The Heritage Foundation, which owns more than $40,000 of Airbnb stock, has won its legal fight to have Airbnb include shareholder proposals on the agenda of its 2026 stockholder meeting, the nonprofit Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) legal organization announced Friday.Airbnb agreed to include the proposals of Heritage and the American Conservative Values ETF in order to resolve the lawsuit, The Heritage Foundation v. Airbnb, filed after the company excluded the two shareholders’ proposals from its 2025 proxy materials.“This case has always been about protecting the rights of shareholders and reinforcing the principle that public companies must follow the law and remain accountable to their owners,” Heritage Foundation Chief Advancement Officer said in a statement. “As a shareholder, Heritage wants Airbnb to succeed by creating long-term value for investors and focusing on its core business. We appreciate that Airbnb fulfilled its legal obligations so its shareholders could have their voices heard.”The Heritage proposal highlights Airbnb’s “history of yielding to politicized pressure campaigns,” ADF said in a press release announcing the settlement:“It cited Airbnb’s 2018 decision to de-list Israeli-owned rental properties in the West Bank before later reversing course. The proposal called on the board to issue an annual report to shareholders analyzing the legal and reputational risks associated with the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement and similar activism.”The American Conservative Values ETF proposal requests a report on how the company’s terms-of-use policies can negatively impact shareholder value. The proposal highlighted broad, subjective standards such as “misinformation,” “hate speech,” “intolerance,” or “reputational risk” that can enable viewpoint discrimination. It also cited instances in which Airbnb, an online marketplace connecting travelers with hosts providing short-term lodging, blocked conservative commentator Michelle Malkin, as well as Lauren Southern and members of her family, from being able to use its services because of their political affiliations.

You come at the X trolling king, you better not miss. And unfortunately for The Economist, all of cyberspace saw its editor-in-chief get torn to shreds in a debate battle with the world’s richest man. X.com The Economist editor-in-chief Zanny Minton Beddoes tried to box X owner Elon Musk in on a number of issues that she twisted into cudgels against him (DOGE cuts, likeability, Islam, etc.) during a July 23 interview. But Musk just smacked her pious line of questioning down for the leftist drivel that it was over and over again. Arguably the most entertaining part of the interview was when Beddoes sneered to Musk that “people loathe you.” The cheeky Musk just spun it back around on her and her colleagues in the media: “I don't care. The fact that a quarter billion people follow me means a lot more people like me than don't. And I think a lot more people hate you and the media than you realize!” Once Musk flipped the script, it was game over: “Do you realize the media is despised? Do you realize that the favorable view of journalists is like 15 percent? So the shoe is on the other foot. They hate you! They hate you far more than they hate me.” He even repudiated Beddoes and her colleagues for their characterizations of the political “far right” writ large, which he argued were completely embellished for rage bait. Musk even took the role of the interviewer away from Beddoes and played the part himself:Tell me which of these [“far-right” policies] sound terrible: That we should have secure borders? That we should have safe cities? That we should have sensible spending? Which of those three are far-right fringe? And I would just like to admonish you and the media for the absurd characterization of the “far-right,” which is false and misleading and nonsense.Musk then turned to the camera crew: “Please keep this part in!” Talk about giving a masterclass on how to deal with pompous elitist journalists with an axe to grind!Watch the entire interview blow!The Economist Elon Musk July 23rd 2026 pic.twitter.com/xti3kXcZFc— Lord Withers (@_lordwithers) July 24, 2026Musk wasn’t fazed by virtually any of the slanted line of questioning Beddoes attempted to skewer him with, especially as it came to her attempts to make him seem like a killer for using DOGE to gut the wasteful bloat replete throughout USAID and other government agencies. Musk listed off a few examples of the kind of stonewalling DOGE would face when asking agencies to give specifics about their intended grant recipients. Beddoes had no choice but to concede the existence of “a lot of waste,” but then she pivoted to arguing the way Musk made the cuts led to people’s deaths and "unnecessary suffering.” Musk retorted immediately, “It caused a lot of complaining.” Beddoes then tried to pin Musk with a hyperbolic hypothetical that was completely off-the-rails: “You don’t buy the idea that anybody — and to put it really crudely — any kid in Africa died because of the suddenness with which …” Musk interjected: “Zero!”A flabbergasted Beddoes then editorialized her whole question, “I just don’t think that’s right,” as if viewers care about what the interviewer thinks. But Musk didn’t hesitate to poke holes in the logic by pointing out the “tens of thousands of NGOs”  like the “$50 billion” Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation that could immediately fill in the gaps theoretically left by the DOGE cuts. When Beddoes saw that Musk wasn’t buckling, she tried to shift the conversation entirely: “I don’t want to have an argument about that.” But Musk had her completely on the ropes: When funding is stopped for fraudulent organizations, do you think they’re going to say, ‘Please keep funding the fraud,’ or come up with a sympathetic story to get the funding restored? Obviously, it will be the latter. The amount of funding we’re talking about is far less than what could be supported by private foundations like the Gates Foundation or MacKenzie Bezos’s foundation. They have tens of billions of dollars and are capable of acting very quickly. If they didn’t, I would say they’re equally responsible. Zero people died because of DOGE. Zero.As NewsBusters Media Editor Bill D’Agostino suggested previously, the “Musk is a killer” narrative is as idiotic as saying he could be blamed for a kid dying in Tajikistan from toxoplasmosis because somehow we stopped paying for his Mucinex. 

Screenshot via CBS/Snapstream Former CBS’s 60 Minutes correspondent Cecilia Vega came off like an eye-roll-inducing drama lama on Thursday night in her first set of extended comments since she was fired on May 28 as part of reshuffling inside the liberal newsmagazine, insisting “the stitches” are “still fresh’ and she’s “scared to be talking” given what’s “at stake” for the press in America.Based on those comments alone, you would have thought Vega had been through some sort of physical ordeal or survived a tour in combat. But alas, it was simply losing her job, something Americans suffer all too frequently and have far less to fall back on. What a spoiled elitist.Status founder Oliver Darcy was first to report Vega detailed her supposedly painful state of affairs “in an onstage interview with” former ABC colleague John Quiñones at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists Conference & Expo.Darcy just had to lead with Vega having been “the first Latina correspondent” before dropping her cartoonishly out-of-touch laments about how much her life sucks:In an on-stage interview…of which Status obtained an audio recording, Vega broke her silence, describing “the stiches” from being fired as “still fresh.” Vega said she was “scared to be talking” about her experience working under Weiss, but added that “there is a lot at stake.”“It’s not that I just lost a job. There is a lot at stake,” Vega said. “Sometimes you got to be scared and do it still.”What a profile in courage, Nellie Bly.She also seethed at the “new administration” for “showing up in the [pre-show] screenings and giving their feedback,” which “made me nervous” when 60 Minutes should be an “’island’ with a ‘moat off protection around it.’”Journalists believing they’re above reproach? Color us shocked!Darcy said she also “detailed three instances in which she said management attempted to interfere with her stories,” which “add[ed] to a growing chorus of former CBS News employees…who have accused Weiss and her team of pushing a political agenda.”She said one included her reporting about the far-left protests and anti-ICE chicanery earlier this year in Minneapolis with one, in Darcy’s summation, having been CBS brass asking Vega “to include footage of protesters violently attacking people in the streets whom the demonstrators believed to be ICE officers in plain clothes,” yet she “could find ‘no credible examples.’”Vega was also allegedly asked to find a clip “from a press conference in which the city’s Democratic mayor, Jacob Frey, said he wanted local police to fight federal ICE agents in the streets.”Our friends at the Daily Wire found they were less than peaceful.He said Vega “never found such a moment, deeming it ‘misinformation.’”The others were just as circumspect. The second was about Iran and she was shell-shocked to be told to peddle an “administration talking point” in arguing “Iran is totally outgunned by the United States and Israel.” Fact-check: True!Vega’s other example was about food stamps in West Virginia, with the now-ex correspondent claiming Weiss’s team wanted her to interview Vice President JD Vance about his upbringing in poverty over in Ohio.Darcy said Vega received “loud and sustained applause” with this Spartacus buffoonery: “If you watch my pieces, you’d see those examples did not make them in.”

MS NOW may be a network that exists solely to give assorted left-wingers a platform to call conservatives and Republicans fascists and Nazis, but business analyst Ron Insana confessed on Friday’s Money, Power, Politics to getting “triggered” by various Republicans for calling the DSA radicals trying to take over the Democratic Party communists.During a larger panel discussion, Puck News congressional correspondent Abby Livingston hypothesized that Democrats find themselves in the same situation Republicans found themselves in 2010. By that, Livingston meant that all the fundamentals favor Democrats, but the wave election will not be as big as it could be because the party has nominated some candidates who cannot win a general election. All that led her to say, “And so I think there's a situation where a wave is coming, but it may not go as far as it normally goes.”A bitterly sarcastic host, Stephanie Ruhle, replied, “Communism is coming. That’s what they’re telling us. Maybe they know because Trump knows a lot about oligarchs.” MS NOW may be a network that exists to call other people fascists and Nazis, but don't you dare call the DSA a bunch of communists. Business analyst Ron Insana laments "But this triggered me when Marco Rubio started talking about communism. Mike Johnson starts talking about… pic.twitter.com/pRjjb7SjXn— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 24, 2026  That set Insana off with a historical analogy, “Yes. And some of his policies, by the way, are far more socialistic than they are capitalistic. But this triggered me when Marco Rubio started talking about communism. Mike Johnson starts talking about communism. The president starts identifying the Democrats as communism. And I went back and looked at the late David Brinkley's memoir, where his sister worked for Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, and Joe McCarthy, of course, who was red-baiting in the 1950s. We had hearings on Capitol Hill about alleged communists who were working in the State Department, 205 of them.”According to Insana, the same thing is happening today, “After Joe McCarthy passed away, David Brinkley asked his sister what was on that alleged list of 205 communists who had infiltrated the State Department, and she said, ‘Nothing. He made it up.’ It was absolutely untrue. The entire process. And they're doing the same red-baiting today that was done in the 50s. And it's you know, it inflames passions, obviously, but the DSA—”After Ruhle interrupted to add, “It scares people,” Insana resumed, “It scares people. DSA is not communist in the sense that we understand that word. They're the social democrats. And granted, not my cup of tea, necessarily, but as you know, I'm more in favor of moderation. But this is the type of, you know, scare tactics that can motivate an electorate to go in a different direction than we currently expect.”Yes, praising communism and mass-murdering communist dictators on the internet will typically lead to accusations of being a communist. That's not exactly trying to make America more like Norway. Politicians like Zohran Mamdani and Darializa Avila Chevalier are not exactly George Marshall, but MS NOW wants to pretend that they are.Here is a transcript for the July 24 show:MS NOW Money, Power, Politics with Stephanie Ruhle7/24/2026ABBY LIVINGSTON: And so I think there's a situation where a wave is coming, but it may not go as far as it normally goes.STEPHANIE RUHLE: Weigh in here. RON INSANA: So—RUHLE: Communism is coming. That’s what they’re telling us.INSANA: Yeah, you knowRUHLE: Maybe they know because Trump knows a lot about oligarchs.INSANA: Yes. And some of his policies, by the way, are far more socialistic than they are capitalistic. RUHLE: I know.INSANA: But this triggered me when Marco Rubio started talking about communism. Mike Johnson starts talking about communism. The president starts identifying the Democrats as communism. And I went back and looked at the late David Brinkley's memoir, where his sister worked for Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, and Joe McCarthy, of course, who was red-baiting in the 1950s. We had hearings on Capitol Hill about alleged communists who were working in the State Department, 205 of them. After Joe McCarthy passed away, David Brinkley asked his sister what was on that alleged list of 205 communists who had infiltrated the State Department, and she said, “Nothing. He made it up.”It was absolutely untrue. The entire process. And they're doing the same red-baiting today that was done in the 50s. And it's you know, it inflames passions, obviously, but the DSA—RUHLE: It scares people.INSANA: It scares people. DSA is not communist in the sense that we understand that word. They're the social democrats. And granted, not my cup of tea, necessarily, but as you know, I'm more in favor of moderation. But this is the type of, you know, scare tactics that can motivate an electorate to go in a different direction than we currently expect.

“You can’t make half-truths; you gotta’ tell the full truth,” House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said Thursday in his first interview since referring former Biden Administration Special Counsel Jack Smith to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution for willfully and intentionally making false statements during his December 17, 2025 deposition.“New information obtained by the Committee reveals how Mr. Smith likely circumvented key constitutional protections, including the Speech or Debate Clause, to spy on Members of Congress,” Jordan wrote in his referral letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.At the deposition, Smith was called to fully answer questions about the extent and methods of his sweeping investigation as special counsel of President Donald Trump and his congressional allies, the letter explains:“During the deposition on December 17, the Committee advised Mr. Smith that he was obliged to provide all necessary information that would make his responses truthful and to avoid half-truths or incomplete answers.”“We tell the witness at the start of those depositions, ‘You gotta’ tell the whole truth, you can’t give partial answers, you can’t mislead in any way,” Chairman Jordan noted in a Fox News Channel interview on Thursday:“And he definitely misled us, because he said he didn’t get content – when, in fact, he did, for 44 members of the United States Congress.“And when he got that information from the National Archives, he was supposed to filter it out, because we are a separate and equal branch of government and there’s a Speech and Debate clause in our constitution. They should have screened out any communications relative to our work as legislators.”“When you ask the special counsel, handpicked by the Biden Justice Department to go after President Trump…‘Did you get content of members of Congress’ communications and he says ‘No,’ that is not telling the truth when, in fact, he did,” Jordan told Fox News.“This is pretty darn clear in our eyes,” Jordan said, adding that Smith had even given instructions to prevent the members of Congress from finding out that he had obtained their toll records.“It’s always worse than we thought. It’s the one thing we get wrong,” the Judiciary chairman said, when asked if accusations of spying could be added to the charges against Smith:“It’s always worse than we thought when we start these things. The amount of information, the number of people he went after - we know he had people from Fox News, he got their communications as well - this blanket they threw out trying to scoop up every Republican in this town to go after President Trump is pretty broad.“And again, we think it’s pretty darn clear, from his deposition, from his public testimony, that he misled Congress. And 18 U.S.C. 1001 says you cannot do that. “And that’s why we referred it.”In his letter to Acting Attorney General Blanche, Chairman Jordan’s explains why the Judiciary Committee called Smith to be deposed:“Among other things, the Committee noted that it sought Mr. Smith’s testimony concerning his office’s ‘surveillance of sitting Members of Congress,’ noting specific interests in ‘how many other members of Congress were investigated as part of the Arctic Frost investigation and Jack Smith investigation’ and if ‘additional Members of Congress that were swept up’ in the investigation. The Committee subsequently issued a deposition subpoena for Mr. Smith.”pic.twitter.com/dYICd5CT65— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) July 23, 2026