ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos featured Missouri GOP Senator Eric Schmitt, apparently to discuss ongoing operations in the Caribbean. The interview immediately went sideways, though, when Stephanopoulos tried to gotcha Schmitt with a recent presidential pardon. The interview followed that of a Democrat representative, which went as such things normally go- very smoothly. Watch as Schmitt takes Stephanopoulos to the woodshed over his selective pushback after a second pass at the pardon question: “Well, I’m curious about your pushback on that particular point. With your previous guest (@RepAdamSmith) you had zero pushback because he’s giving the Democrat talking points like you spew every single week, which is probably why your ratings are so bad” – @Eric_Schmitt to… pic.twitter.com/QDO8jCn6iZ — Brent Baker ???? ?? (@BrentHBaker) December 7, 2025 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS:  What do you mean you're not familiar with the facts and circumstances of the pardon? It's been well reported all across the country. He is the former president of Honduras. He was convicted of conspiring to bring in 400 tons of cocaine into the United States, also guns and other materials. It's been front page news across the country. Aren't you curious about that? ERIC SCHMITT:  Well, I'm curious about your pushback on that particular point. With your previous guest, you had zero pushback because he’s, giving the Democrat talking points like you spew every single week, which is probably why your ratings are so bad. But to make the point, what I'm saying is that you're trying to divert here the attention from what the American people actually support. 75 percent of Americans support us blowing narco terrorists out of the water in the Caribbean who are trying to poison Americans. There's no real legal debate about the ability to do that. Now, you could have a policy discussion about it, which now you see the Democrats pivoting from the second strike and the war crimes allegation to really what this whole thing is about. Should we do it -- be doing it in the first place? I have way more sympathy for my friends, my cousins, my neighbors, those people who've been poisoned by these narco terrorists, people who've been skinned alive by these cartels that they bring people to the United States than I do for these narco terrorists. I mean, that's just the reality of the situation. So, there's legal justification for it. He's doing it. We do have more of a focus on our interests now in the Western Hemisphere, and I'm thankful for that. STEPHANOPOULOS:  Do you support the pardon of the convicted drug smuggler or not? SCHMITT:  George, like I said, what we're talking about here are the narco terrorist poisoning Americans. This attempt to try to focus on a pardon is classic because you've lost the debate now on the narco terrorist question. Schmitt would go on to hammer Stephanopoulos on the media’s handling of the War Crimes Hoax as part of the “Don’t Give Up The Ship” operation to undermine the military’s confidence in their commanders, namely Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and President Donald Trump. After several minutes of this, Stephanopoulos would attempt to pivot to the recently-published Inspector General report on Signalgate. Schmitt schooled Steffy again by breaking down the ways in which it was a “nothingburder”. When Stephanopoulos pushed back, Schmitt reminded him of an actual scandal that threatened operational security that went completely unpunished and which the media covered in a completely deferential manner: the disappearance of Secretary Lloyd Austin due to what would later learn was cancer treatment.  Schmitt rightly concludes that this is about little more than Democrat (and media) derangement over the results of the 2024 election and the fact that the duly elected President of the United States gets to designate his Cabinet and set military policy. No matter how much the Elitist Media would like to think otherwise. The ehole exercise proves, once again, that if it weren't for double standards, there'd be none at all. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, December 7th, 2025: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to bring in now Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri, a member of the Armed Services Committee in the Senate. And Senator, let me just begin where we left off with Congressman Smith. Do you support this pardon of the former Honduran president? ERIC SCHMITT:  I'm not familiar with the facts or circumstances, but I think what's telling here is to try to imply that somehow President Trump is soft on drug smuggling is just ridiculous. It's totally ridiculous. He's the -- he has provided border security like we've never seen before. And the fact is, these cartels now, because the southern border is closed, they've gone to the high seas. So, President Trump is acting with his core Article II powers. No serious legal expert would doubt that the president has authority to blow narco terrorists out of the water, who are poisoning a hundred thousand Americans every year. If you watched the SEC Championship Game yesterday, the Big 10 Championship Game, combine those two stadiums with the number of people there, that's how many people are dying each and every year from the poison that's coming from these narco terrorists. So the fact is, George, President Trump has been delegated the authority by Congress to designate terrorist organizations. He has done that. He sent a letter to Congress saying he was going to initiate these strikes. We've had regular briefings about it, including from Secretary of State Rubio, including from other high-ranking officials in the Department of Defense. He's executing those. And so now, what we have now are Democrats who have such X-ray vision and clairvoyance that they know the intentions of narco terrorists on boats, yet were so blind to see that they had a president for four years that was operating as a vegetable in Joe Biden. So, forgive me if I'm a little skeptical that this isn't all about politics and trying to take out Secretary Hegseth. That's what this whole thing's been about, George. They didn't want him confirmed. They didn't want a realist in place. They didn't want to shift from their pet projects around the world and trying to build democracies in the sandsof the Middle East by the barrel of a gun. We have core national interests at stake, the homeland and the Western Hemisphere, and the rise of China. That's what this administration is focused on. The Democrats are just upset about that, and they try to create some controversy each and every week, and it goes nowhere. STEPHANOPOULOS:  What do you mean you're not familiar with the facts and circumstances of the pardon? It's been well reported all across the country. He is the former president of Honduras. He was convicted of conspiring to bring in 400 tons of cocaine into the United States, also guns and other materials. It's been front page news across the country. Aren't you curious about that? SCHMITT:  Well, I'm curious about your pushback on that particular point. With your previous guest, you had zero pushback because he’s, giving the Democrat talking points like you spew every single week, which is probably why your ratings are so bad. But to make the point, what I'm saying is that you're trying to divert here the attention from what the American people actually support. 75 percent of Americans support us blowing narco terrorists out of the water in the Caribbean who are trying to poison Americans. There's no real legal debate about the ability to do that. Now, you could have a policy discussion about it, which now you see the Democrats pivoting from the second strike and the war crimes allegation to really what this whole thing is about. Should we do it -- be doing it in the first place? I have way more sympathy for my friends, my cousins, my neighbors, those people who've been poisoned by these narco terrorists, people who've been skinned alive by these cartels that they bring people to the United States than I do for these narco terrorists. I mean, that's just the reality of the situation. So, there's legal justification for it. He's doing it. We do have more of a focus on our interests now in the Western Hemisphere, and I'm thankful for that. STEPHANOPOULOS:  Do you support the pardon of the convicted drug smuggler or not? SCHMITT:  George, like I said, what we're talking about here are the narco terrorist poisoning Americans. This attempt to try to focus on a pardon is classic because you've lost the debate now on the narco terrorist question. Because at the beginning of the week, you had Democrats actually on camera saying you should disobey orders. That's what Senator Kelly and Slotkin were saying, you should disobey orders. And then they went so far as to say that if you do -- if you don't do that, you might get prosecuted down the road. It's hard to sort of overstate how problematic that is for the chain of command and what it is for a military. The Democrats had their shot at all this and it was rejected. They wanted to have DEI struggle sessions in our military, transgender surgeries, recruitment was way down. The fact is under President Trump and now Secretary Hegseth, recruitment is sky high. Morale is sky high. They're upset about that, because they had an agenda that said that America could be everywhere all at once all the time. Now, we have a president that's a realist, focusing on core national interests, including protecting Americans from being poisoned by the narco terrorists. STEPHANOPOULOS:  Just to clarify, the Democrats you talked about were talking about illegal orders, they were specific about saying it was illegal orders -- SCHMITT:  Yeah. STEPHANOPOULOS:  -- that they were talking about. SCHMITT:  Sure. But when you press them on -- but when you press them on what orders are they talking about, they had no answer except to say that, somehow they should be guessing along the way. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's really ridiculous. And this is kind of the rabbit hole of Trump Derangement Syndrome, is that they can't let this thing go. They can't believe that he won. They didn't want Hegseth to be the Secretary of War. They fought it. He was their number one target. They failed at that. And so now you just have a series and series of issues that come up every week to try to undermine the president and the Secretary of War.. And it's not working. They're going to carry out their mission. They executed another strike of a narco-terrorist just this past week. Those will continue and they're completely authorized. I reviewed the 40-plus page memo by the Office of Legal Counsel. There's JAG officers in these rooms, George, every time there's a strike. So, again, the narrative at the beginning of the week that these are war crimes, that's clearly fallen away and now the Democrats are peddling another lie. STEPHANOPOULOS: You mentioned Secretary Hegseth. Here's a quote from the Department of Defense inspector general report on that release of sensitive information over the Signal app. According to the inspector general, "The secretary sent information identifying the quantity and strike times of manned U.S. aircraft over hostile territory over an unapproved, unsecure network approximately two to four hours before the execution of those strikes. The secretary's actions created a risk to operational security that could have resulted in failed U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots." Isn't that a concern? SCHMITT: I reviewed the I.G. report and it's a nothingburger. The fact is there were allegations this was confidential or classified information, I should say. It wasn't. There was no operational integrity problems that that Operation Roughrider was executed flawlessly. So was by the way Midnight Hammer. So you can't really call that into question. There's no confidential or classified information that was disclosed. And, again, I think the bigger concern that you didn't have a hue and cry about from the Democrats was when Secretary Lloyd Austin went in for a medical procedure, was incapacitated and didn't tell the president. Literally, we had a Secretary of Defense that wasn't on duty and nobody knew about it. Like that's a real problem. This was a nothingburger and that's what the I.G. report that I read last week in the SCIF indicated. STEPHANOPOULOS: It said it was a risk to operational security. SCHMITT: But it wasn't. It wasn't. There was no -- listen, remember, when the scandal -- so-called scandal started, it was about classified information being disclosed. It wasn't classified information. So, again, you pivot to this sort of sensitive information, but there was no risk. There was no risk. And by the way, I'll point out, Signal is approved by the U.S. government for communications. And so if you want to have a broader discussion about that, we probably can. But I think the bigger issue was, you know, in the previous administration you had real operational risk. You had a department, you had a Secretary of Defense that was incapacitated in a surgery and nobody knew about it for days. That's a problem. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, thanks for your time this morning. SCHMITT: Thanks, George.  

Anyone expecting tough questions from CBS’s Margaret Brennan to U.S. Representative Ilham Omar was sorely disappointed at the end of this week’s Face the Nation. Brennan instead provided a tour-de-force in media coddling, as Omar beneficiary of a kid-gloves interview that cast her as the victim of unfortunate events beyond her control. This coddling of Omar is, as was noted by our own Tim Graham, part of a broader pattern seeking both to shield Omar from her connections to the Somali welfare scam currently roiling the state of Minnesota and to Trumpwash the scandal by focusing on President Donald Trump’s reference to Omar as “garbage” during a recent Cabinet meeting. As a reminder: Trumpwashing is that media tactic that suppresses any and all coverage of a Democrat scandal until President Trump reacts to it, then shifts coverage to turn Trump’s reaction into the scandal, as opposed to the scandal itself. The interview opens with Brennan allowing Omar to deflect from her ties to the scandal, saying merely that it was a donor: CBS's Margaret Brennan opens her softball interview with Rep. Ilhan Omar by allowing her to deflect from her ties to the Feeding our Future fraud: TL;DR: "Some donors did something." pic.twitter.com/iYpkbbeCub — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 MARGARET BRENNAN: We have a lot to get to with you, but I want to pick up on where the Treasury Secretary just left off. He alleged that people who were tied to you or your campaign were involved in this broad, brazen scheme to rip off the Minnesota state welfare system. Do you want to respond to that? Do you know what he is referring to? ILHAN OMAR: I really don't. And I don't think the secretary himself understands what he is referring to. We obviously had people who were able to donate to our campaign that were involved. We sent that money back, ah, a couple years ago. And actually, I was one of the first Members of Congress to send a letter to the Secretary of Ag asking them to look into what I thought was a reprehensible fraud that was occurring within the program. As The New York Post noted, it wasn’t just a “donor.” It was individuals linked to her campaign, persons intimately involved with turnout operations, and the host of Omar’s 2018 victory party. This is all public information and yet Brennan offered none of it, or anything else because there was no follow-up question. Brennan simply checked that box off and moved on, allowing Brennan to skate. Fast forward to Brennan addressing the specifics of Feeding our Future- Brennan tees Omar up again by asking her to address allegations that the investigation is the result of racism. Omar responds by literally blaming the white woman: Ilhan Omar further tries to deflect from the Somali nature of the welfare scam by noting the race of the person who at the time ran Feeding our Future: "So you have to remember that the woman who led the program is a Caucasian woman." pic.twitter.com/K8wRFZraMb — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 BRENNAN: Because as you know, one of the initial defenses by the organization at the heart of the fraud, Feeding our Future, was to claim the probe was due to racism. Do you think that this was all about negligence, or that it was a political fear of alienating the Somali community? OMAR: So you have to remember that the woman who led the program is a Caucasian woman. And that was her way of making sure that this would continue to happen by using whatever rhetoric that was available to her. We do know that when the money was stopped, they did sue the AG, Attorney General Keith Ellison defended the department in that lawsuit. It was a judge that said it should conti- that money should continue to go out. And so this wasn't something that people were not looking at. There was always those alarms. And we will continue to understand where things might have gone wrong as these investigations continue and as these fraudsters are prosecuted and sent to jail. Brennan immediately follows up by, again, setting Omar up to shoot an allegation down rather than responding to the claims underlying the scandal. Here, Omar is asked her degree of confidence in the claim being false. Omar then says that she is confident the claim is false, but if there IS fraud, then it is a failure of the FBI…as opposed to a moral failure from those that committed systemic fraud. WATCH: Margaret Brennan sets Ilhan Omar up to deny that fraus-derived monies are going to terrorism. Omar denies the terror link and preemptively blames the FBI should any terror link emerge. pic.twitter.com/qLFg16ZC0Y — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 BRENNAN: Well, it's going to have impact for your community, because we’ve heard the head of Medicare and Medicaid say they’re going to have a new policy that applies to Minnesota. You heard the Treasury Secretary say they are investigating. But there's another thread here. Because House Republicans and the Treasury Secretary just now talked about a link to terrorism, a possible link. He said they are just now beginning to look into it. How confident are you that that's a false claim? OMAR: I'm pretty confident at the moment, because there are people who have been prosecuted and who have been sentenced. If there was a linkage in that- the money that they had stolen going to terrorism, then that is a failure of the FBI and our court system in not figuring that out and basically charging them with these charges. The record will reflect that Brennan, who makes an effort to pronounce things in proper Arabic, failed to so much as utter al-Shabab within the context of reports that the terror organization was an alleged beneficiary of this fraud. Additionally, there was no mention of Governor Tim Walz- on whose watch this all happened, or of allegations of impropriety against Ellison. After having Omar weigh in, with no context, on President Trump’s remarks calling her “garbage”, Brennan asks Omar about White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller’s remarks on the dangers of unfettered immigration. Again, Brennan offers no context to remarks in the wake of the DC shooting carried out by an Afghan refugee, which killed one member of the National Guard and left another severely injured. Brennan closes out her pillow-soft interview of Ilhan Omar by having react, with no background or context, to Stephen Miller's remarks on unfettered immigration in the wake of the D.C. shooting. After previously decrying "dehumanizing" language that might incite violence, Omar… pic.twitter.com/5yBPIzGyJz — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 BRENNAN: I want to ask you something else that the architect of the president's immigration policy, Stephen Miller, said. On Thanksgiving Day, he posted: ”No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions and terrors of their broken homelands.” What do you make of this argument of failure to assimilate and sort of ruining America. How do you understand this? OMAR: I mean, when I think about Stephen Miller and his white supremist rhetoric, it reminds me-- BRENNAN: --That's how you hear it-- OMAR: Yes, it reminds me of the way the Nazis described Jewish people in Germany. And you know, as we know, there have been many immigrants who have tried to come to the United States who have turned back, you know, one of them being Jewish immigrants. We know the way that people were described who were coming from Ireland, Irish immigrants. We know the way in which people were described back then, when there were Italian immigrants. And to me, you know, we're, we're, yes, of course, ethnically Somali, we are in this country as Americans, we are citizens, we are a productive part of this nation, and we will continue to be. BRENNAN: Congresswoman Omar, thank you for your time today. Fun fact: Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey was able to win reelection against Omar's endorsed candidate Omar Fateh, in large part, because he exploited inter-Somali tribal divisions that the community brought with them into this country. This is proof evident of the kind of failure to assimilate and acculturate that Miller and Trump addressed. Proper journalism would hac challenged Omar with this rather than just play Democrat patty-cake. This wasn’t an interview, so much as it was an anti-news presentation. Brennan offered no significant follow-up to any of the questions she asked Omar, and offered no challenges. There was no interruption of Omar at any time, and no performative pen-wagging- contrary to what we see with Republican guests. Things are (D)ifferent like that. One such question left unasked: why so many Somali politicians who campaign for Omar seem to believe she is Somalia First. The former Prime Minister of Somalia said as much last summer, as a smiling Omar gazed approvingly in the background. No coverage of Omar will be complete until this is addressed. “Ilhan’s interest aren’t those of #Minnesota or the people of #America but the interests of #Somalia” These were the words the former Prime Minister of #Somalia @HassanAKhaire revealed at a rally in support of @Ilhan Omar exposing the true intentions of @Ilhan serving as a… pic.twitter.com/793NsYikp4 — ??????? ?? (@DrCaaro) June 30, 2024 Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview as aired on CBS Face the Nation on Sunday, December 7th, 2025: MARGARET BRENNAN:  And we’re joined now by Minnesota Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. Welcome to the program. ILHAN OMAR: Thank you, Margaret, for having me. BRENNAN: We have a lot to get to with you, but I want to pick up on where the Treasury Secretary just left off. He alleged that people who were tied to you or your campaign were involved in this broad, brazen scheme to rip off the Minnesota state welfare system. Do you want to respond to that? Do you know what he is referring to? OMAR: I really don't. And I don't think the secretary himself understands what he is referring to. We obviously had people who were able to donate to our campaign that were involved. We sent that money back, ah, a couple years ago. And actually, I was one of the first Members of Congress to send a letter to the Secretary of Ag asking them to look into what I thought was a reprehensible fraud that was occurring within the program. BRENNAN: So this was- just for our audience- the Biden-era Justice Department called it the largest Covid fraud scheme in the country. And this was pocketing Covid-era welfare funds, more than $1 billion in taxpayer money that was stolen. It was pretty, pretty shocking. Of the 87 people charged, all but eight are of Somali descent. And that has added to the spotlight being put specifically on your community. Why do you think this fraud was allowed to get so widespread? OMAR: I want to say, you know, this also has an impact on Somalis, because we are also taxpayers in Minnesota. We also could have benefitted from the program and the money that was stolen. And so it's been really frustrating for people to not acknowledge the fact that we, you know, we are also, as Minnesotans, as taxpayers, really upset and angry about the fraud that has occurred. BRENNAN: Mmm-hmm. So do you think, though, that there was a failure by the Democratic state government to police itself? This was a brazen, fraudulent activity here. OMAR: Yeah, and that is what I alluded to in my letter that I sent to the Secretary of Ag- was to see where things were going wrong. How can this amount of money disappear fraudulently without there being alarms being set off? BRENNAN: Yeah. OMAR: And it is something that we have to continue to investigate. We have to continue to ask those questions. BRENNAN: Because as you know, one of the initial defenses by the organization at the heart of the fraud, Feeding our Future, was to claim the probe was due to racism. Do you think that this was all about negligence, or that it was a political fear of alienating the Somali community? OMAR: So you have to remember that the woman who led the program is a Caucasian woman. And that was her way of making sure that this would continue to happen by using whatever rhetoric that was available to her. We do know that when the money was stopped, they did sue the AG, Attorney General Keith Ellison defended the department in that lawsuit. It was a judge that said it should conti- that money should continue to go out. And so this wasn't something that people were not looking at. There was always those alarms. And we will continue to understand where things might have gone wrong as these investigations continue and as these fraudsters are prosecuted and sent to jail. BRENNAN: Well, it's going to have impact for your community, because we’ve heard the head of Medicare and Medicaid say they’re going to have a new policy that applies to Minnesota. You heard the Treasury Secretary say they are investigating. But there's another thread here. Because House Republicans and the Treasury Secretary just now talked about a link to terrorism, a possible link. He said they are just now beginning to look into it. How confident are you that that's a false claim? OMAR: I'm pretty confident at the moment, because there are people who have been prosecuted and who have been sentenced. If there was a linkage in that- the money that they had stolen going to terrorism, then that is a failure of the FBI and our court system in not figuring that out and basically charging them with these charges. And so I do know that for many years this sort of, like, alarm that there's money being transferred through the airport in bags and going to terrorism -- that accusation has always existed. That it’s never been here and there in those accusations. But if that is the case, if money from U.S. tax dollars is being sent to help with terrorism in Somalia, we want to know. And we want those people prosecuted. And we want to make sure that that doesn't ever happen again. BRENNAN: So there are 80,000 people of Somali descent in your state. But the president has been very focused not just on them but on you. In this extraordinary Cabinet meeting he said Somalis, quote: “Come from hell. They complain and they do nothing but bitch.” Take a listen.  DONALD TRUMP: These are people that do nothing but complain. They complain. And from where they came from, they got nothing. We don't want them in our country. Let them go back to where they came from and fix it. [ Applause ] Thank you very much, everybody. BRENNAN: That knocking is vehement agreement from his Cabinet members there. I just wonder what the reaction is in your district to have that from the highest office in the land. OMAR: It's disgusting. It's completely disgusting. These are Americans that he is calling garbage. And we feel like there is an unhealthy obsession he has on the Somali obsession he has on the Somali community and an unhealthy and creepy obsession that he has with me. I think it is also really important for us to remember that this kind of hateful rhetoric and this level of dehumanizing can lead to dangerous actions by people who listen to the president. BRENNAN: And 95% of the Somalis in your state are U.S. citizens.  OMAR: Yes. BRENNAN: Just for clarity there. The president has restricted all immigration processing, including asylum claims from Somalis already on U.S. soil, along with 18 other countries. ICE reports it has rounded up about 19 people. And they put out press releases with the images of about five of them that they say are the worst of the worst. Is that the entirety of the crackdown to date? OMAR: Yeah. So far, we know of the people that they have picked up in Minnesota, about five of them are Somalis. And from what I have read and from the people that I have spoken to, all of them had already had orders of removal. So these are not people who are undocumented but people who have committed crimes and who should have already been sent out of the country. BRENNAN: I want to ask you something else that the architect of the president's immigration policy, Stephen Miller, said. On Thanksgiving Day, he posted: ”No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions and terrors of their broken homelands.” What do you make of this argument of failure to assimilate and sort of ruining America. How do you understand this? OMAR: I mean, when I think about Stephen Miller and his white supremist rhetoric, it reminds me-- BRENNAN: --That's how you hear it-- OMAR: Yes, it reminds me of the way the Nazis described Jewish people in Germany. And you know, as we know, there have been many immigrants who have tried to come to the United States who have turned back, you know, one of them being Jewish immigrants. We know the way that people were described who were coming from Ireland, Irish immigrants. We know the way in which people were described back then, when there were Italian immigrants. And to me, you know, we're, we're, yes, of course, ethnically Somali, we are in this country as Americans, we are citizens, we are a productive part of this nation, and we will continue to be. BRENNAN: Congresswoman Omar, thank you for your time today. And we'll be right back with a lot more Face the Nation. Stay with us.  

Here is a question you can ask the Google AI: "Can the Associated Press editorialize?"And here is the answer you will get: "No, the Associated Press (AP) strives for factual, nonpartisan reporting and prohibits its journalists from editorializing or expressing personal opinions in their news coverage; their core mission is to provide objective news, but they face scrutiny and debate over potential biases, requiring consumers and member editors to remain vigilant for bias and clearly identify third-party contributions." That's some remarkably unintelligent artificial intelligence. Well, it sure seems like the AP violated its own alleged prohibition of editorializing with their Saturday story about the arrest of the J6 pipe bomber suspect  by Alanna Durkin Richer and Eric Tucker, "Trump administration plays up pipe bomb suspect’s arrest. Jan. 6 violence goes unmentioned." While the title itself sounds suspiciously biased the article text itself comes off as an extended editorial:  WASHINGTON (AP) — After the arrest of a man charged with placing two pipe bombs outside the headquarters of the Republican and Democratic national parties on Jan. 5, 2021, the warning from the Trump administration was clear: If you come to the nation’s capital to attack citizens and institutions of democracy, you will be held accountable. Yet Justice Department leaders who announced the arrest were silent about the violence that had taken place when supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol and clashed with police one day after those bombs were placed. It was the latest example of the Trump’s administration’s efforts to rewrite the history of the riot, through pardons and the firings of lawyers who prosecuted the participants of the siege, and of the disconnect for a government that prides itself for cracking down on violent crime and supporting law enforcement but has papered over the brutality of the Jan. 6 attacks on police officers. “The administration has ignored and attempted to whitewash the violence committed by rioters on Jan. 6 because they were the president’s supporters. They were trying to install him a second time against the will of the voters in 2020,” said Michael Romano, who prosecuted the rioters before leaving the Justice Department this year. “And it feels like the effort to ignore that is purely transactional.” So in the first four paragraphs of the story supposedly about the arrest of the suspected pipe bomber, the AP reporters angrily editorialized that the Justice Department neglected to talk about the J6 violence by  "supporters of President Donald Trump," and  that the Trump  administration was attempting to "rewrite the history of the riot" by "papering over the brutality of the Jan. 6 attacks on police officers." The icing on the TDS cake was quoting an obviously anti-Trump Justice Department prosecutor who left the DOJ this year.  As could almost be expected the AP editorialists painted the suspect, Brian Cole, as a Trump supporter based on, get this, anonymous sources. People familiar with the matter told The Associated Press that among the statements Cole made to investigators is that he believed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, which Trump has insisted was stolen from him in favor of Democrat Joe Biden. The people were not authorized to discuss ongoing investigation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The rest of the AP story/editorial continues in this vein revealing a couple of very very angry AP editorialists posing as reporters letting off anti-Trump steam in the form of their highly biased report/editorial.

Shortly after noon on Friday, at the draw for the 2026 World Cup, President Donald Trump was presented with the first ever "FIFA Peace Prize" by FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) President Gianni Infantino at the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C. The draw is a huge deal, as it determines which countries will play each other and where, as they open the competition next summer. Both CNN and Fox News carried part of it live, but it didn't take long for CNN to dump out of their coverage, once Trump received his award, and that wasn't the worst part. Dana Bash, hosting CNN's Inside Politics in the noon hour, not only cut out of the event early as mentioned, but she and a panel member each had an apparent chuckle over what they had just seen. Bash took a backhanded shot at President Trump, during the introduction, while explaining to her viewers what they were about to see, as he took the stage. "This is the 2026 FIFA World Cup draw. Billions of people around the world are going to tune in to see what happens, not necessarily with president Trump's speech, but with the actual draw." This is obvious to sports fans, but she had to diminish Trump, as CNN viewers expect.   The FIFA President presented Trump with a medal and then read from the certificate that went along with it. INFANTINO:.. So the FIFA Peace Prize is presented annually on behalf of the billions of football loving people from around the world to a distinguished individual who exemplifies an unwavering commitment to advancing peace and unity throughout the world through their notable leadership and action. And therefore, FIFA... awards the 2025 FIFA Peace Prize, Football unites the world to Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America, in recognition of his exceptional and extraordinary actions to promote peace and unity around the world... Infantino continued, but it became too much for Bash (and CNN's small audience) to bear. INFANTINO: Before giving you the floor, Mr. President, if I may say two words... Like everyone here in the room, we see images of war all over the world. BASH: Okay, we're going to continue to monitor this ceremony at the Kennedy Center. And let me just explain what just happened.  At this point Bash paused, a female panel member could be heard giggling, and then Bash herself tried to suppress a giggle. Bash went on to diminish the significance and legitimacy of the award as a lame attempt to butter up Trump before turning to panelist Amy Walter, who continued to delegitimize the whole thing. BASH: ..Now, it was only created a few weeks ago after President Trump didn't win the Nobel Peace Prize. And here's the way FIFA explains what this prize is. This is in their official explanation, "In an increasingly unsettled and divided world, it's fundamental to recognize the outstanding contribution of those who work hard to end conflicts and bring people together in the spirit of peace". Amy. WALTER: Well there is no better way to the President's heart then giving him -- BASH: Flattering. WALTER: --  something gold, and giving him literally something that sparkles and then the flattery that goes along with it. Disrespectful not only to our President but to FIFA and their President, too. Compare this with how Fox News's Outnumbered handled it. They did not take a dig at Trump when he took the stage, they did not cut away seconds after Trump received the award. Isn't it something that a so-called "news" network cuts out before the President speaks live?  Fox stayed an extra 3 minutes and 45 seconds until President Trump left the stage, and then Harris Faulkner treated what we just saw with the respect and gravitas it deserved. Liberals all think hailing Trump as a peacemaker is preposterous, because he's so aggressive in attacking them that they can't acknowledge his administration as helped peace break out anywhere.  FAULKNER: But what we just saw there was the very first, and that is FIFA getting into a mission, if you will, of recognizing on behalf of all of their sports fans and those sports fans around the world of soccer, who love peace breaking out. And who are the peacemakers on the globe? And can they give something out on behalf of FIFA and its sports fans to show their appreciation for those people who bring about peace. And you heard the president after Infantino listed all of the areas, the Abraham accords, the Cambodia and Thailand peace that broke out and the Congo, saving millions of lives by brokering a peace deal there, in Gaza. Respectful, dignified, thoughtful, fair analysis, and no giggling or chuckling. The antithesis of what we witnessed on CNN. Par for the course. 

Radical Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) lost her prominence in the Biden years as they downplayed the fringe a bit. But now that "Islamophobia" is back as President Trump called Omar and her friends "garbage," the networks ran to pamper her again. One reason Trump might have been called Rep. Ilhan Omar “garbage” is her connections to the fraudsters in the Somali community that stole more than $1 billion in government money that was supposed to feed children. On his CNN program The Lead on Wednesday, host Jake Tapper began by setting the stage about the fraud -- before nudging Omar's expected barrage of Trump attacks. He noted the New York Times found some Somalis were "making small fortunes by defrauding government programs of more than $1 billion of taxpayer money during the pandemic. We're talking about dozens of people in a community of thousands, of course." He began by gently asking Omar "What are you hearing from investigators right now?" He followed up with "Can you shed any light on why the fraud got so out of control in Minnesota?" Omar babbled in generalities like Kamala Harris.   Tapper didn't make any attempt to question Omar on her connections to this massive fraud, or how Democrats pandered to their Somali voters by letting all this happen. The New York Post reported on Thursday that Omar and her staffers defended the fraudulent charity called “Feeding Our Future.” Guhaad Hashi Said, who worked on Omar’s 2018 and 2020 campaign as an “enforcer” who oversaw Somali voter mobilization, pleaded guilty in  August to running a fake food site called Advance Youth Athletic Development, where he falsely claimed to serve 5,000 meals a day and pocketed $3.2 million out of the food program. Instead, Tapper painted her as a victim lectured about smearing Muslim migrants: TAPPER: Now, obviously, whatever the ethnic group, the actions of a few dozen should not impugn an entire community of thousands of people. Okay, I want to make that very clear. President Trump has used this fraud to make rather shock -- to me, shockingly bigoted comments about Somalis in general, including you, but the entire Somali community in Minnesota….I don't know how shocked you are at this at this point anymore, but Somali immigrants in general, you in particular have been the target of his attacks for a long time. What's your response? OMAR: Yeah. I mean, I'm not shocked because we know that the president oftentimes resorts to very bigoted, xenophobic, Islamophobic, racist rhetoric when he is trying to scapegoat and deflect from the actual failures that he has himself. The worst broadcast interview with Omar this week happened on NPR’s Morning Edition. Co-host Michel Martin did the spoon-feeding of Omar: “You've been a favorite target of President Trump since you were elected, but it cannot have been easy to hear him make these comments about the entire Somali community. I just wondered what went through your mind when he said things like they contribute nothing and should go back to where they came from and so on.” Omar replied: “His vile rant really wasn't a surprise to me. He has trafficked in racism, in xenophobia, in bigotry and Islamophobia for as long as he has held office.” Morning Edition anchor Steve Inskeep underlined NPR is Omar PR with this X post on more of her answer:  On NPR, Rep. Ilhan Omar responds to Trump’s two-day ramble about Somalis, including US citizens who employ him: Says she feels “shame” that “we elected just a really crazy, deranged old man who does not have the ability to control himself.” — Steve Inskeep (@NPRinskeep) December 4, 2025 This is NPR, which claims it's an oasis of civil discourse. It's not. It's viciously anti-Trump all the time. On the fourth question, Martin finally laid out that fraud occurred, and then just asked “do you have any reaction to that information?” Omar said she was happy there was accountability for the taxpayers. Martin followed up with another puffball: “Are you concerned that an entire community is being scapegoated because of the actions of this group of people?” Radical Muslims get softballs. Conservatives get trashed. But they call it "public" radio.