After having been silent on the May 21 release of the Democratic National Committee’s comically bad autopsy on the 2024 election, CBS and NBC broke the broadcast network-wide blackout across their lead morning and evening newscasts with mentions on Wednesday and Thursday once former First Lady Jill Biden spoke out about Joe Biden’s infamous June 2024 debate performance. This leaves Disney-owned ABC News with zero mentions on Good Morning America or World News Tonight of their team’s 2024 election autopsy. Wednesday’s NBC Nightly News featured this moment from anchor Tom Llamas and senior White House correspondent Gabe Gutierrez reacting to Jill’s upcoming CBS Sunday Morning interview. Once Llamas noted “Democrats are still reckoning with that debate,” Gutierrez replied Biden’s debate performance “was not even referenced in the recent DNC autopsy.” Wednesday’s ‘NBC Nightly News’ featured the first ever mention on any of the broadcast networks lead morning or evening newscasts of the 2024 DNC autopsy.@GabeGutierrez brought it up in reaction to Jill Biden’s ‘CBS Sunday Morning’ interview abou Joe’s disastrous debate:… pic.twitter.com/XWEFQDTYxC — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 28, 2026 “And the issue of transparency is now threatening to loom over the midterms, particularly because her answer is so different from what we heard from top Democrats at the time,” Gutierrez added. Thursday’s CBS Mornings provided the other allusion to this buried storyline on the networks (outside of their Sunday morning talk shows and streaming platforms). Senior White House correspondent Weijia Jiang — who hammered Biden officials with hardballs in the days after the debate — told viewers: “A long-awaited new report from the Democratic National Committee does not address Biden’s decision to run at his age while there were questions about his health.” Thursday’s ‘CBS Mornings’ followed suit with @Weijia Jiang including this one-sentence mention of the 2024 DNC autopsy at the end of her report on Jill Biden’s upcoming ‘Sunday Morning’ interview: “A long-awaited new report from the Democratic National Committee does not address… pic.twitter.com/NBYWg2WYH9 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 28, 2026 Earlier in her piece, Jiang improved upon the disastrous spin all three networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) provided Thursday night because she pointed out Jill’s new fear Joe was having a stroke was in contradiction to her public proclamations after the debate. “But shortly after the debate, she had a very different reaction,” Jiang said as a segue to a clip of Jill praising Joe at a post-debate rally for having done “such a great job” and “answered every question.” To see the relevant CBS transcript from May 28, click here.

Americans’ confidence in television news and newspapers rates below that of a host of other U.S. institutions, results of a new national survey reveal. Nearly half (46%) of U.S. adults say they have almost no confidence in TV news, while only one in twenty (5%) have a “quite a lot,” according to a new poll by The Economist/YouGov conducted May 22-26. Likewise, several times as many adults say they have “very little” confidence in newspapers (41%) as say they have quite a lot (5%). Of the eight U.S. institutions that respondents were asked to rate, TV news had the highest percentage of adults voicing “very little” confidence in, followed by Big Business (45%) and newspapers. Adults actually expressed more confidence in organized labor, banks, the medical system, church/organized religion and Small Business than they did in either TV news or newspapers. Small Business was the only one of the eight institutions where more said they had “quite a lot of trust” than said they had “very little.” Confidence in TV news and newspapers has not improved over the past six months. In November of last year, when The Economist/YouGov also asked adults to rate U.S. institutions, 48% said they had very little trust in television news, while only 5% reported having a great deal. Regarding newspapers, 38% said they had very little trust and, again, just 5% voiced a great deal of trust. Previous polls by The Economist/YouGov have found similar low trust in these media. Americans universally agree that people should fact-check media reports, rather than simply trust what they’re being told – and half say they don’t even need to follow the news to stay informed – according to a Pew Research survey. Fully 94% of Democrats and Republicans alike think it’s important “for people to do their own research to check the accuracy of the news they get,” the survey of U.S. adults found. What’s more, two-thirds (66%) say it’s “extremely” or “very” important to fact-check what news media report. It’s also important to get news from media sources with differing political views, according to 88% of adults – and half (52%) call this either extremely or very important.

As hard as it may be for MS NOW justice and intelligence reporter Ken Dilanian to understand, Republicans are still not happy about the FBI downplaying the partisan motivations of the 2017 congressional baseball shooter. Therefore, when the agent involved in that conclusion was fired on Wednesday, Dilanian took to the air to claim the agent was just the latest in a string of FBI officials sacked for “simply doing their job.” First, Dilanian joined Ana Cabrera Reports and had a hard time understanding why anyone would even consider the original conclusion controversial, “She's now the deputy assistant director, the number two official in charge of FBI intelligence. And she was summarily fired on Friday through a letter from FBI Director Kash Patel and walked out of the building. We're told, in part because she worked nine years ago as a much more junior analyst on this intelligence assessment, which I was about to say, controversial. It's only controversial among a certain segment of Republicans.”   MS Now intel reporter Ken Dilanian is not happy the FBI hired the woman who refused to say the congressional baseball shooting was terrorism, "It's only controversial among a certain segment of Republicans. And again, our sources are telling us this is the latest example of a… pic.twitter.com/qMJkz1Fv4n — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) May 28, 2026   He continued with a bit of a Freudian slip, “Our sources are telling us this is the latest example of a career FBI official being fired for simply doing their jobs, following the facts as they understood them. They assessed back then that this shooter, even though he was clearly targeting—he was angry at Republicans. He had a list of Republican lawmakers in his pocket, but they assessed at the time that this was more of a suicide by cop situation.” Yes, he was “clearly targeting” Republicans, which is why Republicans have angrily denounced the suicide by cop explanation. Nevertheless, Dilanian concluded, “Now, later information came to light, and they changed the criteria for how they would label things domestic terrorism. And they, a few years later, they said, 'You know what, under today's rules, we would label that domestic terrorism.' But House Republicans have been furious about that ever since. They issued a report earlier this year criticizing the way the FBI handled this. And now they have a scalp. A senior FBI official walked out of the building because she worked on this assessment many, many years ago.” “Later information” is a nice way of saying “changed under pressure.” Still, a few hours later, Dilanian suggested to Katy Tur that Republicans had a simple disagreement with the FBI, “That wasn't a political act by the FBI. That was just a disagreement. It was just a career, people doing their jobs. And that's what's different about this, is you have this woman, she's supposedly protected by civil service rules, and she's only supposed to be fired for cause. But yet she's marched out of the building on Friday simply because of her involvement in an intelligence assessment that Republicans disagreed with.”   @alexA few hours later, he says the suicide by cop finding "wasn't a political act by the FBI. That was just a disagreement" and repeats "my sources say, what Kash Patel and what the Trump White House wants are sycophants who are just willing to do their bidding and not exercise… pic.twitter.com/Cb8yTDvWYN — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) May 28, 2026   Again, he conluded by warning: And so it just shows that what it does is it creates a cascading effect, because now other career officials, the reason we heard about it is they look at this and they're horrified by this. They see that people who are just assigned to work on cases, who did their job, whether it was investigations of Donald Trump or this thing from nine years ago, they are losing their jobs over this in a way that the FBI Agents Association believes is illegal. They don't think that these firings are on the level. And what they—what my sources say, what Kash Patel and what the Trump White House wants are sycophants who are just willing to do their bidding and not exercise independent judgment about law enforcement. Dilanian did not join Deadline: White House, but host Nicolle Wallace quoted his reporting while trying to claim GOP criticisms were a mere “partisan grudge”: FBI Director Kash Patel has done it again. He has reportedly ousted another analyst over a partisan grudge. That's according to brand new reporting from our own Ken Dilanian. This grudge is almost a decade old. It ties back to the 2017 Republican congressional baseball shooting. The FBI analyst, deputy assistant director Emily Morales, played a role in the FBI's report that did not label the shooting an act of domestic terrorism, which upset House Republicans. Ken Dilanian's sources tell him that 'her removal was widely perceived inside the bureau as the latest in a series of firings of nonpartisan FBI agents who did their jobs in a way that drew disfavor from Donald Trump or Republicans.’ Now the FBI is down yet another experienced agent, and by our count, those numbers are stacking up.    Later, Nicolle Wallace quotes Dilanian, "[Kash Patel] has reportedly ousted another analyst over a partisan grudge... 'The FBI analyst, deputy assistant director Emily Morales, played a role in the FBI's report that did not label the shooting an act of domestic terrorism, which… pic.twitter.com/S1Gc5AZEVO — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) May 28, 2026   That says more about Dilanian’s sources than it does Republicans or Kash Patel. The truth is that if someone who expressed his hatred for Democrats shot a bunch of Democratic politicians practicing for a charity baseball game, MS NOW would not only demand people call it an act of terrorism, but blame Republicans or conservative media for creating an environment that enabled the shooter. Here are transcripts for the March 27 shows: MS NOW Ana Cabrera Reports 5/27/2026 10:52 AM ET KEN DILANIAN: She's now the deputy assistant director, the number two official in charge of FBI intelligence. And she was summarily fired on Friday through a letter from FBI Director Kash Patel and walked out of the building. We're told, in part because she worked nine years ago as a much more junior analyst on this intelligence assessment, which I was about to say, controversial. It's only controversial among a certain segment of Republicans. And again, our sources are telling us this is the latest example of a career FBI official being fired for simply doing their jobs, following the facts as they understood them. They assessed back then that this shooter, even though he was clearly targeting—he was angry at Republicans. He had a list of Republican lawmakers in his pocket, but they assessed at the time that this was more of a suicide by cop situation. Now, later information came to light, and they changed the criteria for how they would label things domestic terrorism. And they, a few years later, they said, “You know what, under today's rules, we would label that domestic terrorism.” But House Republicans have been furious about that ever since. They issued a report earlier this year criticizing the way the FBI handled this. And now they have a scalp. A senior FBI official walked out of the building because she worked on this assessment many, many years ago. *** MS NOW Katy Tur Reports 5/27/2026 3:05 PM ET KEN DILANIAN: So now the deputy is out because of her involvement with this intelligence analysis from nine years ago, this 2017 shooting. And look, I mean, you could disagree with it. The House Republicans published a thorough analysis earlier or last year, March of last year, where they criticized how the FBI handled it. And they said that the conclusion that this was suicide by cop was bogus because this guy, remember, he criticized Republicans, this shooter, and he had the names of Republican lawmakers in his pocket. And the FBI later acknowledged that under the changed definition of domestic terrorism today, they would call that an act of domestic terrorism. This guy was an extremist, but that wasn't a political act by the FBI. That was just a disagreement. It was just a career, people doing their jobs. And that's what's different about this, is you have this woman, she's supposedly protected by civil service rules, and she's only supposed to be fired for cause. But yet she's marched out of the building on Friday simply because of her involvement in an intelligence assessment that Republicans disagreed with. And I don't even think this was a priority of Donald Trump. This was really something that came from The Hill. And Senator Grassley and others have been really adamant about this. And so it just shows that what it does is it creates a cascading effect, because now other career officials, the reason we heard about it is they look at this and they're horrified by this. They see that people who are just assigned to work on cases, who did their job, whether it was investigations of Donald Trump or this thing from nine years ago, they are losing their jobs over this in a way that the FBI Agents Association believes is illegal. They don't think that these firings are on the level. And what they—what my sources say, what Kash Patel and what the Trump White House wants are sycophants who are just willing to do their bidding and not exercise independent judgment about law enforcement. *** MS NOW Deadline: White House 5/27/2026 4:55 PM ET NICOLLE WALLACE: FBI Director Kash Patel has done it again. He has reportedly ousted another analyst over a partisan grudge. That's according to brand new reporting from our own Ken Dilanian. This grudge is almost a decade old. It ties back to the 2017 Republican congressional baseball shooting. The FBI analyst, deputy assistant director Emily Morales, played a role in the FBI's report that did not label the shooting an act of domestic terrorism, which upset House Republicans. Ken Dilanian's sources tell him that 'her removal was widely perceived inside the bureau as the latest in a series of firings of nonpartisan FBI agents who did their jobs in a way that drew disfavor from Donald Trump or Republicans.” Now the FBI is down yet another experienced agent, and by our count, those numbers are stacking up. 

POLL: What was the worst media quote of the week? (Vote below)   Watch @Schineman present the worst quotes from @EugeneDaniels2, @TheView, @springsteen pic.twitter.com/h0WJFdJvHt — Media Research Center (@theMRC) May 28, 2026   NOMINEES:    Eugene Daniels: Democrats Can Win By Talking About “Kitchen Table Issues” Like Services for Trans Kids “You can use ‘identity politics,’ quote unquote, as a kitchen table issue, right? When you talk about whether or not people can have access to healthy abortions — safe abortions, that is a kitchen table issue, right? Whether or not a trans kid can get the services they need, that is a kitchen table issue for families.”— Senior Washington correspondent Eugene Daniels on MS NOW’s Chris Jansing Reports, May 21.   Sunny Hostin: “Very Limited Destruction” During BLM Protests “I just think we need to make it clear that there can be no comparison between the Black Lives Matter movement and what we saw on January 6th. I just want to make that clear….There were very limited destruction of property and violence during the uprising of — the Black Lives Matter uprisings.”— Co-host Sunny Hostin on ABC’s The View, May 21.   Bruce Springsteen to Stephen Colbert: “You’re the First Guy in America” Who Lost His Show Because “We Got a President Who Can’t Take a Joke” “I am here in support tonight for Stephen, because you’re the first guy in America who’s lost his show because we got a president who can’t take a joke. And because Larry and David Ellison feel they need to kiss his ass to get what they want….These are small-minded people, they got no idea what the freedoms of this beautiful country are supposed to be about.”— Singer Bruce Springsteen on CBS’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, May 20.     Sponsored by James P. Jimirro

This summer, the United States celebrates its 250th birthday. In 1776, few people believed this new version of self-government would last. After the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of government the Founding Fathers had created. “A republic,” he replied, “if you can keep it.” If... It’s rare that a new form of government lasts dozens of years, let alone 250. How did America do it? In my new video, people give reasons: “In the U.S. Constitution, you see a lot of phrases like ‘Congress shall not ...’ or ‘No law shall be passed ...,’” Rob Henderson, the author of “Troubled” who coined the term “luxury beliefs,” points out. “It’s not about what government will do for you. It’s focused on (how) Congress and the government are not going to interfere in your lives.” That made America different, says economist Donald Boudreaux: “Compared to most other governments throughout history, ours has been the freest and the most liberal in the sense of tolerating differences in people and accepting economic change.” Daniel Di Martino, who escaped Venezuela to come here, says: “We’re all immigrants fleeing from something – dictatorships, tyranny, socialism. The descendants of those people were willing to take more risks, and also willing to defend their liberties.” That made Americans different from Europeans. “By necessity, Americans were very independent,” says Linnea Lueken of the Heartland Institute. “We went out into untamed wilderness and established towns that didn’t have to lean on a central government to function properly.” Without nobility controlling property, ordinary people could own land, start a business and keep the profits. “America is more devoted to property rights than any other country, and that is why America is more free,” argues Ryan McMaken of the Mises Institute. Property rights and limits on government allowed Americans to try the new things that made America prosperous. The Founders didn’t want a government that took care of people. They wanted a government that mostly left us alone. They created “three branches of government designed specifically to check each other,” says author Wilfred Reilly. “Because so many mistakes are made by leaders.” “Leaders” do make mistakes, constantly. Yet today, we keep increasing their power. There is that instinct to say, “Problem? Government should fix that. There ought to be a law!” But the more laws governments pass, the more power politicians have and the less autonomy individuals have. The Washington swamp keeps growing, under both Democrats and Republicans, most of whom ignore the limits our smart Founders put into our Constitution. It’s good that there are free market think tanks that push back. I like the Cato Institute’s mission: “Keep the principles, ideas, and moral case for liberty alive.” Cato President Peter Goettler recently wrote, “The forces of liberalism unleashed in the Founding era ultimately brought the curtain down on slavery and have persistently extended rights, liberty, and the American dream.” But he also points out today’s threats to that dream: “Towering debt we continue to accrue ... masked government agents disappearing people without due process; targeting of political enemies ... tariffs fluctuating at the president’s whim ... enmeshing of government with private enterprise ... foreign adventurism absent congressional involvement or national debate ...” Sigh. All true. The Constitution says only Congress can declare war, but presidents from both parties now grab power that the Founders never intended for them to have. Harry Truman intervened in Korea without a formal declaration of war. Likewise, John F. Kennedy expanded U.S. military involvement in Vietnam. Richard Nixon expanded the war into Cambodia. George H.W. Bush ordered the invasion of Panama. Bill Clinton engaged in military operations in Bosnia and Yugoslavia. President Donald Trump launched military actions in Iran. All without congressional approval. “That’s not what America was about,” says McMaken. “America was focused on rights and protecting them.” “The first nation in history founded on the inalienable rights of the individual,” adds the Atlas Society’s Jennifer Grossman. “It recognized that man is not a sacrificial animal for the collective, the king or the majority.” “That alone makes us rich,” agrees Boudreaux. “That alone makes us more likely to survive another 250 years.” For 10 generations, the American republic has prospered. Benjamin Franklin’s question is still relevant: Can we keep it? Every Tuesday at JohnStossel.com, Stossel posts a new video about the battle between government and freedom. He is the author of “Government Gone Wild: Exposing the Truth Behind the Headlines.”