Jack Hughes delivered the gold medal to the U.S. ice hockey team in the winter Olympics, scoring the winning goal in overtime play. In a postgame interview, Hughes exclaimed, “This is all about our country now. I love the USA. I love my teammates. It’s unbelievable. The USA hockey brotherhood is so strong ... I am so proud to be an American today.” Moving indeed. But the question is, how much did Hughes’ effusive patriotic sentiments, his exhortation of love of country, resonate across our nation? We don’t hear much these days of unbridled expressions of national pride, of patriotism. And, in fact, feelings of pride in our nation, per Gallup polling released last June, are at an all-time low. Just 58 percent said they were extremely or very proud to be an American. To compare, in 2002, 91 percent said they were extremely or very proud to be an American. What’s happening to our love for our country? Taking a closer look, we find that diminished affection for the USA is not bipartisan. It is disproportionately among Democrats. Looking back to 2002, there was hardly any difference between Republicans and Democrats. Among Republicans, 98 percent said they were extremely/very proud to be an American. Among Democrats, it stood at 92 percent. The average was dragged down by independents, 85 percent of whom said they were extremely or very proud. However, by 2025, only 36 percent of Democrats said they were extremely/very proud. Independents stood at 53 percent and Republicans at 92 percent. One might speculate that the precipitous drop in patriotic sentiment among Democrats is because of the Republican currently occupying the White House. However, we must note that from 2001 to 2025, the percentage of Republicans saying they were extremely/very proud never dropped below 90 percent. The party of the president had no effect on Republican patriotic sentiment.      Gallup annually surveys sentiment toward 30 institutions of our national life – our system of government and how well it works, the size and power of the federal government, corporations, the economy, public schools, healthcare, public education, religion, etc. We find that positive and negative evaluations toward these national institutions are also very different among Republicans and Democrats. During the current term of President Donald Trump, the average positive evaluation of these 30 national institutions among Democrats stood at 27 percent. Average negative evaluation stood at 67 percent. The average negative evaluation among Democrats of these 30 institutions over the last seven presidential terms – Trump, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, George W. Bush – was 56 percent. The average positive evaluation over the same period among Democrats was 38 percent. Among Republicans, over these last seven presidential terms, the negative average was 42 percent, and the positive was 52 percent. So, Republicans are net positive about the country over four presidencies – two Republican and two Democrat – and Democrats are net negative. Even under the Biden presidency, Republicans were more positive about our national institutions than Democrats. Under Biden, the average positive evaluation of these 30 institutions among Democrats stood at 35 percent and negative 60 percent. Among Republicans, under Biden, the average positive evaluation of the 30 institutions was 45 percent and negative was 49 percent. So even under the Democratic Biden presidency, Republicans were more positive about the core institutional structure of the country than Democrats. What can we conclude? Republicans are positive about our country and its institutions and Democrats are not. It doesn’t matter who gets elected. Democrats want a different country. Republicans are grateful to be in a free country, knowing that sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. Democrats want a different country. This hasn’t always been the case. It’s something that has happened over the last 25 years. There was a time when both parties understood we live in a free nation under God. In this 250th year of America’s birthday, we now have one party that no longer wants the nation founded on July 4, 1776. Star Parker is the founder of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education. Her recent book, “What Is the CURE for America?” is available now.

Mortgage rates have fallen below the 6% level for the first time in more than three years, according to results of Freddie Mac’s Primary Mortgage Market Survey® (PMMS®) released Thursday. “For the first time in three and a half years, the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage (FRM) dropped into the 5% range, falling even lower than last week's milestone,” Freddie Mac’s Chief Economist Sam Khater said, announcing the news: “This rate, combined with the improving availability of homes for sale, is meaningful and will drive more potential buyers into the market for spring homebuying season.” The 30-year FRM averaged 5.98% on February 26, 2026, down from 6.01% last week and 6.76% a year earlier. The last time the rate was below 6.00% was in September of 2022. “That amounts to hundreds of dollars’ reduction in mortgage payments,” Professor of Real Estate at Columbia Business School said, commenting on the lower rates. “A 0.25% drop in the rate can enable a buyer afford about 2.5% more house while keeping the same monthly payment,” Bhavesh Patel, an executive at Chase Home Lending, told CNN: “Nationwide we’re seeing inventory start to stabilize and even rise modestly, which could indicate that homeowners are becoming more comfortable with the current rate environment to consider a move. “In some pockets across the US, we’re starting to see six or more months of inventory, which could lead to more favorable conditions for buyers.” Making home-buying more affordable is a prime objective of the Trump Administration, as The Hill explains: “President Trump touted the improvements to mortgage rates during Tuesday’s State of the Union after pledging to give “special attention” to the housing market last month amid a steady annual decline in sales since 2022.  “Trump directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage bonds in an effort to further improve current rates.” “This will drive Mortgage Rates DOWN, monthly payments DOWN, and make the cost of owning a home more affordable. It is one of my many steps in restoring Affordability, something that the Biden Administration absolutely destroyed,” Trump said when he first announced the planned purchase in January. Rates may fall even lower in March, as the events of three key dates next month could help determine their direction: March 6, 2026: The next unemployment report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). March 11, 2026: The next monthly inflation report from the BLS. March 18, 2026: The next Federal Reserve meeting. The business and economic reporting of CNSNews is funded in part with a gift made in memory of Dr. Keith C. Wold.

ABC News was once again treading dangerously close to serious legal lability. During Thursday’s episode of The View, co-host Sunny Hostin spew allegations - without evidence - about President Trump "sexually assaulting that 13-year-old." A short time later, Hostin was made to reel in her definitive claims with a touch of skepticism by noting what she was referring to were “unverified allegations,” which were being pushed by Democrats and the liberal media. The liberal ladies were discussing the Epstein files yet again after Democratic House member Robert Garcia (CA) claimed 50 pages were missing related to a salacious claim made against the President involving a 13-year-old girl. In their discussion, Hostin spoke about the allegation as if it was fact: HOSTIN: I want to know where those pages are. JOY BEHAR: What was taken out? HOSTIN: Well, we don't know what was taken out, but what we know is that Representative Garcia read about 50 -- 50 pages are left out. He did read an account of the President sexually assaulting that 13-year-old. BEHAR: Trump. This president. HOSTIN: Yes.   Treading dangerously close to serious legal lability, The View's Sunny Hostin claims - without evidence - that Trump "sexually assault[ed] that 13-year-old." She was forced to walk it back and announce a disclaimer before pushing the unsupported allegations again: "Well… pic.twitter.com/gZ4h2KY5UC — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) February 26, 2026   A short time later, co-host Joy Behar handed Hostin a card and teed her up to hedge her accusation by admitting the allegations were “unverified,” but she needed to get a dig in by reading them: I want to be very careful here because these are allegations and President Trump has consistently – they're unverified allegations and President Trump has consistently denied all the allegations and any wrongdoing. BUT there was a presentation made by the FBI and the witness stated that Jeffrey Epstein introduced her to Trump, who subsequently forced her head down and punched her in the head in response to something that she did. The reality of the situation was the fact the allegations were in the files because they were known to investigators for years and nothing came of them. Just as we did when we found co-host Whoopi Goldberg in the files asking Epstein to borrow a jet, NewsBusters went searching for allegations. We found them and investigators didn’t seem to trust the source. The accusation Hostin mentioned was part of a slideshow put together by the Child Exploitation & Human Trafficking Task Force as an over view of the Epstein sex crimes investigation through to his death. There were five different versions of the slideshow with various levels of redactions. In one form, the allegation read: “[Redacted]** stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which is subsequently bite. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out."     Notice the “**” following the redacted name. Elsewhere on the same slide investigators included a key that explained that “**” meant the person had a “criminal history,” thus weren’t trustworthy. In a different file, an email dated "Monday, July 12, 2021" says this about Trump: "Donald Trump was complicit in abusing me to extort money from my grandfather and my grandfather engaged in similar activities. This is probably the biggest reason I had trouble getting help." Both of these allegations were in the files and in possession of President Biden’s Department of Justice during the height of the lawfare they were waging against Trump in their effort to keep him from the White House again. Which meant there’s nothing to them.     Meanwhile, Behar scoffed at the notion that Trump’s DOJ would find and release the supposedly 50 missing pages; claiming “They’re in his pocket.” An other criminal accusation against Trump. Filling in for co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, who was out on maternity leave, CNBC anchor Sara Eisen noted that the accusation was made before the contentious 2020 election. She drew the ire of the rest of the table when she called out the Democrats for loving to bash Trump: EISEN: We know Democrats like to bash president Trump. That's – GOLDBERG (interrupting): No, no, it's not about bashing Trump. This is about – This is about – Listen, you got. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: This is about children. GOLDBERG: You have people who are taking responsibility. HOSTIN: This is about child sex crimes.   Whoopi claims their constant harping on the Epstein files and trying to connect it to Trump isn't them "bashing Trump." But claims Trump "is at the tip of this iceberg." pic.twitter.com/7saHANl5EF — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) February 26, 2026   Sure it is. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View February 26, 2026 11:07:05 a.m. Eastern (…) SUNNY HOSTIN: I want to know where those pages are. JOY BEHAR: What was taken out? HOSTIN: Well, we don't know what was taken out, but what we know is that Representative Garcia read about 50 -- 50 pages are left out. He did read an account of the President sexually assaulting that 13-year-old. BEHAR: Trump. This president. HOSTIN: Yes. (…) 11:08:34 a.m. Eastern BEHAR: I want to clarify to make sure people understand what happened here. More than 50 pages are missing from the release contained notes from several interviews the FBI conducted with a woman as she pointed out who claimed she was abused by Trump in 1983 when she was 13. And these are -- explain what this is, the words. HOSTIN: Well apparently in this document – and I want to be very careful here because these are allegations and President Trump has consistently – they're unverified allegations and President Trump has consistently denied all the allegations and any wrongdoing. BUT there was a presentation made by the FBI and the witness stated that Jeffrey Epstein introduced her to Trump, who subsequently forced her head down and punched her in the head in response to something that she did. WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Right. So, what's really crazy to me is that, you know, thinking of him giving this State of the Union and not even acknowledging -- SARA HAINES: The survivors -- GOLDBERG i: -- That the survivors were there, not mentioning them, not mentioning that, you know, we are -- we are seeing American citizens being shot by their own government. He didn't mention any of that. He didn't mention their names either. BEHAR: He wants it to go away. GOLDBERG: I think he does. [Crosstalk] SARA EISEN: The only thing I would say is, though, the amount of disclosure we have had so far has been astonishing. You have to admit. It's been more than three million documents and why we talk about it day in and day out on this show and everywhere else and we want more of that. The President did sign the act from Congress that would disclose all this information. And the DOJ does say that they are on it and they will look for any pieces that were not included. So – [Crosstalk] BEHAR: They’re in his pocket. EISEN: - before we jump to conclusions they are still unsubstantiated allegations that made in 2019, before the 2020 election and so let's see before, you know -- we know Democrats like to bash president Trump. That's – GOLDBERG: No, no, it's not about bashing Trump. This is about – This is about – Listen, you got. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: This is about children. GOLDBERG: You have people who are taking responsibility. HOSITN: This is about child sex crimes. EISEN: 100 percent disgusting crimes. GOLDBERG: And so, he is at the tip of this iceberg and he is the only person who we really have not heard from except to say, no, it never happened. EISEN: Let’s see what they produce. Let’s see it. HAINES: Representative Massie and Mace are Republicans and they are also calling for this. BEHAR: And by the way, the FBI interviewed this woman or this child, she was a child at the time, now she’s a woman four times. HOSTIN: Four times. BEHAR: They must have had something, something in there that provoked them to do it three more times. GOLDBERG: Well, let's find out what's going on. Let’s see if we can get it. HOSTIN: There should be four 302s filled out. GOLDBERG: Yes. BEHAR: Right. GOLDBERG: We'll be back.

EDITOR'S NOTE: I somehow left out the Associated Press fact check of Trump, so that's been added to the count. The State of the Union is typically an eye-opening exhibit of how dramatically slanted our "independent fact-checkers" are. An overview of the most prominent traditional national media sites reveals a total of 123 "fact checks" on the president to four for Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.). One might say that Trump spoke much longer, but all four of Spanberger's claims were ruled as solid. Here's the rundown:  PolitiFact promised their usual checking in real time, and performed nine checks on Trump and three on Abigail Spanberger. While Trump's claims drew words like "exaggeration," "mathematical hyperbole," "no evidence," and a "wrong," they avoided the usual "Truth-O-Meter" ruling words. Spanberger's three claims were ruled as ""research supports this number,” "This is accurate," and "Early data supports." (9-3) PBS reposted these checks on both parties.  National Public Radio made those checks look fair and balanced. NPR reporters performed 28 "fact checks" on Trump to absolutely zero on Spanberger.  It began with a "partly true" on the crackdown on illegal immigration. A number of the checks on Trump by NPR weren't ruled false, they were merely explained, like “Congressional stock trading ban faces tough odds for passage.” But like several others, NPR picked battles on "I ended eight wars" and "the United States military obliterated Iran's nuclear weapons program." (28-0) The New York Times published an amazing 29 "fact checks" on Trump to one on Spanberger. The terms for Trump included "false," "exaggerated," "misleading," "lacks evidence," and if was a tiny bit true, then it "needs context." The Times checked one Spanberger line, and it was "Mostly true." Like PolitiFact, the Times backed Spanberger's claim that Trump’s policies "have forced American families to pay more than $1,700 each in tariff costs." (29-1) They even checked Trump’s sports claims. Julian Barnes confessed: “OK, this is definitely a pedantic fact check. Mr. Trump is probably correct that he has never seen a goaltending performance like Mr. Hellebuyck’s. Sportswriters praised the amazing game he played. However, the Canadian team had 42 shots on goal, and Mr. Hellebuyck stopped 41.  An amazing performance, but only 41, rather than 46, shots stopped.” CNN flagged 22 Trump statements and nothing by Spanberger. Toronto-based Daniel Dale provided most of the "checking." He couldn't stand boasting on gas prices coming down: "Trump claimed gas prices are 'now below $2.30 a gallon in most states, and in some places, $1.99 a gallon.' But no state had an average gas price on Tuesday below $2.37 per gallon, according to AAA; only two states had an average below $2.50 per gallon." (22-0) FactCheck.org brought its readers 22 "fact checks" on Trump to zero for Spanberger. Like several others, Team FC added "context" on the jobs claims. "Trump’s claim that 'more Americans are working today than at any time in the history of our country,' while accurate, doesn’t account for population growth. Job growth slowed a bit last year." (22-0) Associated Press put all its "Fact Focus" on Trump, 13 to zero. Their lede: "On inflation, immigration, tariffs and matters of war and peace, President Donald Trump presented a frequently distorted account of the state of the nation Tuesday as he claimed a “turnaround for the ages” and myriad achievements that don’t pass scrutiny." So all that adds up to 123-4. The "no quick fact check of either party" list includes Reuters, USA Today, The Washington Post, Snopes.com, and Lead Stories -- although in the last case LS cried foul on a Loudoun County (Va.) Republican Party video which created an AI-generated mockery of Gov. Spanberger collecting wads of cash from taxes. 

Appearing Thursday on Morning Joe, MS NOW’s Ali Vitali conceded there are “valid questions” about Bill Clinton’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein — enough to justify a House Oversight deposition. But the only connection Vitali mentioned? “He appears in photos.” Left unmentioned was what ABC News has reported: Bill Clinton was listed on 26 Epstein flight legs — though some were segments of the same international trips. Still, 26 entries in the logs. Not one. Not “a couple.” Twenty-six. Morning Joe viewers would never have known it. Instead, Vitali pivoted to a curious feminist-adjacent defense of Hillary Clinton, seasoned with a dash of apophasis: “I think there's also a fascinating dynamic of Hillary Clinton once again being forced to answer for her husband. That, I think, has a ton of gender dynamics that we won't get into before 7 in the morning.” Not get into it? She just did. Morning Joe is becoming your go-to destination for liberal-media apophasis. Just yesterday, Joe Scarborough declared, apropos of Trump, “I’m not going to talk about fascism or Nazism” — immediately after doing exactly that. Scarborough blustered about Hillary having to testify: "the whole thing is a farce." No one is arguing that Hillary is responsible for her husband’s conduct. The question is whether she could be a relevant witness, given her proximity during the years Epstein orbited the Clinton world. If spouses are off-limits, say so. But that’s not where Vitali ended. MS NOW’s Vitali Skips Bill’s 26 Epstein Flight Legs, Raises ‘Gender Dynamics,’ Suggests Deposing Melania pic.twitter.com/BQfrbjTTOr — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) February 26, 2026 Moments later, Vitali turned to tit-for-tat politics: “If we are asking spouses to talk about what their husbands might have been privy to, why are we not also asking Melania Trump that question?” So Hillary is framed as a victim of sexist scrutiny — but the remedy, Vitali suggests, is expanding that scrutiny to Melania. One could argue that Melania married Trump in 2005, after his friendship was Epstein was already on the rocks, while Hillary was married to Bill through everything. They also share the Clinton Global Initiative, which Epstein's collaborator Ghislaine Maxwell helped to set up. In the long run, Vitali can't stand that women haven't elected Hillary or Kamala to the White House. In 2022, she wrote a book about Hillary and Kamala and the rest titled Electable: Why America Hasn't Put a Woman in the White House... Yet. Her colleague Katy Tur offered a blurb: "Ali Vitali confronts the possibilities we may not want to consider and explains in this sharp and often poignant book what it’s going to take to break the single dumbest losing streak in politics.” But on Morning Joe, viewers only heard that Bill Clinton “appears in photos.” They didn’t hear that he was listed on 26 Epstein flight legs — a revealing omission. Here's the transcript. MS NOW Morning Joe 2/26/28 6:07 am ET JOE SCARBOROUGH: You have with Hillary Clinton, somebody that, again, hardly ever spoke to Jeffrey Epstein, never on his plane, had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein.  She's being deposed today, while the Justice Department clearly, clearly got caught in a cover-up by NPR, clearly got caught in a cover-up. As reported by the New York Times, as reported by Murdoch's Wall Street Journal.  And again, it's just a farce. The whole thing is a farce. If I were Hillary Clinton, and of course Hillary Clinton is much smarter than me, but if, I would spend the whole time saying, I didn't know him. What do you think are in those files? What do you think are in those files with a young woman who was 13 years old, who's accusing the president of doing X, Y, and Z?  I mean, here we have a scandal. Just, probably the biggest scandal of the entire Epstein files right now, the cover-up by the Justice Department of these files that reveal testimony of the most terrible things about Donald Trump. We don't know whether they're true or not. But they cover those up after the law orders that they be released. And at the same time, they're dragging Hillary Clinton into a deposition?  . . .  ALI VITALI: I think you're right to bring up the hypocrisy that this then raises. Because it raises the question of, if you want to talk to former President Bill Clinton, which I think there's some valid questions to be asked. He appears in photos. Let's ask those questions. Why are you then not asking the same of President Trump?  I've asked James Comer, the chairman of the Oversight Committee, that very question. He doesn't have a clear answer. In fact, he said, well, the president has talked many times on the record about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Okay. Hasn't done that under oath to Congress. I think that's probably a valid conversation to have.  And then I think there's also a fascinating dynamic of Hillary Clinton, once again, being forced to answer for her husband. That, I think, has a ton of gender dynamics that we won't get into before 7 in the morning. But I think there's also then the question of, if we are asking spouses to talk about what their husbands might have been privy to, why are we not also asking Melania Trump that question?