Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is in a very special category: black, Muslim, and a refugee from Somalia. It’s a triple-banger, like Karine Jean-Pierre, always touted as black, lesbian, and Haitian. Never question their prominence on the merits. It’s a born-on-third-base situation in national politics and media. So when Omar submits herself to television interviews from liberal networks, she knows she can say inflammatory things and not be seriously challenged. On CBS’s Face the Nation, the topic was Renee Good being shot after she drove into an ICE agent with her SUV. Omar claimed Good was “sitting in her car peacefully,” and then the ICE agent “shouldn't be trying to get in front of a moving car.” Good was right whether she was in Park or in Drive. On top of that, Team Trump shouldn’t defend the ICE agent, because “we can see in the videos that have been produced so far that what they are describing is really not what is taking place.” This is engaging in denialism. It’s obvious from the ICE agent’s video that he was struck by Good's car. CBS host Margaret Brennan didn’t challenge Omar on that, or anything else about the incident. She only pushed back by vaguely stipulating there has been violence against ICE agents. This agent was previously run over by a car in his official capacity. That’s not relevant when you’ve decided that in every instance, ICE and Trump are the villains. That wasn’t as outrageous as Omar’s appearance later on MS NOW’s The Weekend: Primetime. Over half an hour, all the questions were designed to elicit her talking points. Co-host Antonia Hylton asked: “In the wake of someone being shot and killed. Are you worried that more of your constituents’ lives will be at risk? Are you worried at all as they pull out their cell phones, as they interact with these officers, that that might just frankly, not be safe?” Omar came on to break out the conspiracy theories: “What this administration is looking for is for there to be deadly encounters so that they can invoke the Insurrection Act and have martial law. And it is a dangerous, dangerous escalation that they're looking for.” MS NOW airs Ilhan Omar's conspiracy theory on the Minnesota ICE surge: "What this administration is looking for is for there to be deadly encounters so that they can invoke the Insurrection Act and have martial law." pic.twitter.com/OTRHUjCMRM — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) January 14, 2026 But it’s the second segment of this interview that shocked the conservative world, when they asked Omar about fighting welfare fraud, as if Omar isn’t connected to Somalis who benefited from fraud schemes, including employees of her campaigns. MS NOW star Ayman Mohyeldin disparaged “conservative YouTuber” Nick Shirley and complained “we have politicians making decisions based off of conspiracy theories. I'm just wondering what you make of that and how dangerous that is, that our politicians are falling for this.” Omar lamented that anyone would fall for the idea that “Democrats condone this fraud,” and suggested all the fraud prosecutions occurred under the Biden administration. That’s not true. But Omar was on a roll, attacking Team Trump: “I'm so exhausted in trying to ask what any of this, you know, information has led to you finding any criminals that you have indicted, that explains why you are wasting so much of our taxpayer resources.” Ilhan Omar is a part of a Somali fraud scheme that robbed $9 billion from American taxpayers. Omar going on TV to argue that investigating that fraud is “wasting our taxpayer resources” is a level of brazen shamelessness I don’t think I’ve seen in politics. https://t.co/NY1pnzBgs3 — Matt Whitlock (@MattWhitlock) January 12, 2026 U.S. attorneys under Biden achieved about 60 fraud convictions, many of them Somalis, and that effort continues under Trump. That’s not “wasting” taxpayer dollars. It’s trying to punish people who stole money from social programs. Shameless Ilhan Omar doesn’t have to worry about journalists bothering her with challenging questions about her conspiracy theories or her connections to fraudsters, or her booming net worth and if that was ethically gained. “Diversity, equity, and inclusion” goals translate to media coddling, polishing, and defusing.

The dust has settled on the second Trump interview of the Bari Weiss Era at CBS News. It is another positive step in the right direction, away from the usual talking point-laden gotchafests. For the chattering classes, they will most certainly hate it and hysterically point to it as further proof of Trump’s supposed erosion of the hallowed norms of the journalistic profession. In keeping with CBS practices, the totality of the interview was quickly made available. In this instance, by airing in its entirety on theCBS Evening News. Anchor Tony Dokoupil acquitted himself well, being firm but respectful. He brought questions, not talking points. He engaged, rather than scolded. This resulted in meaningful conversation, rather than performative confrontation. The interview opened with Iran, and President Trump’s statement to Iran protesters about help being “on the way”, and a reaction to news of the regime’s hanging of protesters: "I don't know where you come from or what your thought process is but perhaps you'll be very happy." President Trump to CBS's Tony Dokoupil on what may happen if Iran begins hanging protesters pic.twitter.com/6ztaTDl6ij — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 13, 2026 Dokoupil interjects with thoughtful followup rather than hectoring: "We will take very strong action", says Trump if the Iranians hang protesters. "Let's define it in Venezuela. Let's define with al-Baghdadi, he was wiped out. Let's define it with Soleimaini, and let's define it in Iran, where I wiped out their Iran nuclear threat in a matter of… pic.twitter.com/hzIakyMXQF — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 13, 2026 The next question is on the economy, and on a domestic economic focus. Dokoupil tries to bring up groceries, but Trump stays on manufacturing. On the economy: DOKOUPIL: There's so much going on overseas. Understandably a lot of your focus has been on other countries but when I talk to Americans, when I talk to your own voters, they want your focus to be on them, and they feel like it may be drifting. What do you have… pic.twitter.com/xoMQP9XGXz — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 Dokoupil takes the market segue and goes to the Jerome Powell investigation. There was a bit of a back-and-forth with Trump on this one, but nothing outright hostile. Dokoupil pressed and got an answer on the appearance of political retribution: “I can’t help what it looks like.” DOKOUPIL: Mr. President, you mentioned the market there. A credit question that might affect the markets. It's the Jerome Powell situation. He is the Fed chair. I know you said you had nothing to do with the investigation, the criminal probe into him, but you have been… pic.twitter.com/ZV6LYQQTwx — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 Tony D pivots next to an emotional appeal on Minnesota, bringing up the fact that Renee Nicole Good’s father appears to be a Trump supporter. Trump displays empathy towards the father but holds the line otherwise. An emotional appeal on Minnesota: DOKOUPIL: I've got an important question about the situation in Minnesota, the death of Renee Nicole Good. I've been speaking to her father, who was a big supporter of yours... TRUMP: Good. DOKOUPIL: ...like many Americans are, but he is… pic.twitter.com/1sAUSpbDKh — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 Dokoupil goes back to economic matters, asking about the inflation report. The conversation leads to talk about whether Dokoupil would be the anchor of the Evening News if Kamala Harris won the election (who knows?). DOKOUPIL: I want to talk about the economy while we have you here. The inflation numbers came out. Overall, not bad, but grocery prices -- TRUMP: No, no. Overall very good. Good for us. Good for our country. Joe Biden had the highest inflation numbers in history, correct?… pic.twitter.com/4DscRB7nb1 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 Dokoupil shifts to automation, something you don’t normally see on the evening news. The big takeaway here? The need for skilled workers. On manufacturing and automation: DOKOUPIL: Mr. President, I’m just trying to be fair here, just trying to do my job and I want to talk about this assembly-line here. TRUMP: To me, it’s vibrant. Listen to this sound. DOKOUPIL: It's incredible, right? TRUMP: I love the sound of… pic.twitter.com/ZRxwmyKrjx — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 The interview closes with a question on morality- a followup to the Times interview. Trump says he is constrained by the courts and the Constitution, but is moved by his moral impetus to not see humans suffering. They end with a callback to the earlier joke about Dokoupil not “having this job” had Kamala won, a laugh and a handshake. The morality question: DOKOUPIL: Last question. I think you’ll be- I was very interested in a comment you made recently about nothing being able to limit your action overseas except for your own morality and your own mind. I’d like to take that same question and apply it here in… pic.twitter.com/7Xhyq5mXQ2 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 Dokoupil closes the newscast with some words for the chattering classes: Tony Dokoupil closes out the newscast with a shot at the media reporting clerisy: "We are not even two weeks now into the new year, and it feels like a decade has passed. The U.S. captured Venezuela's former president Nicolas Maduro. Reports are that as many as 12,000 protesters… pic.twitter.com/CILvPBmCbF — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 14, 2026 The media writers may eventually take their shots at this interview for all the things it is not: the usual sneering, condescending affair by a legacy media elite who comes off as hating half the nation- á la Terry Moran last year. If anything, its comp is Norah O’Donnell for 60 Minutes.  What we got from Dokoupil was pretty straightforward: no softballs but also no preening. As it should be.  

Rock. Pepper. Spray. Call it Chuck Rocha's variation on Rock. Paper. Scissors. On Tuesday's CNN This Morning, after a clip rolled of an ICE agent pepper-spraying a protester, Democrat strategist Rocha claimed: "If there's somebody who's come here and they've done something illegal, sure, they should be deported. But [not] killing people in our streets that are U.S. citizens, point-blank pepper spraying . . . People in America are okay with somebody throwing a rock." Question for Chuck—What would you rather be hit in the face with: a thrown rock or a shot of pepper spray? CNN showed only the portion of the incident in which the ICE agent pepper-sprayed the protester. Why didn't CNN let viewers see what preceded the spraying?  As many ICE critics have done, Rocha described Renee Good as "unarmed." While she might not have had a gun, she was at the wheel of a 4,000 lb. Honda Pilot SUV—potentially a very lethal weapon. Rocha also called ICE agents "thugs that are terrorizing neighborhoods." So, let's assemble Dem campaign consultant Rocha's slogan for prospective clients: "ICE agents are thugs--throwing rocks at them is okay!" That might actually work in a Dem primary. But in a general election in anything but a deep blue district? Not so much.  Even so, Jasmine Crockett might want to hire fellow Texan Chuck and adopt his slogan in her race for a Senate seat from Texas. After all, Crockett recently declared that "Texas is racist." Not necessarily the way to win a majority of hearts and minds in a state that hasn't elected a Democrat senator in 38 years--but ya never know! Note: Ace strategerist Rocha also claimed: "I haven't seen a protester do anything except voice friendly resistance."  Don't get around much, Chuck? Here's the transcript. CNN This Morning 1/13/26 6:02 am ET KEITH ELLISON: Law enforcement agencies should be focused on our public safety, but instead, many are dealing with the aftermath of DHS agents' chaos and violence.  AUDIE CORNISH: And that chaos and violence played out Monday near the site where Renee Good was killed. Video shows the moment protesters and ICE clashed. One protester pepper-sprayed point blank. He can later be heard saying, "I need help." In a statement, the DHS assistant secretary said the protesters were threatening officers and impeding the investigation. She went on to say that all officers were able to safely exit the scene.  . . . There's a little bit of a conversation right now that says, some people are calling the demonstrators insurgents that somehow need to be dealt with. You have the Fraternal Order of Police saying "We're deeply concerned by the reckless public statements and premature judgments the rush to condemn law enforcement without a full understanding of the facts," talking about this shooting of Renee Goode, but also the idea that ICE is inherently doing something unconstitutional.  How are you guys hearing it in your worlds, you kind of former security people, but Democrats also, who have to deal with images of people throwing rocks and fireworks and fighting ICE?  CHUCK ROCHA: I think what I've been hearing is exactly what Jasmine said. The administration wants us talking about immigration because they don't want us talking about the price of everyday goods, which is affecting people dramatically. What folks don't like are the images they're seeing on their TV. They're all about, if there's somebody who's come here and they've done something illegal, sure, they should be deported. But killing people in our streets that are U.S. citizens, point-blank pepper spraying. It doesn't stop, and it's happening in more and more cities.  And I think this is the pushback you're seeing with the midterms. I think this is the pushback you saw in elections just four months ago in Virginia.  CORNISH: But isn't it going to be a split screen? You're going to see people throwing rocks in protest if that is the kind of channel you're watching.  ROCHA: I think people in America are OK with somebody throwing a rock. They're not OK with somebody getting shot in the face that was unarmed.  . . .  ASHLEY DAVIS: I'm having flashbacks of the defund the police. I mean, it's the same kind of rhetoric that happened. And I just don't think that's a winning argument for Democrats.  ROCHA: I would totally push back on my good friend, Ashley. These guys are thugs. They're masked federal agents that are terrorizing neighborhoods. And I think it's not an equal if, on or that. I haven't seen a protester do anything except voice friendly resistance. Even the woman in the car. I may not be an expert on foreign policy or know what's going on with the White House every day, but I know about evading the police since I was a teenager. And that woman was pulling away. And I just think the American people have had it up to here with people terrorizing neighborhoods.  CORNISH: Yeah, actually, that's going to be a question. One thing with the Black Lives Matter movement is there was often a sense of saying, well, the victim did something wrong. They were somehow, by definition, a criminal. With Renee Good, that's also the attempt here. And it does not seem to be working the same way to say the suburban housewife was a domestic terrorist. And I think that does affect the public view. So there are some key differences here. 

National Public Radio legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg previewed oral arguments in two Supreme Court cases involving transgender females (i.e., males) participating in female sports on NPR’s Morning Edition Tuesday. Even as the liberal editorial board of the Washington Post hops off the transgender train in a surprisingly strong editorial, the transgender athlete echo chamber still resounds in other outlets, ringing with distorted language and discredited arguments, as shown by Totenberg’s word choice. Totenberg approached the issue as if the Supreme Court started this skirmish in the “culture wars,” as opposed to the radical “gender-affirming” side that believes boys have the right to compete against girls in women’s sports. This text version tracks closely with the broadcast version: The Supreme Court dives back into the culture wars full steam on Tuesday with oral arguments in two cases that test laws banning transgender girls and women from participating in women's sports at publicly funded schools. Transgender participation in sports, though extremely rare, has become the newest flashpoint in both politics and law. Especially in 2024 when the Trump presidential campaign aired attack ads on the subject more than 15,000 times, putting Democrats decidedly on defense…. For something “extremely rare,” the media certainly spends a lot of time defending the “rights” of transgender females to compete alongside actual females and steal their athletic trophies. To date, 27 states have enacted laws barring transgender participation in sports. Supporters say the laws are needed to ensure fairness in athletic competition and to prevent athletes whose assigned sex at birth was male from having an unfair advantage in women's sports. Opponents of these laws say they discriminate based on sex, in violation of both federal law and the constitution's guarantee to equal protection of the law. This next sentence was surprising: Has tennis great Billie Jean King changed her mind since September 2023, when she sounded opposed to males in female sports, saying that once athletes get to high school, “you really have to have rules” about participation? Navratilova has long drawn the line against males participating in female sports, but it seems King now favors it. For athletes at every level, the issue is deeply personal, with tennis greats Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova on opposing sides, along with hundreds of other high-profile athletes. Totenberg told the story of Becky Pepper Jackson, “apparently the only openly trans girl in the state seeking to play school sports,” and used the distorted, anti-scientific language of the radical trans movement to bolster “her” side of the case. Though her assigned sex at birth was male, she says she knew from a very young age that she was a girl, and by third grade she not only presented herself as a girl, she joined the girls running team in school. … And while Becky's case began when she was in fifth grade, as McCuskey observes, "By the time she was a high school freshman, at age 13 or 14," she "is the third best shot putter in the entire state. And that includes 15, 16, and 17-year-olds, and 18-year-olds." The same kinds of physical advantages, he says, are clear in other sports worldwide. "Every single women's swimming world record, all of them, have been beaten by a boy who's 16 or younger," he says.  But Becky's lawyer, Josh Block of the ACLU, counters that there are always winners and losers in sports, as well as special advantages. .... While Block concedes there is a difference between intramural sports and varsity sports at the college level, he sees this case as potentially punitive for trans individuals overall. Totenberg again used the distorted descriptors favored by trans activists, noting the Supreme Court “has also required passport applicants to list only their assigned sex at birth.” While Totenberg doesn’t hang an ideological label on the left-wing ACLU, another party in the case, the Alliance Defending Freedom, is called “a powerful conservative group.”

States that have sanctuary cities protecting illegal aliens and their dangerous criminal element as of February 1 will no longer receive any form of federal funding, President Donald Trump announced Tuesday during an address at the Detroit Economic Club. The U.S. simply can’t afford to subsidize the millions of illegal aliens currently in the U.S. – especially since many of them are a threat to American citizens, Trump warned: “Many of those people are murderers. They’re people released from jails, prisons, mental institutions, insane asylums. They’re people that are drug dealers, they’re addicts.” If states and cities continue to protect people who break U.S. immigration laws, they’ll have to do so without the help of federal funding, Pres. Trump said: "Starting Feb. 1, we’re not making any payments to sanctuary cities or states having sanctuary cities because they do everything possible to protect criminals at the expense of American citizens." While some illegal alien sanctuaries, such as California, simply refuse to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration laws, others are now going so far as to sue the administration and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). On Monday, the State of Minnesota and cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul announced they have sued DHS in a bid to halt U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) “Operation Metro Surge” surge into Minnesota, claiming they have been “targeted” for their pro-illegal immigration policies – and citing Pres. Trump’s previous threats to cut off federal funding: “Operation Metro Surge instead fits the Trump Administration’s pattern of targeting Democratic municipalities, including Los Angeles, Portland, Chicago, and Washington-DC. Furthermore, the Trump Administration has made a habit of repeatedly and unlawfully attacking the state of Minnesota, both verbally and by attempting to illegally cut federal funding for programs the people of Minnesota rely on.” The State of Illinois and Chicago also filed a lawsuit against DHS and the Trump Administration on Monday, seeking to end federal enforcement of federal immigration law in the state and city. As CBS News Chicago reports: “The lawsuit asks the court to enjoin CBP from conducting civil immigration enforcement in Illinois, declare the Trump administration and DHS in violation of the Tenth Amendment, and enjoin all defendants from using the tactics and methods the state claims are illegal. It also asks the court to award reasonable fees, costs and expenses, including attorney's fees.” The U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause subordinates all state and local laws to U.S. federal law. .@POTUS: "Starting February 1st, we're not making any payments to Sanctuary Cities or states having Sanctuary Cities because they do everything possible to protect criminals at the expense of American Citizens, and it breeds fraud and crime." pic.twitter.com/ixh5XEtyBt — Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 13, 2026