with ICE shooting of an 18th Street gangbanger who tried to run the agent over, NBC's Maggie Vespa links to the totally unrelated shovel incident in Minneapolis. TOM LLAMAS: We turn to that shooting involving ICE officers today in northern California.… pic.twitter.com/kpc6HdYlOA — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 8, 2026 NBC NIGHTLY NEWS 4/7/26 6:40 PM TOM LLAMAS: We turn to that shooting involving ICE officers today in northern California. The officers opening fire on a car as it speeds forward and was all caught on video. ICE says it happened during a targeted traffic stop to arrest a gang member wanted for murder. Here's Maggie Vespa. MAGGIE VESPA: Tonight, dramatic new video of an ICE shooting today in California east of the Bay Area. You see multiple SUVs and trucks pulled over, flashers on. At least three officers outside that black car, which suddenly backs up. Then, the car turns and speeds forward. Officers, guns drawn, appearing to move out of the way. Zooming in, at least one officer appears to fire. The car speeds to the left over the median. The video, which has no sound, ends there and doesn't show what led up to the driver taking off. ICE saying in a statement, “officers were conducting a targeted vehicle stop to arrest Carlos Ivan Mendoza Hernandez, an 18th Street gang member wanted in El Salvador for questioning in connection to a murder and he weaponized his vehicle in an attempt to run an officer over.” Adding, “our officers fired defensive shots.” They say Hernandez was taken to a hospital. His condition tonight unknown. The FBI is now investigating.  It comes as the city of Minneapolis releases this new video of another ICE shooting back in January, which contradicts the Trump administration's original account. DHS previously said an officer shot and wounded a Venezuelan man during an immigration enforcement operation after he and another man attacked the officer with a shovel and broom. But the new video shows one man appearing to drop a shovel, as another runs toward a house empty-handed. A third person believed to be the officer tackles him. Two unnamed ICE officers were suspended in February with the agency saying in a scathing statement, “they appeared to have made untruthful statements,” adding they could face “potential criminal prosecution.” Maggie Vespa, NBC News. When news of the shooting first broke my expectation was that some outlet would link it to the shooting of Rene Nicole Good, which drew initial heightened media coverage for Minnesota. Vespa went instead with a story that didn’t draw as much coverage, but has a concrete finding of agent malfeasance. And this is the reason why Vespa tied these completely unrelated stories together- with bailing wire and duct tape. CBS did not file an item on the agent-involved shooting, and nearly comes out better for not doing so. ABC and CBS demonstrated the alternative.  

In a continued meltdown after President Trump’s press conference and continuous Truth Social posts, Tuesday’s Morning Joe on MS NOW continuously claimed Trump was about to commit war crimes in Iran, except for newly signed MS NOW analyst John Kirby, who acted as a voice of reason as he put trust in military leaders instead. Even after Kirby’s moment, during the 9 a.m. hour, co-host Jonathan Lemire called Trump “genocidal” as guests Andrew Ross Sorkin and Eugene Robinson said the U.S. will become a villain. Late in the program, host Jonathan Lemire accused the president of threats of genocide: Let’s just repeat for a moment the President of the United States and his post this morning. That is threatening a war crime. That is threatening something genocidal if he follows through with this, and perhaps, perhaps it's just a bluff, perhaps it's a negotiating tactic (...)   Of course, 9 AM host Jonathan Lemire just a few hours later called Trump's statements "genocidal." Lemire later compared Trump to Putin and Kim Jong Un, before the NYT's Peter Baker gave renewed praise to the months-old "illegal orders" video from Democrats. pic.twitter.com/zA3Wf0i1b8 — Nick (@nspin310) April 7, 2026   He then immediately compared Trump to global villains like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. Peter Baker of The New York Times decided to use the moment to praise the six lawmakers who made the infamous “illegal orders” video: So this is what exactly those six Democratic members of Congress foreshadowed when they released that video a few months back, when they said that members of the military should remember that they are obligated under the law to not follow illegal orders (...)   CNBC's Andrew Ross Sorkin said the US could become the villain: “I think there's a real question about whether you can go from being a - we can go from potentially being the victim of Iran to, depending on how this is executed, to being a villain.” pic.twitter.com/itWyO2Pw3r — Nick (@nspin310) April 7, 2026   CNBC’s Sorkin and MS NOW analyst Robinson claimed the US had become the villain, as Sorkin said: “I think there's a real question about whether you can go from being a - we can go from potentially being the victim of Iran to, depending on how this is executed, to being a villain.” At the end of the segment, Lemire added his “genocidal” line along with the U.S. as the “villain”, as he now claimed that's what he is hearing from “alarmed officials in Washington. A former figure of Biden White House briefings, Kirby made his debut as an analyst earlier in the show.  One of the first questions posed to him was by Mike Barnicle, who asked if there was a “destruction” of Iran amid a conversation about infrastructure, “What do you think that does to the enhanced and legitimate reputation of our great United States Military?”   New MS NOW National Security Analyst John Kirby was the voice of reason on Tuesday's Morning Joe, as, amid cries of war crimes, he calmly said his "expectation" was the US Military would carry out targeted strikes on sites "used to support the IRGC" after the 8 pm deadline. pic.twitter.com/iJ4HSI6nMS — Nick (@nspin310) April 7, 2026   Kirby then said strikes on civilian infrastructure with “no military use or purpose” would constitute war crimes, but, in one of the first moments of reason on MS NOW since the Trump presser, Kirby gave a reality check on what the military would actually do: But, I really don't think - well, let me say my expectation is that the military leaders, General Kaine, Admiral Cooper, they know well those two conventions and they know well where the lines are in terms of international humanitarian law. (...) And I suspect that if we see today or tonight, you know, additional bombing, you'll see justification from the Pentagon about why these targets were hit and what and how these targets were being used to support the IRGC or military uses by the regime. A new trend began after October 7th, that every new war had represented an apparent genocide. If there was a want to not dilute the term, more of the unhinged at MS NOW should start to listen to their newly minted analyst, John Kirby. The transcript is below. Click "expand": MS NOW’s Morning Joe April 7, 2026 7:16:12 AM Eastern (...) MIKE BARNICLE: And, Admiral, let me ask you this. You've devoted most of your life to the service of this country in the United States Navy, and the possibility that what will happen tonight at 8:00 or might be going on right now is a precursor to 8 p.m. tonight, the destruction of power plants turning a country dark, the destruction of water facilities, turning a country desperately in need of water and unable to find water.  What do you think that does to the enhanced and legitimate reputation of our great United States military? In the spine of what America represents and has represented to the world for generations. What does that do potentially to our reputation? JOHN KIRBY: If, in fact, we indiscriminately struck civilian infrastructure that had no military use or purpose, that would constitute war crimes under both The Hague and the Geneva Conventions, and certainly that would completely eradicate any credibility that the United States has in the world in terms of our leadership and our standing.  But, I really don't think - well, let me say my expectation is that the military leaders, General Kaine, Admiral Cooper, they know well those two conventions and they know well where the lines are in terms of international humanitarian law. And while the political leadership, Secretary Hegseth and the president can bluster all they want about obliterating targets and bombing them back into the stone ages, I'm convinced that the military leadership knows exactly how far they can go. And I suspect that if we see today or tonight, you know, additional bombing, you'll see justification from the Pentagon about why these targets were hit and what and how these targets were being used to support the IRGC or military uses by by the regime. (...) 9:03:28 AM Eastern JONATHAN LEMIRE: Let’s just repeat for a moment the President of the United States and his post this morning. That is threatening a war crime. That is threatening something genocidal if he follows through with this and perhaps, perhaps its just a bluff, perhaps it's a negotiating tactic, an 11th hour push to get the Iranians to the bargaining table. But even just issuing that threat from the Oval Office is a remarkable escalation, and something we have never before seen from any president of the United States.  With us, we have now MS NOW senior national security reporter David Rohde, chief White House correspondent for the New York Times, Peter Baker, contributing writer to The Atlantic, Eugene Robinson, and contributing opinion writer for the New York Times, Molly Jong-Fast. Our thanks to all of you for being with us this morning.  Peter Baker, start with you about the president's post this morning. And we know he is, you know, fond of over the top language. He is fond of fire and fury, threats and the like. But this, to me, is something entirely new. And even if it is, does prove to just be a bluff of some sort or a bargaining tactic. This is still a new place for a President of the United States. This is the rhetoric we associate with people like Vladimir Putin, with people like Kim Jong Un, with the monsters of history. And yet we have heard it now from the sitting president. PETER BAKER: Yeah, absolutely. Right. He's using the language of war crimes in a way that no other American president, certainly in our lifetime, ever has. I mean, America traditionally has tried to occupy the high ground when it comes to wars. Wars are fought only out of necessity, not out of spite or out of emotion or out of bombastity, And that presidents, when they talk about war, talk about achieving military objectives, talk about, you know, targeting military targets, not wiping out a civilization, wiping out a civilization is the language of war crimes.  And this is going to be, as you rightly say, it's - you never know with Trump, right? Obviously, this could be just him chest thumping. He likes to do that. He likes to shock. He likes to threaten. He likes to look tough. He's almost 80 years old. He wants to look like a tough guy. But you know, it's a real test, I think for the US military at this point because the us military is bound by law not to follow illegal orders, war crimes, if that's what he ends up ordering, would be illegal.  So, this is the this is what exactly those six Democratic members of Congress foreshadowed when they released that video a few months back, when they said that members of the military should remember that they are obligated under the law to not follow illegal orders, they got punished or tried to be punished by the Trump Administration for it. In fact, the Trump Administration tried to literally prosecute them and throw them in prison for stating, you know what the law says. And now, of course, that looks different in the context of what we're seeing today.  And the question is, what will the military actually do when push comes to shove? LEMIRE: Peter Baker, you're so right to note that the military has an obligation not to follow illegal orders. These would seem like illegal orders. What will they do? Also, what will Republicans in Congress do? Where is the Senate? Where is the house? How can they stand for this?  (...) 9:10:23 AM Eastern ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Look, I think that most people who are focused on oil prices right now think that if this happens tonight, you're looking at much higher oil prices and for a very long time. That's the fundamental issue here. And so you're seeing these comments from the president. I think there's a real question about whether you can go from being a we can go from potentially being the victim of Iran to, depending on how this is executed, to being a villain. And I think that's that's a real question in the in terms of not just the markets, but the sort of larger geopolitical question. (...) 9:15:20 AM Eastern EUGENE ROBINSON: There are still lawyers in the Pentagon. And one wonders what they are telling the commanders and the Secretary of Defense right now that, no, we cannot wipe out or try to wipe out an entire civilization. That is the very definition of a war crime. And it is hard to believe that the United States could actually do this, that - And make no mistake, the United States then does become the villain, period. It becomes the villain in the world. LEMIRE: Yeah, the US would be the villain if this were to happen. It would be a war crime, genocidal. Again, words that I'm getting from alarmed officials in Washington if the president were to follow through. (...)

While it’s certain to not always be the case, Sunday’s 60 Minutes offered a possible harbinger of things to come if editor-in-chief Bari Weiss is to turn CBS News into a network with journalism that appeals to all Americans. The episode including a lengthy piece blasting California’s high-speed rail boondoggle and then a closing minute from Christian evangelist Franklin Graham about Easter. Correspondent John Wertheim laid bare the ugly reality of how America went from having trains as a central part of the country’s history to an afterthought as a jumping off point to an attempt by California for a bullet train “connecting L.A. and San Francisco has lurched, derailed, cost billions and may never happen.” He opened with a fake-out, touting a reliable high-speed rail system before admitting it’s in Morocco. In contrast, he noted California voters passed nearly 28 years ago “a ballot measure for a train connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco in less than three hours” for “estimated price tag” of $33 billion and expected completion in 2020. Still thinking of how incredible this ‘60 Minutes’ story was about how much of a disaster California’s Los Angeles-to-San Francisco high-speed rail project was. Just incredible. John Wertheim’s intro: “It’s hard to exaggerate the role of the train in the American story, or the… pic.twitter.com/I0JrkSlQEM — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 7, 2026 Unsurprisingly, the current state of the project is less than ideal: Status update: today, the state’s high-speed rail authority is preparing to lay its first tracks at roughly the same cost. Only, slight course correction here: Instead of L.A. to San Francisco, it will run one-third of that distance, connecting — wait for it — the metropolis of Bakersfield and Merced, population 96,000. Oh, and when will it open? 2033. Maybe. Central Valley-area Congressman Vince Fong (R-CA) was surprisingly given prime billing off the top and told Wertheim this “nightmare is the probably quintessential example of government waste and mismanagement.” Wertheim then paraphrased more of what Fong told him: “He says that when California voters first approved high-speed rail, the promise and price tag were more marketing campaign than realistic projection.” But when Wertheim took these concerns to California Secretary of Transportation Toks Omishakin and rail board member Anthony Williams, Omishakin seemed to argue voters are the real problem in this project for not understanding how difficult it would be to make a reality: California California's Secretary of Transportation Toks Omishakin first blames VOTERS for the state's failure to not build any high speed rail. "There were mistakes made. Some of the criticism on this project, I think, are very fair... I don't think the voters fully understood,… pic.twitter.com/zrBIfW1Yby — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) April 6, 2026 The next portion focused on how red tape dooms such herculean ambition. Wertheim explained for the uninitiated that, “[t]o get the necessary political buy-in from the whole state, the plan called for the train to run inland, threading the farmland of the Central Valley.” Left unsaid was that, in essence, the call was to run it through the red part of the state because the blue supermajority doesn’t want it cutting through their neighborhoods. Even that wasn’t enough: “Yet, the rail authority hadn’t answered basic questions, like precisely where it could lay down its tracks, what’s known as right-of-way.” Along with land disputes, Wertheim added other pitfalls included “California’s exacting environmental regulations, which triggered all manner of reviews, lawsuits, and delays” and “high U.S. labor and construction costs.” 60 Minutes exposes how California's burdensome environmental regulations prevent anything from being done, particularly with their high-speed rail: "California’s exacting environmental regulations, which triggered all manner of reviews, lawsuits, and delays. As anyone who's… pic.twitter.com/UuEB2WAnNr — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) April 5, 2026 After pointing out far-left Governor Gavin Newsom “didn’t respond to repeated interview requests,” Wertheim said the project changed to run just in the Central Valley as years went by and with nothing to show for it, even though it’d be “a route few clamored for and fewer are likely to ride.” The visuals of empty concrete beams and overpasses (sans any tracks) put the project’s waste into perspective, bolstered by Wertheim sharing that “[l]ocals here jokingly refer to it as their own Stonehenge.” 60 Minutes EXPOSES California's incomplete high speed rail system, locals in the Central Valley call it "Stonehenge": "Locals here jokingly refer to it as their own Stonehenge. Ideally, these bridges and viaducts will one day be used to support California high-speed rail. But… pic.twitter.com/FLEDroMPmh — Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) April 5, 2026 “[F]or now, these are curiosities in a field, monuments to promises that haven’t been met, and plans that haven’t been executed,” he added. He took a detour for the next few minutes to spotlight Brightline, a private rail company aiming to build a high-speed train that would consist of a two-hour span Los Angeles to Las Vegas in 2029 (versus a five-hour drive). It currently has a semi-high-speed line in Florida spanning Orlando to Miami and goes 125 miles per hour, but here again, Wertheim found problems with it (even though it should be a leftist dream) (click “expand”): WERTHEIM: Cultural questions aside, Brightline’s Florida trains run at street level through crowded neighborhoods. And according to numbers compiled by the Miami Herald and local public radio, more than 200 people have been hit and killed by the trains in the near-decade since operations began. Brightline says that running rail in the desert out West — where track crossings won’t be at street level — will be a safer proposition. Then there are the finances: the stratospheric costs of building and running a rail line vastly outstrip revenues. Analysts have downgraded Brightline’s debt to junk, raising questions about private rail as a business. [TO REININGER] To what extent, big picture, do you worry about the future financial viability of Brightline? REININGER: The business has built slower than we originally expected it to build. We thought we would be carrying more passengers today than we are. The business is, in fact, growing month over month, year over year. That’s a great thing. That solidifies in our mind the viability of the business. WERTHEIM: Brightline’s West Coast project has already received some federal funding and is hoping for a $6 billion loan from the Trump administration. REININGER: If you look around the world, for the most part, the infrastructure systems are funded by the public sector. WERTHEIM [TO REININGER]: You do see a role for government here? REININGER: Absolutely. We — we welcome it. The rest of his piece was on the government-run disaster in California with officials telling him this short span from small town to small would cost $126 billion, which Wertheim acknowledged is “more funding than Amtrak has received in its history and still leaves a shortfall of roughly $90 billion.” Wild stat -- the current portion of Gavin Newsom's so-called high-speed rail running from small towns to small towns and not connecting LA and SF is now up to $126 billion in cost, which is far more than Amtrak has received in its entire history. pic.twitter.com/SoZnwo7LTq — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 7, 2026 Liberals can melt down all they want about this reality check, but the first story — led by Scott Pelley — was more up their alley as it focused on the soaring cost of health insurance and the free health care clinic charity known as Ram. Shifting to the end of the show, CBS’s other supposed sin was giving Graham — the son of the late American preacher Billy Graham — a few minutes to talk about the connection between Christianity and America (click “expand”): Evangelist Franklin Graham, who's preached in all 50 U.S. states, says he believes faith in God is the value that played the biggest role in shaping the nation. pic.twitter.com/9Jc6pG07ct — 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) April 5, 2026 Faith. Faith in God is the value that most shaped America. Remember, the pilgrims, they came to this land to find freedom to live out their faith. And it’s people of faith who have been the bedrock, the driving force behind our nation. In years past, where did people turn after a disaster? Not FEMA, not to the government. It was the church that took them in, fed them, gave them shelter, clothed them. It was people of faith who established our health care in this country. Our higher education was started by people of faith. Harvard, Yale, Princeton were founded to train ministers of the gospel. From the remote villages of Alaska to the tip of the Florida Keys today, you’ll find houses of worship and people of faith making a difference. As a follower of Jesus Christ, I want all people to know that God loves them, that He cares for them. So, I see faith as the most important defining value in our nation and in every single life. The horror! Check out the vile, unhinged replies and quoted replies seething over an X post of Graham’s simple message about how Americans have turned to churches for education, health care, relief after disaster, and even a search for our meaning. To see the relevant CBS transcripts from April 7, click here and here.