Google settled a racial bias lawsuit for $50 million. Merrill Lynch paid $20 million. Maryland taxpayers will have to pay $3 million to make a racial discrimination suit go away. “This is ridiculous! Taxpayers should not be on the hook for this!” complains Heather Mac Donald, author of “When Race Trumps Merit.” In our new video, she argues that companies and governments feel forced to pay because of a legal doctrine called “disparate impact.” “Most people don’t even know what it is!” I say. “It is their greatest weapon against excellence,” she replies, “and it is an abuse of the spirit of our civil rights laws.” Disparate impact rules say any policy or test in which some races or sexes do better than others is illegal discrimination, even if the policy has nothing to do with race or sex. “The Maryland State Police wanted to make sure state troopers could read at a very basic level,” says Mac Donald. But because black applicants got lower scores, the test was ruled racist. Because women got lower scores on the physical fitness test, the state was also found guilty of sexism. State politicians promised to change their standards and create new tests. Maryland taxpayers still have to pay millions. “Disparate impact means an institution can be completely colorblind, it can want to have as many different races as possible, but if it has a standard that blacks do poorly on, you got to throw out the standard,” says Mac Donald. New York taxpayers also paid about $2 billion because lawyers said a test for teachers was racist. Mac Donald says, “Even though you’ve spent decades throwing out every question on this exam that has too wide a racial divergence, you still didn’t have the same proportion of black applicants passing as white applicants, we’re going to throw out the exam. And you, New York taxpayers, are liable for $2 billion!” I push back, saying the reason Blacks are behind “is because of the legacy of slavery ... That’s all they’re saying. Remember that.” “No,” replies Mac Donald, “they’re saying much more than that! ... We have way overcorrected. You can have meritocracy in an institution, or you can have diversity. You cannot have both.” Now, President Donald Trump has ended disparate impact rules in the federal government. “We’re bringing meritocracy, the American way, back!” said his energy secretary. Trump also told colleges to get rid of DEI programs. “Some did kind of dismantle the DEI offices,” says Mac Donald, “but a lot of other ones just renamed them. ‘Diversity and Equity’ becomes ‘Belonging and Community.’” At the University of Virginia, staffers were caught bragging about it. “We have to change the names of some of our programs,” says one. “We have ‘queer brunch.’ You can’t call it ‘queer brunch’ anymore. You (have) to call it ‘cozy brunch’ ... We’re doing the same stuff, but changing the names a little bit.” “It is an act of narcissism and ego on the part of these college administrators who only care about the photos that show up on their college website and making sure that they’re suitably diverse,” says Mac Donald. “None of your viewers should give any benefit of the doubt to these bureaucrats. There’s no knowledge required to be a diversity bureaucrat. The only thing necessary is you’re willing to prosecute the race hustle.” That’s doing real harm, she says. “You already have medical schools that have simply waived the medical college admissions tests for black students because they do so poorly on them. They are bringing blacks into medical schools with qualifications that would be automatically disqualifying if presented by whites or Asians.” These facts are unpleasant for many to hear. But they deserve to be heard. Institutions should have one standard for excellence. “Ban discrimination,” says McDonald, “but we do not ban excellence. We do not ban high expectations ... Have a single level of excellence in this society. That is how we’re going to move forward.” 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.”

On PBS, every scandal seems to be a Trump scandal. Friday’s News Hour segment by Minnesota-based special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro finally acknowledged the incredible slow-emerging scandal of taxpayer fraud in that state, involving the theft of up to a billion dollars intended to feed children during the COVID crisis. The segment ran over seven minutes – but only 35% was devoted to the fraud itself. Instead the focus was on President Trump’s verbal fireworks in response, and ICE raids. In that way, the News Hour followed the other broadcast networks’ lead by spending most of its coverage fretting over ICE and President Trump’s harsh reaction to the scandal, not the actual scandal. The show’s intro graphic set the tone: “Community Under Threat.” Co-anchor Geoff Bennett neatly encapsulated the upcoming story: 20 seconds of Trump “xenophobia,” with a mere three seconds' mention of the actual fraud scandal at the end. Co-anchor Geoff Bennett: President Trump in recent days has taken aim at Minnesota's Somali community with xenophobic remarks and calls for removal from the U.S. It coincides with the new ICE operation in the Twin Cities that's resulted in at least five arrests of Somali immigrants. Special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro has this report on the community's response and how we got here, including a sweeping fraud scandal that's gripping the state. de Sam Lazaro devoted the first 128 seconds to Trump’s alleged xenophobia, including clips of Trump saying of Somalians “They contribute nothing.” Trump also blasted controversial Somalian-born congresswoman Ilhan Omar (who has her own connections to the scandal) as “garbage.” Finally, de Sam Lazaro sandwiched in 122 seconds devoted to the fraud scandals. de Sam Lazaro: In one case, hundreds of millions of dollars were allegedly stolen from a program meant to feed children during the pandemic. Officials called it the largest COVID era fraud scheme in the country.... PBS did finger Minnesota’s Democratic governor (and failed VP candidate) Tim Walz for allegedly “failing to heed early warnings about fraud and to do enough to combat it.” Then de Sam Lazaro spoke with one of Walz’s possible opponents in next year’s gubernatorial election, Republican Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth. But he had other priorities for the interview. He allowed Demuth 13 seconds to outline the actual scandal before pressuring her three times to disown Trump’s remarks. de Sam Lazaro: What do you think about what has emerged since, which is a racialization at many levels of this issue? Demuth replied, "I don't think that we're painting everyone with a broad brush, but we are definitely pointing where there has been known fraud, and that's what needs to stop." de Sam Lazaro: We asked Demuth about President Trump's recent comments about Somalis. What's your message to the Somali community when they hear rhetoric like that? When she demurred, he tried once more to make the story about Trump, not fraud, asking her, "You don't take issue with the president's rhetoric?" The story closed with 27 seconds of clips from two anxious but defiant business owners promising that Trump “can’t bully us.” In all, the segment featured 35% on fraud, 65% on Trump xenophobia, with the actual details of the massive taxpayer scandal sandwiched in the middle. Note: A relatively blunt New York Times story November 30 captured the pathetic dangers of “Minnesota nice” -- or at least the hazards of Minnesota liberals avoiding their fiduciary duties for fear of being accused of racism by the media: Feeding Our Future, the nonprofit group that was the largest provider in the pandemic program, responded with a warning. In an email, the group told the state agency that failing to promptly approve new applicants from “minority-owned businesses” would result in a lawsuit featuring accusations of racism that would be “sprawled across the news.” Sadly, such threats keep liberal mouths shut. This segment was brought to you in part by BDO. A transcript is available, click “Expand.” PBS News Hour 12/5/25 7:23:32 p.m. (ET) Geoff Bennett: President Trump in recent days has taken aim at Minnesota's Somali community with xenophobic remarks and calls for removal from the U.S. It coincides with the new ICE operation in the Twin Cities that's resulted in at least five arrests of Somali immigrants. Special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro has this report on the community's response and how we got here, including a sweeping fraud scandal that's gripping the state. Fred de Sam Lazaro: At Karmel Mall, a hub for Somali life and culture in south Minneapolis, business has been slower than usual this week. Woman: It's very scary, especially the small business owner. For us, for me, well, all the business, Karmel Mall, we're not making any monies. Fred de Sam Lazaro: Concern rose here after word of an increase in federal immigration enforcement targeting Minnesota's Somali community. The state is home to about 80,000 people of Somali descent, the largest such population in the country. Most are citizens and many were born here. The stepped-up enforcement, dubbed Operation Metro Surge, follows President Trump's repeated attacks on Minnesota's Somali community. President Donald Trump: They contribute nothing. I don't want them in our country, I will be honest with you. Their country stinks. Fred de Sam Lazaro: The president also singled out Ilhan Omar, the progressive Somalia-born Minnesota congresswoman, who he's long criticized. Donald Trump: Ilhan Omar is garbage. She's garbage. Her friends are garbage. These aren't people that work. These aren't people that say, let's go. Come on. Let's make this place great. These are people that do nothing but complain. Man: I was shocked, bro. I was like, what? I was just like, really? He said that? I mean, I have seen him say crazy things, but now he hits home. Fred de Sam Lazaro: The comments sparked an uproar in Minnesota's Somali community. Woman: We really thought, wow. Why would somebody to call a whole community and say you're garbage or you stink? Actually, we smell really good. Fred de Sam Lazaro: Even Somali Americans who voted for Trump, like business owner Waris Mohamud, expressed anger. Waris Mohamud, Business Owner: We want he make America great, but not insulting the people. He is the president. I want he change his tongue, because he doesn't know us. Come over here, Donald Trump. You are our president. Come over here, have a tea, and you will learn who we are. Fred de Sam Lazaro: President Trump targeted Somali immigrants in his first term too. But his rhetoric sharpened dramatically this week amid increased national attention to a series of massive Minnesota fraud scandals in which almost all of the dozens of people charged so far are of Somali descent. In one case, hundreds of millions of dollars were allegedly stolen from a program meant to feed children during the pandemic. Officials called it the largest COVID era fraud scheme in the country. Authorities later said there was large-scale fraud in a program designed to help people with disabilities get housing. And in September, a woman was charged for defrauding a state autism treatment program. All told, federal prosecutors estimate fraud in Minnesota could cost taxpayers over a billion dollars. When you started to read about these fraud stories, what was your reaction as a Somali American? Ahmed Samatar, Macalester College: Well, I was ashamed. Fred de Sam Lazaro: Ahmed Samatar is an international studies professor at Macalester College in st. Paul. Originally from Somalia, he's lived in Minnesota for over 30 years. He says Somalis mostly started arriving here in the 1990s, fleeing their country's civil war. They were drawn to Minnesota's generous safety net, including refugee resettlement nonprofits based here. That's partly why he was so angered by Somalis' involvement in the fraud cases. Ahmed Samatar: Somali Minnesotans have to face this, and they really have to clean up their act, because the state deserves better than that. But I think the challenge is to keep that in its proper place, because it's a real story, and then, next to it, expound on what the Somalis have achieved in the state of Minnesota. Fred de Sam Lazaro: But, as scrutiny of Minnesota's Somali community spikes, so does criticism of Governor Tim Walz for failing to heed early warnings about fraud and to do enough to combat it. Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN): You commit fraud in Minnesota, you're going to prison. I don't care what color you are, what religion you are. Anybody who wants to help us in that, we welcome that. But sitting on the sidelines and throwing out accusations and, let's be very clear, demonizing an entire population and lying to people about the safety and security of the state, is beneath that. Fred de Sam Lazaro: The topic will likely dominate next year's gubernatorial election, when a crowded Republican field will try to stop Walz from winning a third term. One of his challengers is Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth. State Rep. Lisa Demuth (R-MN): This does point to Governor Walz, because whether or not some of it preceded him, it has exploded during his time leading our state. And there has not been that accountability that taxpayers are counting on. Fred de Sam Lazaro: What do you think about what has emerged since, which is a racialization at many levels of this issue? State Rep. Lisa Demuth: You know, I don't think fraud needs to be a topic of race, but when we're looking at that, it is heavily centered on one culture, one population. But I don't agree with any demonization of an entire culture. So I don't think that we're painting everyone with a broad brush, but we are definitely pointing where there has been known fraud, and that's what needs to stop. Fred de Sam Lazaro: We asked Demuth about President Trump's recent comments about Somalis. What's your message to the Somali community when they hear rhetoric like that? State Rep. Lisa Demuth: My top message to Governor Walz is end the fraud. Fred de Sam Lazaro: To the Somali community. State Rep. Lisa Demuth: My top message to Governor Walz is, end the fraud here in the state of Minnesota. When fraud ends in the state of Minnesota, a whole group of people will not be concerned or wondering if they're going to be under investigation. Governor Walz has not taken fraud seriously enough in the state of Minnesota. Fred de Sam Lazaro: You don't take issue with the president's rhetoric? State Rep. Lisa Demuth: I'm focused on what Minnesota is doing and our lack of leadership here. Fred de Sam Lazaro: Back at Karmel Mall, as rumors of ICE sightings and detentions trickle through the community, residents and business owners anxiously await what comes next, while remaining defiant. Man: This is our country. If the people says to, go back to your country, this is your country. Waris Mohamud: We're not scared of what our president said. We don't care. Whatever he want to, he can say. We're not going to scare with that. He cannot bully us. Fred de Sam Lazaro: For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Fred de Sam Lazaro in Minneapolis.

ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos featured Missouri GOP Senator Eric Schmitt, apparently to discuss ongoing operations in the Caribbean. The interview immediately went sideways, though, when Stephanopoulos tried to gotcha Schmitt with a recent presidential pardon. The interview followed that of a Democrat representative, which went as such things normally go- very smoothly. Watch as Schmitt takes Stephanopoulos to the woodshed over his selective pushback after a second pass at the pardon question: “Well, I’m curious about your pushback on that particular point. With your previous guest (@RepAdamSmith) you had zero pushback because he’s giving the Democrat talking points like you spew every single week, which is probably why your ratings are so bad” – @Eric_Schmitt to… pic.twitter.com/QDO8jCn6iZ — Brent Baker ???? ?? (@BrentHBaker) December 7, 2025 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS:  What do you mean you're not familiar with the facts and circumstances of the pardon? It's been well reported all across the country. He is the former president of Honduras. He was convicted of conspiring to bring in 400 tons of cocaine into the United States, also guns and other materials. It's been front page news across the country. Aren't you curious about that? ERIC SCHMITT:  Well, I'm curious about your pushback on that particular point. With your previous guest, you had zero pushback because he’s, giving the Democrat talking points like you spew every single week, which is probably why your ratings are so bad. But to make the point, what I'm saying is that you're trying to divert here the attention from what the American people actually support. 75 percent of Americans support us blowing narco terrorists out of the water in the Caribbean who are trying to poison Americans. There's no real legal debate about the ability to do that. Now, you could have a policy discussion about it, which now you see the Democrats pivoting from the second strike and the war crimes allegation to really what this whole thing is about. Should we do it -- be doing it in the first place? I have way more sympathy for my friends, my cousins, my neighbors, those people who've been poisoned by these narco terrorists, people who've been skinned alive by these cartels that they bring people to the United States than I do for these narco terrorists. I mean, that's just the reality of the situation. So, there's legal justification for it. He's doing it. We do have more of a focus on our interests now in the Western Hemisphere, and I'm thankful for that. STEPHANOPOULOS:  Do you support the pardon of the convicted drug smuggler or not? SCHMITT:  George, like I said, what we're talking about here are the narco terrorist poisoning Americans. This attempt to try to focus on a pardon is classic because you've lost the debate now on the narco terrorist question. Schmitt would go on to hammer Stephanopoulos on the media’s handling of the War Crimes Hoax as part of the “Don’t Give Up The Ship” operation to undermine the military’s confidence in their commanders, namely Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and President Donald Trump. After several minutes of this, Stephanopoulos would attempt to pivot to the recently-published Inspector General report on Signalgate. Schmitt schooled Steffy again by breaking down the ways in which it was a “nothingburder”. When Stephanopoulos pushed back, Schmitt reminded him of an actual scandal that threatened operational security that went completely unpunished and which the media covered in a completely deferential manner: the disappearance of Secretary Lloyd Austin due to what would later learn was cancer treatment.  Schmitt rightly concludes that this is about little more than Democrat (and media) derangement over the results of the 2024 election and the fact that the duly elected President of the United States gets to designate his Cabinet and set military policy. No matter how much the Elitist Media would like to think otherwise. The ehole exercise proves, once again, that if it weren't for double standards, there'd be none at all. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned report as aired on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, December 7th, 2025: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to bring in now Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri, a member of the Armed Services Committee in the Senate. And Senator, let me just begin where we left off with Congressman Smith. Do you support this pardon of the former Honduran president? ERIC SCHMITT:  I'm not familiar with the facts or circumstances, but I think what's telling here is to try to imply that somehow President Trump is soft on drug smuggling is just ridiculous. It's totally ridiculous. He's the -- he has provided border security like we've never seen before. And the fact is, these cartels now, because the southern border is closed, they've gone to the high seas. So, President Trump is acting with his core Article II powers. No serious legal expert would doubt that the president has authority to blow narco terrorists out of the water, who are poisoning a hundred thousand Americans every year. If you watched the SEC Championship Game yesterday, the Big 10 Championship Game, combine those two stadiums with the number of people there, that's how many people are dying each and every year from the poison that's coming from these narco terrorists. So the fact is, George, President Trump has been delegated the authority by Congress to designate terrorist organizations. He has done that. He sent a letter to Congress saying he was going to initiate these strikes. We've had regular briefings about it, including from Secretary of State Rubio, including from other high-ranking officials in the Department of Defense. He's executing those. And so now, what we have now are Democrats who have such X-ray vision and clairvoyance that they know the intentions of narco terrorists on boats, yet were so blind to see that they had a president for four years that was operating as a vegetable in Joe Biden. So, forgive me if I'm a little skeptical that this isn't all about politics and trying to take out Secretary Hegseth. That's what this whole thing's been about, George. They didn't want him confirmed. They didn't want a realist in place. They didn't want to shift from their pet projects around the world and trying to build democracies in the sandsof the Middle East by the barrel of a gun. We have core national interests at stake, the homeland and the Western Hemisphere, and the rise of China. That's what this administration is focused on. The Democrats are just upset about that, and they try to create some controversy each and every week, and it goes nowhere. STEPHANOPOULOS:  What do you mean you're not familiar with the facts and circumstances of the pardon? It's been well reported all across the country. He is the former president of Honduras. He was convicted of conspiring to bring in 400 tons of cocaine into the United States, also guns and other materials. It's been front page news across the country. Aren't you curious about that? SCHMITT:  Well, I'm curious about your pushback on that particular point. With your previous guest, you had zero pushback because he’s, giving the Democrat talking points like you spew every single week, which is probably why your ratings are so bad. But to make the point, what I'm saying is that you're trying to divert here the attention from what the American people actually support. 75 percent of Americans support us blowing narco terrorists out of the water in the Caribbean who are trying to poison Americans. There's no real legal debate about the ability to do that. Now, you could have a policy discussion about it, which now you see the Democrats pivoting from the second strike and the war crimes allegation to really what this whole thing is about. Should we do it -- be doing it in the first place? I have way more sympathy for my friends, my cousins, my neighbors, those people who've been poisoned by these narco terrorists, people who've been skinned alive by these cartels that they bring people to the United States than I do for these narco terrorists. I mean, that's just the reality of the situation. So, there's legal justification for it. He's doing it. We do have more of a focus on our interests now in the Western Hemisphere, and I'm thankful for that. STEPHANOPOULOS:  Do you support the pardon of the convicted drug smuggler or not? SCHMITT:  George, like I said, what we're talking about here are the narco terrorist poisoning Americans. This attempt to try to focus on a pardon is classic because you've lost the debate now on the narco terrorist question. Because at the beginning of the week, you had Democrats actually on camera saying you should disobey orders. That's what Senator Kelly and Slotkin were saying, you should disobey orders. And then they went so far as to say that if you do -- if you don't do that, you might get prosecuted down the road. It's hard to sort of overstate how problematic that is for the chain of command and what it is for a military. The Democrats had their shot at all this and it was rejected. They wanted to have DEI struggle sessions in our military, transgender surgeries, recruitment was way down. The fact is under President Trump and now Secretary Hegseth, recruitment is sky high. Morale is sky high. They're upset about that, because they had an agenda that said that America could be everywhere all at once all the time. Now, we have a president that's a realist, focusing on core national interests, including protecting Americans from being poisoned by the narco terrorists. STEPHANOPOULOS:  Just to clarify, the Democrats you talked about were talking about illegal orders, they were specific about saying it was illegal orders -- SCHMITT:  Yeah. STEPHANOPOULOS:  -- that they were talking about. SCHMITT:  Sure. But when you press them on -- but when you press them on what orders are they talking about, they had no answer except to say that, somehow they should be guessing along the way. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's really ridiculous. And this is kind of the rabbit hole of Trump Derangement Syndrome, is that they can't let this thing go. They can't believe that he won. They didn't want Hegseth to be the Secretary of War. They fought it. He was their number one target. They failed at that. And so now you just have a series and series of issues that come up every week to try to undermine the president and the Secretary of War.. And it's not working. They're going to carry out their mission. They executed another strike of a narco-terrorist just this past week. Those will continue and they're completely authorized. I reviewed the 40-plus page memo by the Office of Legal Counsel. There's JAG officers in these rooms, George, every time there's a strike. So, again, the narrative at the beginning of the week that these are war crimes, that's clearly fallen away and now the Democrats are peddling another lie. STEPHANOPOULOS: You mentioned Secretary Hegseth. Here's a quote from the Department of Defense inspector general report on that release of sensitive information over the Signal app. According to the inspector general, "The secretary sent information identifying the quantity and strike times of manned U.S. aircraft over hostile territory over an unapproved, unsecure network approximately two to four hours before the execution of those strikes. The secretary's actions created a risk to operational security that could have resulted in failed U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots." Isn't that a concern? SCHMITT: I reviewed the I.G. report and it's a nothingburger. The fact is there were allegations this was confidential or classified information, I should say. It wasn't. There was no operational integrity problems that that Operation Roughrider was executed flawlessly. So was by the way Midnight Hammer. So you can't really call that into question. There's no confidential or classified information that was disclosed. And, again, I think the bigger concern that you didn't have a hue and cry about from the Democrats was when Secretary Lloyd Austin went in for a medical procedure, was incapacitated and didn't tell the president. Literally, we had a Secretary of Defense that wasn't on duty and nobody knew about it. Like that's a real problem. This was a nothingburger and that's what the I.G. report that I read last week in the SCIF indicated. STEPHANOPOULOS: It said it was a risk to operational security. SCHMITT: But it wasn't. It wasn't. There was no -- listen, remember, when the scandal -- so-called scandal started, it was about classified information being disclosed. It wasn't classified information. So, again, you pivot to this sort of sensitive information, but there was no risk. There was no risk. And by the way, I'll point out, Signal is approved by the U.S. government for communications. And so if you want to have a broader discussion about that, we probably can. But I think the bigger issue was, you know, in the previous administration you had real operational risk. You had a department, you had a Secretary of Defense that was incapacitated in a surgery and nobody knew about it for days. That's a problem. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, thanks for your time this morning. SCHMITT: Thanks, George.  

Anyone expecting tough questions from CBS’s Margaret Brennan to U.S. Representative Ilham Omar was sorely disappointed at the end of this week’s Face the Nation. Brennan instead provided a tour-de-force in media coddling, as Omar beneficiary of a kid-gloves interview that cast her as the victim of unfortunate events beyond her control. This coddling of Omar is, as was noted by our own Tim Graham, part of a broader pattern seeking both to shield Omar from her connections to the Somali welfare scam currently roiling the state of Minnesota and to Trumpwash the scandal by focusing on President Donald Trump’s reference to Omar as “garbage” during a recent Cabinet meeting. As a reminder: Trumpwashing is that media tactic that suppresses any and all coverage of a Democrat scandal until President Trump reacts to it, then shifts coverage to turn Trump’s reaction into the scandal, as opposed to the scandal itself. The interview opens with Brennan allowing Omar to deflect from her ties to the scandal, saying merely that it was a donor: CBS's Margaret Brennan opens her softball interview with Rep. Ilhan Omar by allowing her to deflect from her ties to the Feeding our Future fraud: TL;DR: "Some donors did something." pic.twitter.com/iYpkbbeCub — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 MARGARET BRENNAN: We have a lot to get to with you, but I want to pick up on where the Treasury Secretary just left off. He alleged that people who were tied to you or your campaign were involved in this broad, brazen scheme to rip off the Minnesota state welfare system. Do you want to respond to that? Do you know what he is referring to? ILHAN OMAR: I really don't. And I don't think the secretary himself understands what he is referring to. We obviously had people who were able to donate to our campaign that were involved. We sent that money back, ah, a couple years ago. And actually, I was one of the first Members of Congress to send a letter to the Secretary of Ag asking them to look into what I thought was a reprehensible fraud that was occurring within the program. As The New York Post noted, it wasn’t just a “donor.” It was individuals linked to her campaign, persons intimately involved with turnout operations, and the host of Omar’s 2018 victory party. This is all public information and yet Brennan offered none of it, or anything else because there was no follow-up question. Brennan simply checked that box off and moved on, allowing Brennan to skate. Fast forward to Brennan addressing the specifics of Feeding our Future- Brennan tees Omar up again by asking her to address allegations that the investigation is the result of racism. Omar responds by literally blaming the white woman: Ilhan Omar further tries to deflect from the Somali nature of the welfare scam by noting the race of the person who at the time ran Feeding our Future: "So you have to remember that the woman who led the program is a Caucasian woman." pic.twitter.com/K8wRFZraMb — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 BRENNAN: Because as you know, one of the initial defenses by the organization at the heart of the fraud, Feeding our Future, was to claim the probe was due to racism. Do you think that this was all about negligence, or that it was a political fear of alienating the Somali community? OMAR: So you have to remember that the woman who led the program is a Caucasian woman. And that was her way of making sure that this would continue to happen by using whatever rhetoric that was available to her. We do know that when the money was stopped, they did sue the AG, Attorney General Keith Ellison defended the department in that lawsuit. It was a judge that said it should conti- that money should continue to go out. And so this wasn't something that people were not looking at. There was always those alarms. And we will continue to understand where things might have gone wrong as these investigations continue and as these fraudsters are prosecuted and sent to jail. Brennan immediately follows up by, again, setting Omar up to shoot an allegation down rather than responding to the claims underlying the scandal. Here, Omar is asked her degree of confidence in the claim being false. Omar then says that she is confident the claim is false, but if there IS fraud, then it is a failure of the FBI…as opposed to a moral failure from those that committed systemic fraud. WATCH: Margaret Brennan sets Ilhan Omar up to deny that fraus-derived monies are going to terrorism. Omar denies the terror link and preemptively blames the FBI should any terror link emerge. pic.twitter.com/qLFg16ZC0Y — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 BRENNAN: Well, it's going to have impact for your community, because we’ve heard the head of Medicare and Medicaid say they’re going to have a new policy that applies to Minnesota. You heard the Treasury Secretary say they are investigating. But there's another thread here. Because House Republicans and the Treasury Secretary just now talked about a link to terrorism, a possible link. He said they are just now beginning to look into it. How confident are you that that's a false claim? OMAR: I'm pretty confident at the moment, because there are people who have been prosecuted and who have been sentenced. If there was a linkage in that- the money that they had stolen going to terrorism, then that is a failure of the FBI and our court system in not figuring that out and basically charging them with these charges. The record will reflect that Brennan, who makes an effort to pronounce things in proper Arabic, failed to so much as utter al-Shabab within the context of reports that the terror organization was an alleged beneficiary of this fraud. Additionally, there was no mention of Governor Tim Walz- on whose watch this all happened, or of allegations of impropriety against Ellison. After having Omar weigh in, with no context, on President Trump’s remarks calling her “garbage”, Brennan asks Omar about White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller’s remarks on the dangers of unfettered immigration. Again, Brennan offers no context to remarks in the wake of the DC shooting carried out by an Afghan refugee, which killed one member of the National Guard and left another severely injured. Brennan closes out her pillow-soft interview of Ilhan Omar by having react, with no background or context, to Stephen Miller's remarks on unfettered immigration in the wake of the D.C. shooting. After previously decrying "dehumanizing" language that might incite violence, Omar… pic.twitter.com/5yBPIzGyJz — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) December 7, 2025 BRENNAN: I want to ask you something else that the architect of the president's immigration policy, Stephen Miller, said. On Thanksgiving Day, he posted: ”No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions and terrors of their broken homelands.” What do you make of this argument of failure to assimilate and sort of ruining America. How do you understand this? OMAR: I mean, when I think about Stephen Miller and his white supremist rhetoric, it reminds me-- BRENNAN: --That's how you hear it-- OMAR: Yes, it reminds me of the way the Nazis described Jewish people in Germany. And you know, as we know, there have been many immigrants who have tried to come to the United States who have turned back, you know, one of them being Jewish immigrants. We know the way that people were described who were coming from Ireland, Irish immigrants. We know the way in which people were described back then, when there were Italian immigrants. And to me, you know, we're, we're, yes, of course, ethnically Somali, we are in this country as Americans, we are citizens, we are a productive part of this nation, and we will continue to be. BRENNAN: Congresswoman Omar, thank you for your time today. Fun fact: Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey was able to win reelection against Omar's endorsed candidate Omar Fateh, in large part, because he exploited inter-Somali tribal divisions that the community brought with them into this country. This is proof evident of the kind of failure to assimilate and acculturate that Miller and Trump addressed. Proper journalism would hac challenged Omar with this rather than just play Democrat patty-cake. This wasn’t an interview, so much as it was an anti-news presentation. Brennan offered no significant follow-up to any of the questions she asked Omar, and offered no challenges. There was no interruption of Omar at any time, and no performative pen-wagging- contrary to what we see with Republican guests. Things are (D)ifferent like that. One such question left unasked: why so many Somali politicians who campaign for Omar seem to believe she is Somalia First. The former Prime Minister of Somalia said as much last summer, as a smiling Omar gazed approvingly in the background. No coverage of Omar will be complete until this is addressed. “Ilhan’s interest aren’t those of #Minnesota or the people of #America but the interests of #Somalia” These were the words the former Prime Minister of #Somalia @HassanAKhaire revealed at a rally in support of @Ilhan Omar exposing the true intentions of @Ilhan serving as a… pic.twitter.com/793NsYikp4 — ??????? ?? (@DrCaaro) June 30, 2024 Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview as aired on CBS Face the Nation on Sunday, December 7th, 2025: MARGARET BRENNAN:  And we’re joined now by Minnesota Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. Welcome to the program. ILHAN OMAR: Thank you, Margaret, for having me. BRENNAN: We have a lot to get to with you, but I want to pick up on where the Treasury Secretary just left off. He alleged that people who were tied to you or your campaign were involved in this broad, brazen scheme to rip off the Minnesota state welfare system. Do you want to respond to that? Do you know what he is referring to? OMAR: I really don't. And I don't think the secretary himself understands what he is referring to. We obviously had people who were able to donate to our campaign that were involved. We sent that money back, ah, a couple years ago. And actually, I was one of the first Members of Congress to send a letter to the Secretary of Ag asking them to look into what I thought was a reprehensible fraud that was occurring within the program. BRENNAN: So this was- just for our audience- the Biden-era Justice Department called it the largest Covid fraud scheme in the country. And this was pocketing Covid-era welfare funds, more than $1 billion in taxpayer money that was stolen. It was pretty, pretty shocking. Of the 87 people charged, all but eight are of Somali descent. And that has added to the spotlight being put specifically on your community. Why do you think this fraud was allowed to get so widespread? OMAR: I want to say, you know, this also has an impact on Somalis, because we are also taxpayers in Minnesota. We also could have benefitted from the program and the money that was stolen. And so it's been really frustrating for people to not acknowledge the fact that we, you know, we are also, as Minnesotans, as taxpayers, really upset and angry about the fraud that has occurred. BRENNAN: Mmm-hmm. So do you think, though, that there was a failure by the Democratic state government to police itself? This was a brazen, fraudulent activity here. OMAR: Yeah, and that is what I alluded to in my letter that I sent to the Secretary of Ag- was to see where things were going wrong. How can this amount of money disappear fraudulently without there being alarms being set off? BRENNAN: Yeah. OMAR: And it is something that we have to continue to investigate. We have to continue to ask those questions. BRENNAN: Because as you know, one of the initial defenses by the organization at the heart of the fraud, Feeding our Future, was to claim the probe was due to racism. Do you think that this was all about negligence, or that it was a political fear of alienating the Somali community? OMAR: So you have to remember that the woman who led the program is a Caucasian woman. And that was her way of making sure that this would continue to happen by using whatever rhetoric that was available to her. We do know that when the money was stopped, they did sue the AG, Attorney General Keith Ellison defended the department in that lawsuit. It was a judge that said it should conti- that money should continue to go out. And so this wasn't something that people were not looking at. There was always those alarms. And we will continue to understand where things might have gone wrong as these investigations continue and as these fraudsters are prosecuted and sent to jail. BRENNAN: Well, it's going to have impact for your community, because we’ve heard the head of Medicare and Medicaid say they’re going to have a new policy that applies to Minnesota. You heard the Treasury Secretary say they are investigating. But there's another thread here. Because House Republicans and the Treasury Secretary just now talked about a link to terrorism, a possible link. He said they are just now beginning to look into it. How confident are you that that's a false claim? OMAR: I'm pretty confident at the moment, because there are people who have been prosecuted and who have been sentenced. If there was a linkage in that- the money that they had stolen going to terrorism, then that is a failure of the FBI and our court system in not figuring that out and basically charging them with these charges. And so I do know that for many years this sort of, like, alarm that there's money being transferred through the airport in bags and going to terrorism -- that accusation has always existed. That it’s never been here and there in those accusations. But if that is the case, if money from U.S. tax dollars is being sent to help with terrorism in Somalia, we want to know. And we want those people prosecuted. And we want to make sure that that doesn't ever happen again. BRENNAN: So there are 80,000 people of Somali descent in your state. But the president has been very focused not just on them but on you. In this extraordinary Cabinet meeting he said Somalis, quote: “Come from hell. They complain and they do nothing but bitch.” Take a listen.  DONALD TRUMP: These are people that do nothing but complain. They complain. And from where they came from, they got nothing. We don't want them in our country. Let them go back to where they came from and fix it. [ Applause ] Thank you very much, everybody. BRENNAN: That knocking is vehement agreement from his Cabinet members there. I just wonder what the reaction is in your district to have that from the highest office in the land. OMAR: It's disgusting. It's completely disgusting. These are Americans that he is calling garbage. And we feel like there is an unhealthy obsession he has on the Somali obsession he has on the Somali community and an unhealthy and creepy obsession that he has with me. I think it is also really important for us to remember that this kind of hateful rhetoric and this level of dehumanizing can lead to dangerous actions by people who listen to the president. BRENNAN: And 95% of the Somalis in your state are U.S. citizens.  OMAR: Yes. BRENNAN: Just for clarity there. The president has restricted all immigration processing, including asylum claims from Somalis already on U.S. soil, along with 18 other countries. ICE reports it has rounded up about 19 people. And they put out press releases with the images of about five of them that they say are the worst of the worst. Is that the entirety of the crackdown to date? OMAR: Yeah. So far, we know of the people that they have picked up in Minnesota, about five of them are Somalis. And from what I have read and from the people that I have spoken to, all of them had already had orders of removal. So these are not people who are undocumented but people who have committed crimes and who should have already been sent out of the country. BRENNAN: I want to ask you something else that the architect of the president's immigration policy, Stephen Miller, said. On Thanksgiving Day, he posted: ”No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions and terrors of their broken homelands.” What do you make of this argument of failure to assimilate and sort of ruining America. How do you understand this? OMAR: I mean, when I think about Stephen Miller and his white supremist rhetoric, it reminds me-- BRENNAN: --That's how you hear it-- OMAR: Yes, it reminds me of the way the Nazis described Jewish people in Germany. And you know, as we know, there have been many immigrants who have tried to come to the United States who have turned back, you know, one of them being Jewish immigrants. We know the way that people were described who were coming from Ireland, Irish immigrants. We know the way in which people were described back then, when there were Italian immigrants. And to me, you know, we're, we're, yes, of course, ethnically Somali, we are in this country as Americans, we are citizens, we are a productive part of this nation, and we will continue to be. BRENNAN: Congresswoman Omar, thank you for your time today. And we'll be right back with a lot more Face the Nation. Stay with us.  

Here is a question you can ask the Google AI: "Can the Associated Press editorialize?"And here is the answer you will get: "No, the Associated Press (AP) strives for factual, nonpartisan reporting and prohibits its journalists from editorializing or expressing personal opinions in their news coverage; their core mission is to provide objective news, but they face scrutiny and debate over potential biases, requiring consumers and member editors to remain vigilant for bias and clearly identify third-party contributions." That's some remarkably unintelligent artificial intelligence. Well, it sure seems like the AP violated its own alleged prohibition of editorializing with their Saturday story about the arrest of the J6 pipe bomber suspect  by Alanna Durkin Richer and Eric Tucker, "Trump administration plays up pipe bomb suspect’s arrest. Jan. 6 violence goes unmentioned." While the title itself sounds suspiciously biased the article text itself comes off as an extended editorial:  WASHINGTON (AP) — After the arrest of a man charged with placing two pipe bombs outside the headquarters of the Republican and Democratic national parties on Jan. 5, 2021, the warning from the Trump administration was clear: If you come to the nation’s capital to attack citizens and institutions of democracy, you will be held accountable. Yet Justice Department leaders who announced the arrest were silent about the violence that had taken place when supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol and clashed with police one day after those bombs were placed. It was the latest example of the Trump’s administration’s efforts to rewrite the history of the riot, through pardons and the firings of lawyers who prosecuted the participants of the siege, and of the disconnect for a government that prides itself for cracking down on violent crime and supporting law enforcement but has papered over the brutality of the Jan. 6 attacks on police officers. “The administration has ignored and attempted to whitewash the violence committed by rioters on Jan. 6 because they were the president’s supporters. They were trying to install him a second time against the will of the voters in 2020,” said Michael Romano, who prosecuted the rioters before leaving the Justice Department this year. “And it feels like the effort to ignore that is purely transactional.” So in the first four paragraphs of the story supposedly about the arrest of the suspected pipe bomber, the AP reporters angrily editorialized that the Justice Department neglected to talk about the J6 violence by  "supporters of President Donald Trump," and  that the Trump  administration was attempting to "rewrite the history of the riot" by "papering over the brutality of the Jan. 6 attacks on police officers." The icing on the TDS cake was quoting an obviously anti-Trump Justice Department prosecutor who left the DOJ this year.  As could almost be expected the AP editorialists painted the suspect, Brian Cole, as a Trump supporter based on, get this, anonymous sources. People familiar with the matter told The Associated Press that among the statements Cole made to investigators is that he believed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, which Trump has insisted was stolen from him in favor of Democrat Joe Biden. The people were not authorized to discuss ongoing investigation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The rest of the AP story/editorial continues in this vein revealing a couple of very very angry AP editorialists posing as reporters letting off anti-Trump steam in the form of their highly biased report/editorial.