On Monday’s Good Morning America, ABC co-host and former NFL player Michael Strahan sucked up to socialist New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s pick to lead the city’s Department of Corrections who’s been tasked with not only closing Riker’s Island, but reframing prison time for the dangerous and violent as patients “in our care” in need of “rehabilitation” while suffering from mental health crises. Following two fluffy teases, Strahan boasted in the last half-hour the show would “turn down to one man’s hopes and changing the system” and stating he “sat down with Stanley Richard, the newly appointed Department of Corrections Commissioner here in New York City and Stanley is breaking barriers as the first formerly incarcerate person to be appointed to the job.” “Beyond these gates is a jail known as one of the world’s most dangerous, Rikers Island. There have been complaints of neglect, abuse, and overcrowding...Stanley Richards, the new commissioner of New York City’s Department of Corrections, is tasked with improving conditions,” he gushed. WILD: Yesterday on ABC's 'Good Morning America, Michael Strahan sucked up to Zohran Mamdani’s pick to lead the city’s Department of Corrections, who wants to reframe prison time for the dangerous and violent as patients “in our care” in need of “rehabilitation” while suffering… pic.twitter.com/68hTStNrtF — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) June 23, 2026 This gave way to flowery back-and-forth about “reform” and “possibilities” in the prison system: STRAHAN [TO RICHARDS]: There have been task forces and independent commissions, the oversight bodies that have called for, you know, fix the problem at Rikers to no avail. Is reform even possible there? RICHARDS: Oh, absolutely. So, I don’t see the dysfunction. I see the possibilities. Will it be hard? Yes, step by step, decision by decision, strategy by strategy.  Of course, Strahan focused on the time Richards spent at Rikers: “After losing his mother at age 10, Richard says he searched for a sense of belonging and purpose, finding it in gang life, a path that led to repeated arrests for drug offenses and robbery, ultimately resulting in a four-and-a-half year prison sentence.” Asked about why he’s the right person for the job, Richards said he’s “learned.... could be a facilitator of hope to help people understand that they don’t have to live the life of cycling in and out of jail in prison.” Richards then flirted with the far-left’s dream of prison abolitionism under the guise of reform and viewing criminals as health care patients (click “expand”): RICHARDS: So, I see my work as bringing my experience to bear on a system that has been forgotten, and that means making sure that when the judges decide that someone needs to come into our care, we can center our work on dignity, humanity, normalization and reentry, making sure that our officers are valued and cared for and elevated. STRAHAN [TO RICHARDS]: Yeah, because it seems to be when you think about it one side against the other, here you’re trying to show humanity to both sides.] RICHARDS: To both sides. If I don’t see the humanity in our offices, how can I see it in the people in our care? If I don’t see the humanity in the people in the care, how can I see it in my community? Strahan joined in on promoting the soft-on-crime mentality: “He sees the corrections system that across the country is failing its inmates, one that is too focused on punishment and not enough on rehabilitation, leaving little room for growth, hope, and change.” Richards cited letting inmates decide what food they’re served and gardening classes as examples of how prison sentences could be of better use, telling Strahan the public fails to understand “the entire system.” “[B]y the time they get to jail or get to prison, we probably missed multiple opportunities to intervene on the school level, on the mental health level, on the drug treatment level. The country’s pursuit of punishment has created a system that misses those opportunities,” he argued. Sounding like a true Democratic Socialist, he lamented people “demonize” those behind bars and that the public has made it “easy to justify the pain and suffering and punishment we inflict on them, but if you see them as your brother, your sister, your cousin, your community member, you see them based on the humanity.” Americans like Laken Riley were unavailable for comment. Here was the only sort of pushback or allusion to Americans supporting law and order:  STRAHAN [TO RICHARDS]: People say, well, there’s people who have done some heinous crimes. RICHARDS: Accountability should be a centerpiece of our justice system. I’m not saying that people shouldn’t be accountable. Here’s some actual pushback, courtesy of the New York Post back on March 30 (click “expand”): Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s push to mindlessly free perps held at Rikers is a carbon copy of the de Blasio-era drive that immediately sent crime rates soaring; New Yorkers have zero reason to expect a different result. (....) And the folks who’d get sprung are not the low-level offenders that the “criminal-justice reform” crew always pretends. As veteran Queens prosecutor Jim Quinn notes in The Post, 95% of those now jailed at Rikers awaiting trial face felony charges, mostly for murder or another violent offense. (....) The last few years should have taught the whole city that a relatively few recidivists are responsible for nearly all major crime; keeping repeat offenders off the streets is vital to public safety. (....) Yet Mamdani has made Richards the first ex-offender to head the city’s jail system; he says he’s working to “responsibly” reduce the number of people in custody by expanding supervised release, work release and alternatives to incarceration: Watch out. The interview concluded with Richards emphasizing prisons need to better incubators of “providing people with the tools that when they get out, they could have a place to live and get the resources they need[.]” Someone tell that to the victims of sex offenders. Back live, Strahan said that, along with Rikers having to be shut down by next year, Richards told him “60 percent of the people incarcerated at Rikers had mental health issues, which guards aren’t trained to deal with,” so guards need better training and pay. Co-host Robin Roberts was enamored: “Well, I hope that people really listen to his perspective because he has one unlike many in that position.” “He’s an example. He’s been on both sides. He’s been in Rikers, and now he’s on the outside in the law enforcement side,” Strahan replied. Exit question: Since ABC sucked up to a pro-criminal mindset, when will they do a puff piece with, say, Angel Moms? To see the relevant ABC transcript from June 22, click here.

Ahead of America 250, PolitiFact’s Louis Jacobson penned an article chronicling what he considered to be eleven instances where presidents “shaded reality as they shaped US history.” Unfortunately for Jacobson, in some instances it was he who did the shading, especially when he considered some of the nation’s most defining foreign policy moments. The first time Jacobson got himself into trouble was talking about President James Polk and the Mexican-American War. Jacobson wrote: The path to war began months before the fighting, when Polk ordered Gen. Zachary Taylor (who would succeed him as president) to ‘station his men on the banks of the Rio Grande in an area under dispute between the­ still-independent state of Texas and Mexico,’ Eric Alterman, a Brooklyn College historian and professor of English and journalism, wrote in ‘Lying in State,’ one of two books he’s written on presidential falsehoods. The casualties in this area became the spark for the war. He further added, “Despite knowing that the land was disputed, Polk framed it as blood shed on U.S. soil, justifying a military attack. Polk ‘would eventually go so far as to admit that the battle had taken place on ‘disputed’ rather than American soil,’ Alterman wrote, but that was after the war concluded.”  That’s a bit silly. The Mexican-American War began in 1846 after Texas became a state and the U.S. assumed its disputed border. Every country that has a territory dispute considers the disputed territory their own. Next, Jacobson turned to the origin story of the media’s Main Character Syndrome, “In 1898, the USS Maine exploded in Cuba, killing 261 crew members. Pushed by a war-hungry media, William McKinley leveraged the incident into the Spanish-American War, even though historians generally believe the explosion was an accident, not an act of sabotage.” Jacobson is correct that the explosion was likely an accident, but that does not mean McKinley was influenced by the press, as he suggested, “Even though ‘it’s hard to locate an obvious lie among his explanations for the need for war in Cuba,’ Alterman said, ‘McKinley caved into the hysteria manufactured by an increasingly irresponsible press.’” Serious Spanish-American War historians do not consider yellow journalism to be the reason why the U.S. went to war with Spain. A lot of the stories usually cited to support such a claim simply do not have supporting evidence. The less exciting truth is the court of inquiry that was set to investigate the Maine concluded the keel’s inverted V shape suggested an external explosion. The next wartime president to find himself on Jacobson’s bad side was Harry Truman, “In 1945, Harry Truman announced the United States’ deployment of the world’s first atomic bomb by saying it was ‘dropped on Hiroshima, a military base.’ It was a seminal moment for the world on the brink of the nuclear age, and it wasn’t the whole story of who would be affected.” He tried to rebut Truman by claiming, “Precise comparisons of military and civilian deaths are not available, but there’s broad agreement that most of the 66,000 deaths and 69,000 injuries were civilians, not troops.” However, even Jacobson was forced to concede, ‘Hiroshima was the command center for southern Japan, which made it ‘a significant military target,’ [Albany Law School emeritus professor of legal history Paul] Finkelman said.” Even when PolitiFact goes back to 1846, 1898, or 1945, it can’t help itself. While Jacobson may not have taken out the truth-o-meter, his nitpicking or, in McKinley’s case, flat-out incorrectness shows the perils of a website that is famous for such a rating system.

"Painting?" On Tuesday's CNN This Morning, host Audie Cornish opened a discussion of Tucker Carlson by saying: "For months, Republicans have been painting him as antisemitic." Cornish failed to mention Carlson’s: Friendly interview with avowed Holocaust denier and Hitler fan Nick Fuentes. Praise for Holocaust revisionist Darryl Cooper asmaybe “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.” Comments embracing the classic blood libel holding Jews responsible for the death of Jesus. Description of Jewish Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “sweaty, rat-like, and shifty.” There's more antisemitic evidence on Tucker Carlson than paint in a Sherwin-Williams store—but Cornish presented the criticism as mere partisan brushwork. Cornish made the claim during a Group Chat discussion that featured speculation about Carlson potentially running for president in 2028. The segment turned to Carlson distancing himself from the Republican party over its support for Israel, with Carlson declaring he could not support a party “not loyal to the United States” -- yet another accusation with antisemitic overtones. CNN’s @AudieCornish: Republicans Are ‘Painting’ @TuckerCarlson as Antisemitic "Painting?" There's more antisemitic evidence on Carlson than paint in a Sherwin-Williams store. pic.twitter.com/0nRmKxUCVv — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) June 23, 2026 Panelists repeatedly tied the moment to presidential positioning for 2028, with strategists noting that both Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene appear to be “testing the grounds of running.”  Democrat strategist Chuck Rocha claimed that in a primary with multiple candidates, Carlson could win with just 30% of the vote--and "Tucker Carlson knows that."  Problem for Carlson: Given that he has announced his departure from the Republican party, it's hard to see how he could enter a GOP primary—unless he does so on the platform of "Make the GOP American Again." Cornish’s delicate framing of Republicans "painting" Carlson as antisemitic was a Tom Sawyer-worthy whitewash. The facts paint a different story. In contrast with Cornish's reticence, Ted Cruz, in a clip played during the segment, didn't hesitate to decry the rise of antisemitism on the right, calling Carlson "the single most dangerous demagogue in this country." Note: Ashley Davis, a panel regular presented as a Republican, called Democrat Josh Shapiro "my very good friend." Last time Ashley said the same about a conservative? Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 6/23/26 6:53 am EDT AUDIE CORNISH: So we've been talking about this issue [Israel, antisemitism, etc.], whether this could affect the fate of these politicians in New York.  And it appears Israel sealed the fate of Tucker Carlson as well. For months, Republicans have been painting him as antisemitic. TED CRUZ: And I will say, on the right, I have seen more antisemitism in the last eighteen months on the right. It is being spread by loud voices. The most consequential of whom is Tucker Carlson. I believe Tucker Carlson is the single most dangerous demagogue in this country. CORNISH: Carlson says he is done with the Republican party. He says it puts the interest of Israel above those of its own citizens. TUCKER CARLSON: I would not support the Republican party, there's no chance I would support the Republican party. Not gonna support the Democratic party. I don't know what I'm gonna do. But at this point, you know, how could you support, how could I or any American voter support a political party that's not loyal to the United States? TAMARA KEITH: I think that what is happening here with Tucker Carlson, with Ted Cruz, is various parts of what has been the Republican coalition figuring out what happens in a potential post-Trump reality, and positioning themselves. And there are flashpoints. Israel is going to be a flashpoint, it didn't used to be. Republicans were all very pro-Israel, that's not the case anymore. And I think you're gonna see it over abortion and other issues as well. CORNISH: Yeah, Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeting, "Tucker's not the only one who's done supporting the Republican party." This is her, I think, on X. "There is A LOT of us that are absolutely fed up and won't support a party that betrays its voters and country. That doesn't mean we're turning into Democrats either, but we are done with the America LAST Republican party." CHUCK ROCHA: There's something going on here. It's not just this issue. If you think about this issue, you think about the war, you think about the Epstein files. You have all of these activists on the right who voted for Donald Trump because of those three things, and Tucker Carlson, maybe Marjorie Taylor Greene, are trying to tap into that. The old political consultant here thinks it has a lot to do with 2028. . . .  ASHLEY DAVIS: I also think that Marjorie Taylor Greene and Tucker are trying to figure out a path in regards to 2028. I think they're both testing the grounds of running.  But also one of the questions I have for you is, there are four or five potential Jewish candidates on the Democrat side that would run in 2028, one of 'em, my dear friend Josh Shapiro. How does that happen?  I mean, they're like go-- trying, the Dems are trying to go left of the left of the left of Israel.  ROCHA: This has relevance in Democratic and primaries for both parties in 2028. When you have multiple people running, more than four or five, you can win the nomination with thirty percent. Keep in mind, you just need that thirty percent, and Tucker Carlson knows that. CORNISH: Okay. You think he's definitely, this is a he's running situation? ROCHA: [Nods cowboy hat affirmatively.]  CORNISH: Okay.

Border officers can suspend a foreign national’s status as a permanent lawful U.S. resident, pending resolution of a criminal charge, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday. In a 6-3 decision in the case of Blanche v. Lau, the Supreme Court sided with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, reversing and remanding a Second Circuit appeals court ruling in favor of Muk Choi Lau, a Chinese national seeking to remain in the U.S. after pleading guilty to a felony. Lau became a lawful permanent U.S. resident in 2007. But, after he was charged with third-degree trademark counterfeiting in New Jersey in 2012, he left the country. A lawful permanent resident who arrives in the U.S. after a temporary absence can usually reenter the U.S. at will because he has previously been deemed admitted – unless he has committed serious crimes involving “moral turpitude.” In Lau’s case, when he tried to reenter the U.S., a border officer noticed on a FBI database that Lau had been indicted for a felony. As a result, the border officer granted Lau temporary admittance (“parole”) – not admittance as a lawful permanent resident – pending the outcome of his criminal trial. Ultimately, Lau pleaded guilty to counterfeiting, prompting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to secure a removal order for his deportation. Lau lost an appeal to the Board of Immigration, then sued. The Second Circuit ruled in his favor on the grounds that the border officer did not have “clear and convincing” evidence Lau had committed a serious crime. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court disagreed: “Held: The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) does not require a border officer to have clear and convincing evidence that a lawful permanent resident has committed a crime involving moral turpitude before deeming the resident an applicant for admission.” “We decline to read into the INA an additional clear-and-convincing-evidence burden on border officers entrusted with making ‘quick judgments on the spot’ when that burden is nowhere in the statute,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority opinion. If a legal permanent resident returning from abroad has committed a qualifying offence, such as a serious crime, that person “can be divested of his already-admitted status and treated as if he is ‘seeking an admission’” by a border officer, Thomas explained. The ruling enables border officers who know that a permanent legal resident seeking reentry has been charged with a felony criminal offense to modify that foreign national’s status and issue a notice to appear for immigration status resolution once the court case is settled. The Supreme Court did not decide whether Lau’s crime was one meeting the “moral turpitude” requirement to revoke his permanent status. Instead, it sent the case back to the Second Circuit for further proceedings. Indictment, instead of “clear and convincing evidence,” is considered sufficient, since prosecutors are only allowed to seek and file charges if they believe they have enough proof to convince a jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. “Congress never intended to saddle customs officers at airports with finding ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that an alien charged with a crime actually committed it,” Christopher J. Hajec, deputy general counsel of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), said in a statement applauding the Supreme Court’s decision:   “Because border officers would not know the evidence against the alien, imposing that requirement was just a way of dismantling the protections in the law against a whole class of alien criminals. We are pleased the Court refused to go along with this gutting of the law, and reversed.” FAIR had previously filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing for what would prove to be the High Court’s ruling in Tuesday’s opinion.

Amid a so far successful World Cup, Monday’s CNN This Morning backtracked on their worries about the World Cup, as host Audie Cornish, who previously showed worry over the event on its opening day over a Somali referee banned for ties to terrorism, framed the World Cup as “uniting.” Her guest expert on the World Cup, Will Leitch, the founder of Deadspin, was also seemingly surprised by the success, as he mentioned how “people were very concerned” about the US hosting because of ICE. Leitch later praised the Iranian national team for their “pretty inspiring story” amid being treated “shabbiliy” by the US. After Leitch briefly mentioned the experiences of foreign soccer fans, using the example of Dutch fans enjoying Kansas City barbecue, he turned back to the concerns before the tournament and the theory that ICE would instill fear into internationals and possibly have deportation campaigns at stadiums: We've talked about this, people were very concerned about coming in, coming to the United States for a variety of reasons, from immigration to ICE. And there have been issues. (...) But generally speaking, this tournament has gone off kind of magnificently in a way that has felt pretty healing for the United States at a certain level.   Monday's CNN This Morning featured Will Leitch, the founder of Deadspin, who seemed surprised that ICE has not been a bigger factor in hurting World Cup excitement. He also called Iran's national team "inspiring" amid being treated "shabbily" by the US government. pic.twitter.com/CHFAwpzCdi — Nick (@nspin310) June 22, 2026   Leitch, the founder of an apparent sports news website, then later said Trump might have a bigger role in the tournament but, “he’s been distracted by the pool lately.” One could also say CNN has been completely distracted by the reflecting pool. He then returned to the idea of ICE before he praised the Iranian team, who he said have, “been treated incredibly shabbily in this tournament.” Leitch also attempted to debunk, with only denials from the Iranian Team, claims from DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin that someone with ties to he IRGC almost boarded an Iranian team plane to the US, as he also called the team “inspiring”: Just this weekend, uh, U.S. Homeland Secretary Markwayne Mullin claimed that a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was about to get on the plane. The team denies this, says this is in no way true.  Of all the teams in this, the one team that I think is actually a pretty inspiring story is Iran, in addition to the U.S. Team, for the conditions that they've had to play under and have generally succeeded. To close, Leitsch conceded, “other than the Iranian team, most of the fears that people have worried about have not happened.” But still, he left the door open to instill fear that Trump could put his hands on the tournament, in the country he has governed and an event he played a role in obtaining for the US back in 2018: And eventually the pool may be blue, and there may be something for Trump to turn his attention back to this. With all the lead-up coverage to the event and controversy over a referee banned over ties to terrorism, the event has shown the true side of American media’s apparent dislike of their own country. While the media worried over immigration and Trump, foreign visitors have thoroughly enjoyed America, as seen with Freddy’s travels across the US South, Scottish fan enjoyment of Fenway Park, and the newfound European obsession with ranch dressing. The transcript is below. Click "expand": CNN This Morning June 22, 2026 6:21:57 AM Eastern (..)  AUDIE CORNISH: So you've got dreams coming true. That's what the World Cup is all about, and the worries about filling stadiums and selling tickets at this point are gone because of moments like these. Whether we're watching the next greats score their first World Cup goal of what should be many to come, or seeing a team claim a World Cup victory for the first time in their history. Perhaps one of the most uniting things, seeing different cultures embracing. (...) 6:22:50 AM Eastern CORNISH: Okay. Joining me now, Will Leitch, contributing editor for New York Magazine Sports. Nature is healing is what I'm hearing. Why do you think all of this, like culture clash, is such a big deal? And I especially hear it coming out of the South, I should say the fans from abroad who are visiting there. WILL LEITCH: Yeah, to hear the people from the Netherlands talk about the Kansas City barbecue has really been kind of a wonderful aspect of this, too.  Yeah. You know, remember this was a - we've talked about this, people were very concerned about coming in, coming to the United States for a variety of reasons, from immigration to ICE. And there have been issues. The Iranian team in particular has been treated pretty shabbily by the U.S. Government in this. But generally speaking, this tournament has gone off kind of magnificently in a way that has felt pretty healing for the United States at a certain level. You know, it's been a good reminder. You know, we're kind of so caught up in the morass of everything that we do have a lot to show people, a lot of things to be proud of. I think you've seen that this is what the World Cup does, right?  All of those worries about the World Cup, what's going to happen with this? What's going to happen with that. Once the game gets started, the games themselves are wonderful, but also all of these different cultures. I was fortunate to be at the Spain-Cabo Verde game, that first game in Atlanta.  And just to celebrate with Cabo Verde fans after. Cabo Verde has fewer people than Mesa, Arizona. I mean, this is a very, very small country. And the joy that they have, that you see this at every single one of these places. These venues have been full. The tickets have been very, very expensive. But the seats are full, the stands are full. So, people are going out to these games and really kind of having a pretty wonderful time. (...) 6:26:25 AM Eastern CORNISH: Um, you know, I want to mention this. Iran's team actually left a note in the locker room in LA. I just want to show people on this little notebook here. It says “From the ancient Persia of thousands of years ago to the civilized Iran of today, the spirit of Iran remains alive and steadfast. We came to Los Angeles with pride, competed with honor, and leave with dignity. Thank you, Los Angeles, for your hospitality.”  We weren't sure they'd be able to be here or leave a note like that. And it reminds us of what's going on politically. Is there another shoe to drop? Is Trump going to make an appearance after FIFA gave him a very special peace-adjacent prize? LEITCH: Yeah, very special prize. Yeah. So, I think that - remember the final is in MetLife Stadium, or sorry, New York-New Jersey stadium in East Rutherford. So it's very possible there could be a Knicks-level-esque appearance for him.  Certainly he's been a big part - He's been distracted by the pool lately. But generally speaking, he's been a big part of what was going on with this World Cup. He was at the draw, famously got his peace prize.  And I feel like, for all the worries that, like, listen, ICE has not been a major presence in this tournament like a lot of people worried about. The Iranian team in particular has been treated incredibly shabbily in this tournament. They've had to fly out after their games, not been allowed to stay in the country. They've had to leave, actually, the night of the game to go back to Mexico.  Just this weekend, uh, U.S. Homeland Secretary Markwayne Mullin claimed that a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was about to get on the plane. The team denies this, says this is in no way true.  Of all the teams in this, the one team that I think is actually a pretty inspiring story is Iran, in addition to the U.S. Team, for the conditions that they've had to play under and have generally succeeded. They've played very well in this tournament. There is a non-zero possibility. Iran certainly looks like they could advance to the knockout round and keep going. This has been, very generally, other than the Iranian team, most of the major fears that people have worried about have not happened. But we still have a long way to go in this tournament. And eventually the pool may be blue, and there may be something for Trump to turn his attention back to this. But so far, it's really been - the focus has remained with the games and on the international spirit that the U.S. has been able to welcome here, making the Iranian team, even if the government isn't making them feel welcome, the fans are, and I think that speaks to kind of the really wonderful thing about this tournament so far, and really kind of every four years. (...)