On Tuesday The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that inflation in April had risen 3.8% from  last year, the highest level since May of 2023, and as President Trump took questions from the press before leaving the White House headed to China, he was asked about his negotiations with Iran, and if  Americans paying higher prices was a motivating factor to make a deal. We are at war, so his response, which was basically, I don't think about that, could be viewed as insensitive by those who were not provided with the full question to him, and as you might expect, most of the nightly network newscasts did not present that complete question. The President was asked, "When you are negotiating with Iran, Mr. President, (to) what extent (are) Americans' financial situations motivating you to make a deal? The CBS Evening News probably did the worst job in presenting  the story fairly, with Correspondent Kelly O'Grady handling the honors.  O'GRADY: Consumers saw a jump and a sharp jump in prices last month. Airfares drove a decent portion of that. Of course jet fuel costs are soaring just as the summer travel starts to pick up. And it's not just the optional purchases that are getting more expensive. Essentials are rising, too. She then led into Trump's comments, in a most misleading way, without playing the actual question, or his full answer. O'GRADY: The war with Iran is impacting prices here at home, but this afternoon, President Trump said he isn't backing down. TRUMP CLIP: I don't think about American's financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. Her intro to the clip made it seem as though Trump gratuitously brought up the tough financial situation of many Americans and coldly dismissed them. The question to Trump was not played, neither was his entire answer and therefore, no accurate context was provided. Over on ABC's World News Tonight, Chief Business Correspondent Rebecca Jarvis offered only a slightly more honest job in her introduction to the Trump clip with, "President Trump rejecting the idea that the pain Americans are feeling from inflation will influence his negotiations with Iran." Again, the actual question to Trump could have been played but wasn't. However, unlike CBS's O'Grady, she did provide some context to the President's statement. The reporter's question, as well as all of Trump's answer was played over on NBC's Nightly News with Tom Llamas, who is in China and did the report himself.   LLAMAS: And there's new urgency tonight. With higher gas prices pushing U.S. Inflation to 3.8%, now at its highest levels since 2023. REPORTER QUESTION : When you are negotiating with Iran, Mr. President, (to) what extent (are) Americans' financial situations motivating you to make a deal? TRUIMP CLIP: The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran, they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about Americans financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing, you cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. How hard was that to do? Why couldn't ABC and CBS do the same? The PBS NewsHour had a great opportunity and blew it. Correspondent Stephanie Sy presented a social media post from a high-level Iranian official, which proves that Trump's answer to the reporter's question is the only answer that a leader in his position can give. SY: Iranian officials said they were ready to resume talks, but not to acquiesce. Iran's Parliament Speaker posted on X "the longer they dragged their feet, the more American taxpayers will pay for it." She then totally misrepresented the question asked to the President, "The President was asked about the rising prices outside the White House."  No, no, no. Again, he was asked, "When you are negotiating with Iran, Mr. President, (to) what extent (are) Americans' financial situations motivating you to make a deal?" And he gave the only answer that he should and could give being that we are at war, and as the Iranian Speaker's post indicates, our enemy is well aware of this issue. Unfortunately, the nightly newscasts, for the most part, seemed more interested in making Donald Trump look bad. No real surprise.

On Monday night’s The 11th Hour on MS NOW, the progressive network decried redistricting in Tennessee on the grounds of its impact to the Civil Rights Movement because Memphis is the location of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. Tennessee Lookout editor-in-chief Holly McCall implied that her state was a racist state and said, “We still have not gotten out of the Confederacy.” Guest-host Ayman Mohyeldin asked panelist Joyce Vance, a former US Attorney under President Obama, if a NAACP lawsuit against the new Tennessee district will work. Vance said it was a good argument since, as she then argued the new maps were a punishment for the Civil Rights Movement and mentioned the assassination of MLK: And seeing this done, particularly in Memphis, where Doctor King was assassinated, where many of the events that were key to the Civil Rights Movement happens, almost feels as though the legislature is imposing a punishment on one of the most well-developed civil rights communities in the country.   On MS NOW's The 11th Hour, when discussing Tennessee redistricting, panelist Holly McCall said she used to defend Tennessee when people called it "a racist state," but now she says, "I think you have to say that we still have not gotten out of the Confederacy." pic.twitter.com/gepeXGZc8k — Nick (@nspin310) May 12, 2026   Mohyeldin continued down the path of a connection to the Civil Rights Movement and asked McCall to respond. McCall’s response started with a story of her previous defense of Tennessee against accusations of racism, as she turned to echo Vance and talk about MLK’s assassination. She then turned to state that Tennessee has still not recovered from the Civil War: And to see this happen and to listen to some of the lawmakers deny any knowledge of the race makeup - the racial makeup of Memphis. I think you have to say that we still have not gotten out of the Confederacy. Mohyeldin followed up with her and asked if the redistricting “is motivated by the Republicans wanting to seize power, or is it motivated by racism to diminish the influence of black constituents in the state?”   Guest-host Ayman Mohyeldin asked if redistricting is motivated by "Republicans wanting to seize power" or "motivated by racism." McCall responded and mentioned the 'Tennessee Three' expulsions from 2023 and implied some state lawmakers were racists. pic.twitter.com/cc8o6FPCWh — Nick (@nspin310) May 12, 2026   McCall invoked the ‘Tennessee Three’ as she said the new district maps paired with the 2023 scenes in the state house mean “race is definitely a factor,” as she also seemed to call some lawmakers in the state house racists: Just three years ago, this same state legislature, almost to a man, expelled two young up-and-coming black lawmakers for taking a stand on the House floor about gun safety. This came in the wake of a horrid school shooting. And, of course, it was the two young black lawmakers who were expelled and not the one white woman, who had also been vocal about this with them.  And so I think to witness the legislature in action and to know how some of the white lawmakers talk to black lawmakers, race is definitely a factor. Mohyeldin ended as he mentioned a photograph of a protest sign on screen that read ‘Jim Crow 2.0.’ MS NOW’s constant invoking of the Civil War in their coverage is just the latest example of them to divide the country even more. The transcript is below. Click "expand": MS NOW’s The 11th Hour May 11, 2026 11:26:16 PM Eastern (...) AYMAN MOHYELDIN: Joyce, the NAACP sued Tennessee, challenging the new maps there. Does it legally have a chance? JOYCE VANCE: Well, it does. It has a good argument, in large part because Tennessee law seems to prohibit these sorts of late in the decade changes to voting maps. You know, what Holly is saying, I think, is the key to a successful challenge. There are rules around map-making that involve keeping cohesive communities together and not arbitrarily splitting them up. And seeing this done, particularly in Memphis, where Doctor King was assassinated, where many of the events that were key to the civil rights movement happens, almost feels as though the legislature is imposing a punishment on one of the most well-developed civil rights communities in the country. MOHYELDIN: It's such an important point, and I wanted to ask Holly about that. I mean, Tennessee - to Joyce's point, Tennessee and Alabama, they were central in the fight for civil rights in this country and that movement. They are now two of the first states to exploit or take advantage of the gutting of the Voting Rights Act. Your thoughts on that? HOLLY MCCALL: You know, I lived outside of the south for a long time before I moved back. And when I did live outside of the South, I would defend Tennessee against people who thought that this was a racist state.  And certainly not everybody in Tennessee is racist. There are lots of good people here. But to witness what the legislature has done to carve up Memphis, which, as you and Joyce both mentioned, is so profound in the history of the civil rights movement. It's where Doctor King was martyred. One of his attorneys actually testified before the state legislature last week.  And to see this happen and to listen to some of the lawmakers deny any knowledge of the race makeup - the racial makeup of Memphis. I think you have to say that we still have not gotten out of the Confederacy. MOHYELDIN: Yeah. So to ask you to follow up on that, I mean, do you believe this is motivated by the Republicans wanting to seize power, or is it motivated by racism to diminish the influence of black constituents in the state? MCCALL: Well, two things can be true. And the Republicans in the Tennessee legislature were - they admitted, and I think it's very clear, they wanted to take that one last district that Democrats still hold.  But to hear them deny any knowledge of race and to just clearly obfuscate. And I think you also have to look at this decision with other issues that have occurred in Tennessee over the last few years.  Just three years ago, this same state legislature, almost to a man, expelled two young up-and-coming black lawmakers for taking a stand on the House floor about gun safety. This came in the wake of a horrid school shooting. And, of course, it was the two young black lawmakers who were expelled and not the one white woman, who was also been vocal about this with them.  And so I think to witness the legislature in action and to know how some of the white lawmakers talk to black lawmakers, race is definitely a factor. MOHYELDIN: And it's as we saw in that sign, some have called it ‘Jim Crow 2.0.’  Joyce, Holly, thank you so much for joining us tonight, helping us make sense of this ruling.  (...)

During Tuesday’s The View, co-hosts Joy Behar and Sunny Hostin were both joyless and gloomy as they lashed out at actor Billy Bob Thornton because an interview he did where he explained that he didn’t want to shove his politics down the throats of his fans. Behar, of all people, called Thornton “uninformed” as she asserted that “every minute” America was slipping closer to “autocracy.” From Hostin, we heard the nagging “silence is complicity” shtick. What could Thornton had said that had them that outraged? This: “I don’t know anything about politics. I have no idea. I mean - and the stuff I believe about it, I don't want to force it down somebody else's throat because I'm not an expert on that.” “Yeah, imagine bragging about how uninformed you are,” Behar sneered after the soundbite aired. “You've an American citizen. Don’t you watch the news? Don't you read the paper? Come on,” she scoffed. If you’d like evidence of just how uniformed Behar was, click here and here. Co-host Sara Haines tried to defend Thornton by arguing that celebrities didn’t need to “scream from the mountaintop what their thoughts are,” but Behar wasn’t having it: HAINES: I do think the civic participation. Our vote is a privilege that so many have died for and fought for that to be participating in our political structure, you need to inform yourself enough to vote. I don't think that every celebrity needs to scream from the mountaintop what their thoughts are because I'd rather see them march door to door to recruit people voting and in your local government, helping people - BEHAR: No, but they have an influence. I mean, Springsteen right now and Robert de Niro have big audiences.   Joy Behar bashes actor Billy Bob Thornton for saying he doesn't want to force his politics on others. She demands celebrities "use your platform" to "have an influence." Sunny Hostin agrees saying America is "at a crisis point" with Trump and "silence is complicity": BILLY BOB… pic.twitter.com/0VsB6eudLd — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 13, 2026   “Use your platform! Use it!” Behar shouted. Haines shot back: “The only people applauding them though are people that agree with them.” Hostin jumped into give Behar back up. She proclaimed that celebrities “have an obligation” to shove their politics down Americans’ throats because “we are at a crisis point in this country” and “you have a responsibility to speak up.” Behar continued her incendiary and stochastic terrorist rhetoric about how the country was about to come crashing down any minute: “And every minute, every day we’re getting closer - Every day we get closer to a autocracy in this country! We're about to lose it! I think people don’t seem to understand what’s going on!” Co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin also defended Thornton by arguing that what Behar and Hostin were doing was trying to “bully people into speaking out for people who don’t feel like they’re experts.” She also suggested it was leading to too many “uninformed takes right now.” Haines backed her up by comparing it to “just get[ting] on Instagram and say[ing] ‘I hate Trump,’” with no substance.   Alyssa Farah Griffin and Sara Haines suggest Behar and Hostin were trying to "bully" celebrities into vapid "I hate Trump" Instagram posts and other "uninformed takes." Farah Griffin notes The View bashed George Clooney's Biden op-ed and Hostin falsely claimed she didn't do that:… pic.twitter.com/kaPklysaP7 — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 13, 2026   “If now is not the time, I don't know when is. I don’t know when is,” Hostin chided while making a ridiculous face (pictured above). “As one who can actually speak to this,” moderator Whoopi Goldberg spoke last and defended Thornton and extended it to other celebrities who didn’t want to wade into politics: “I'm not mad at you if this is not something you're comfortable doing, because you're doing something I don't know you're doing. I believe that people are taking care of business the way they need to.” Additionally, Farah Griffin called them out for criticizing actor George Clooney for writing and op-ed calling out then-President Biden’s cognitive decline. “I didn’t,” Hostin declared. But that was a big lie. Below is a video from July 11, 2024 of Hostin criticizing Clooney for his op-ed.   Here's video from July 11, 2024 of Hostin bashing George Clooney's op-ed calling out Biden's mental decline: HOSTIN: But I will say this, I don't like that George Clooney did this. I don't like that George Clooney aired this dirty laundry to the world. I think that these… pic.twitter.com/z749aMBv7q — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 13, 2026   The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 13, 2026 11:16:09 a.m. Eastern (…) BILLY BOB THORNTON: I don’t know anything about politics. I have no idea. I mean - and the stuff I believe about it, I don't want to force it down somebody else's throat because I'm not an expert on that. [Cuts back to live] WHOOPI GOLDBERG: All right. JOY BEHAR: Yeah, imagine bragging about how uninformed you are. SUNNY HOSTIN: Yeah. BEHAR: You know? SARA HAINES: Well, I think he's saying it’s more ‘I'm not an expert, so my opinion -‘ BEHAR: ‘I don't know anything about politics.’ You've an American citizen. Don’t you watch the news? Don't you read the paper? Come on. HAINES: I do think the civic participation. Our vote is a privilege that so many have died for and fought for that to be participating in our political structure, you need to inform yourself enough to vote. I don't think that every celebrity needs to scream from the mountaintop what their thoughts are because I'd rather see them march door to door to recruit people voting and in your local government, helping people - BEHAR: No, but they have an influence. I mean, Springsteen right now and Robert de Niro have big audiences. [Crosstalk] [Applause] BEHAR (waving Haines off): And so does - Wait a minute! So does Jon Voight and Kid Rock. Okay? They have -- all of them have the right to speak out. HAINES: They do. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: Use your platform! Use it! HAINES: The only people applauding them though are people that agree with them. HOSTIN: I think you have an obligation. We are at a crisis point - BEHAR: That's right. HOSTIN:  - in this country. I think democracy is participatory. I think when you have a platform, that means I have an outsized voice and when you have a platform, I think that you have a responsibility to speak up about what's going on in this country. And my view, silence is complicity. We need every single ally to speak out. BEHAR: And every minute, every day we’re getting closer - Every day we get closer to a autocracy in this country! HOSTIN: Correct. BEHAR: We're about to lose it! I think people don’t seem to understand what’s going on! ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: If I may say, “A,” Billy Bob Thornton is one of my favorite actors, I’m never going to say a bad word about him. Starting with that. But “B,” a lot of this table criticized George Clooney when he wrote his Biden op-ed. HOSTIN: I didn't. FARAH GRIFFIN: That is a celebrity using his voice, saying what he believes. BEHAR: Fine. FARAH GRIFFIN: It can’t just be when they agree with your position. BEHAR: He can say it and I can criticize it, that’s called free speech. FARAH GRIFFIN: I think that often times we give too much weight to celebrities when they wade into things. I care way more about -- Honestly, I call it slackivism. If you get on social media you do your post and are like, I’ did my part because I have a million followers.’ No, go door to door, get involved in your community and get deeper on the issues. But I don't think we should bully people into speaking out for people who don’t feel like they’re experts. [Crosstalk] HAINES: It's a litmus test of the mobs. Right now people speak up and half the world wants to hate them so when looking at entertainers and people that looking to unify people, if they feel called like Kerry Washington does to be civic and loud, good for her. But if you don't feel that I'm tired of people saying, ‘no, no, now’s the time.’ What do you do, just get on Instagram and say “I hate Trump” and then - HOSTIN (interrupting): If now is not the time, I don't know when is. I don’t know when is. FARAH GRIFFIN: But what they say matters because we have more uninformed takes right now, we need - [Crosstalk] GOLDBERG: Okay. As one who can actually speak to this, you have every right to feel how you feel. Celebrities cannot go door to door to people's houses because it's hard to do. So, people can do their thing the way they can do it and be grateful that someone is doing stuff. I don't -- I'm not mad at you if this is not something you're comfortable doing, because you're doing something I don't know you're doing. I believe that people are taking care of business the way they need to. And we’ll be right back.

On Tuesday, Comedy Central’s The Daily Show host-of-the-week Jordan Klepper welcomed actor Paul Dano to the set to promote his new movie, The Wizard of the Kremlin, which is a satirical film on Vladimir Putin’s rise to power. According to both Klepper and Dano, the film also has relevant insights for Trump’s America. Dano plays the part of Vadim Baranov, who is based on the real-life Vladislav Surkov. Surkov was a Putin advisor up until 2020 who helped shape and define what could be called Putinism and was responsible for, among other things, advising Putin on Ukraine during the original 2014 dismemberment of that country.     That context made Klepper’s attempt to tie Russia to the current political climate at home even more ridiculous. Although he never mentioned Trump explicitly, it was clear who he was talking about, “I mean, you can't help but watch a movie like this and relate it back to what is happening in America. I think it is really curious watching this person who is sort of described as the Rasputin to Vladimir Putin, who goes from being an avant-garde theater director to being this media manipulator. As you are piecing it together, how are you wrapping your head around a real person, how a character can transfer into somebody who essentially becomes, like, an amoral device of the state?” One obvious way Klepper’s media analogy breaks down is that Putin simply shut it down when reporters started asking uncomfortable questions. Under Trump, the government has not shut down any domestic news organizations, nor has it forcibly taken any over. People who say Trump has forced CBS to bend to his will have not done a thorough job of watching what CBS actually airs. Nevertheless, Dano replied, “One of the unfortunate things about the character is I don't think he was born, like, seeking that, but that is where his talents were rewarded for it, and I think it is easy for us to follow that path.” Dano continued: I mean, I think, so I think in some ways, the film is about complicity. Like, this is where this person was rewarded and given power, so this is what I will do. I was really disturbed by some of the tactics that they instituted to control modern power and modern politics. One of the ones that I—really struck a note with me as an American was this idea of consciously creating chaos because then you need a strong figure in the middle. Years later, now we have heard Steve Bannon use the term, like, ‘muzzle velocity,’ because they are just going to come at you so fast that we can't do anything about it. So, I think that there is a pretty big mirror held up in this film, not just to Russia, but to the world at large. It is absolutely correct to say that Putin has used chaos—possibly even government-created chaos—to justify a relapse into authoritarianism that revolves around himself. What is not justified is this idea that anything Trump does that liberals don’t like is part of some analogous sinister plan to make Trump president for life. Here is a transcript for the May 12 show: Comedy Central The Daily Show 5/12/2026 11:27 PM ET JORDAN KLEPPER: I mean, you can't help but watch a movie like this and relate it back to what is happening in America. I think it is really curious watching this person who is sort of described as the Rasputin to Vladimir Putin, who goes from being an avant-garde theater director to being this media manipulator. As you are piecing it together, how are you wrapping your head around a real person, how a character can transfer into somebody who essentially becomes, like, an amoral device of the state? PAUL DANO: Yeah, sure. One of the unfortunate things about the character is I don't think he was born, like, seeking that, but that is where his talents were rewarded for it, and I think it is easy for us to follow that path. I mean, I think, so I think in some ways, the film is about complicity. Like, this is where this person was rewarded and given power, so this is what I will do. I was really disturbed by some of the tactics that they instituted to control modern power and modern politics. One of the ones that I—really struck a note with me as an American was this idea of consciously creating chaos because then you need a strong figure in the middle. Years later, now we have heard Steve Bannon use the term, like, “muzzle velocity,” because they are just going to come at you so fast that we can't do anything about it. So, I think that there is a pretty big mirror held up in this film, not just to Russia, but to the world at large.

It turns out that hundreds of millions in U.S. tax dollars was being doled out to a radical George Soros-funded legal group at the tip of the spear of the leftist billionaire’s political war against the American criminal justice system. Talk about law and disorder! Data research outfit Morse Research tipped the internet off with a shocking report detailing how “$636.7 million” in awarded contracts was gifted and hand-wrapped for the radical left-wing Vera Institute of Justice by the Department of Health and Human Services. MRC Business was able to verify the veracity of these contracts through the USASpending.gov database, which were awarded by the DHHS between 2009 and 2021 in obligated amounts. MRC Business noted in its groundbreaking 2024 investigation that Vera Institute, which received $11,024,679 from Soros between 2016 and 2022, was part of a cabal of left-wing Soros-backed groups that directed and controlled the Soros-funded local and state prosecutors responsible for perpetuating a wave of soft-on-crime policies that has ransacked major cities across the country.  What makes the tax dollar funding worse in light of the context is that the lucrative contracts were specifically engineered towards helping illegal immigrants with legal services. Specifically, per Morse, the contracts “overwhelmingly support ‘legal service providers’ for unaccompanied children (UC/UAC) referred to the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).” As 6 USC § 279(g)(2) defined, the term “unaccompanied alien child” means “a child who— (A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States; (B) has not attained 18 years of age; and (C) with respect to whom— (i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.” The contracts fit a broader agenda by Vera (and Soros by extension) to establish a federal initiative to combat efforts to curb illegal immigration enforcement, as Morse analyzed:  These awards align with Vera's broader ‘Advancing Universal Representation’ initiative, which seeks to establish a federal right to taxpayer-funded lawyers for anyone facing deportation—dramatically increasing the likelihood of remaining in the U.S. (studies cited by Vera itself note representation boosts success rates tenfold). Morse Research also pointed to a 2022 report by the Center for Immigration Studies exposing Vera scoring another contract worth anywhere between $171.7 million and nearly $1 billion to “provide legal assistance to unaccompanied alien children (UACs) in immigration proceedings.” Vera doesn’t beat around the bush as to what its end game is, as it celebrated following then-candidate Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral victory: The 2020 election brought much joy and relief to immigrant rights activists, many of whom worked around the clock to help defeat a president who made cruelty to immigrants a central tenet of his administration, and amplified the inhumanity of an immigration system that has been never been fair or just.  In April 9, 2025, Vera kvetched that the Trump Department of Justice had terminated some of the contracts it received to the tune of $5 million in DOJ grants collectively, railing that it is the latest so-called “civil society organization to be targeted by the Trump administration.” But as Morse concluded, what Vera advocates for on the taxpayer’s dime as nothing to do with justice or "civil society" as much as it does with fomenting the unraveling of law and order: In short, Vera uses federal contracts—hundreds of millions for legal aid to illegal entrants—to subsidize an advocacy machine that actively works to expand immigration, reduce enforcement, and advance a progressive equity’ worldview. Americans should demand Congress terminate these cash flows immediately. Click on the following link to download and read the full 2024 MRC Business report: Law & Dis-Order How The Soros Machine Directs and Controls Prosecutors  Across America to Implement His Leftist Agenda.