CNN This Morning 7-17-26 Shades of those X videos of instant karma for the would-be bully!On Friday’s CNN This Morning, Group Chat member Luke Thomas, an MMA analyst with an imposing presence who doubles as a left-wing pundit, initially sounded ready for battle.After more than a hundred House Democrats voted to block billions in military aid to Israel, Sen. John Fetterman drew his red line, saying that he would leave the Democratic Party if it went officially anti-Israel.Thomas’s tough-guy response? “Good riddance. I’ll help him pack his bags.”Macho stuff, Luke!Host Cornish joined the pile-on, declaring that Republicans “would probably welcome a cabbage if it meant another vote in the Senate” — a notably insensitive remark given Fetterman’s very public stroke and ongoing questions about his fitness.But Thomas's bravado didn’t last. Fellow panelist Elliot Williams, a scholarly, buttoned-down former Obama Justice Department official, and no conservative partisan, calmly asked Thomas a straightforward question: "Would you still be content with Fetterman leaving the Democratic Party if it meant Republicans kept the Senate majority?"Thomas, who had just been so full of fight, promptly backed down: “I mean, these are complex questions about how power is shared, and I, I have to, I’d have to think more about it.”Williams pressed the point, noting that Senate control is often decided by a seat or two and carries enormous consequences — not just how one senator votes, but who chairs committees, sets the agenda, confirms Supreme Court justices, and checks presidential power.Thomas tried to wave it off, arguing that if Fetterman kept voting the same way, it was “a difference without a distinction.” Williams politely corrected him again: "It's not just a vote. It's not just a vote. It's who's the chair of the committee? Who's setting the agenda?" Thomas meekly conceded, “Fair point.”  CNN Panelist’s Tough-Guy 'Good Riddance' to Fetterman Melts Under Senate Math Question@lthomasnews @elliotcwilliams @CNNThisMorning pic.twitter.com/FLD5QaMnCs— Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) July 17, 2026 The exchange was revealing. The guy who eagerly trash-talked a senator who has been one of the most pro-Israel voices in the Democratic Party, folded the moment Williams explained to him the realities of power dynamics and electoral consequences. Fetterman has repeatedly expressed public dismay at his party’s direction on Israel. If the party’s anti-Israel lurch continues, he may yet face that choice.Here's the transcript.CNN This Morning7/17/266:39 am EDTAUDIE CORNISH: I want to talk about another uncooperative partisan battle. Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, after more than a hundred House Democrats voted to block billions of dollars in military aid to Israel, this happened on Wednesday, Senator Fetterman is threatening to leave the party.JOHN FETTERMAN: I've always expressed my dismay, the way the Democratic Party continues to turn their back on Israel. So I've said that publicly, like, that's my red line. If Democratic Party becomes official anti-Israel, then that's when I would, force me out.CORNISH: All right. I wanted to talk about this because, a, it feels like a long time coming. Like, oh, okay. Am I the only one that really --LUKE THOMAS: I'll help him pack his bags. Good riddance.. . . CORNISH: Do Republicans want him?ELIZABETH MITCHELL: I think that Republicans would probably welcome him to the party, but I don't think he's gonna leave, personally, either.CORNISH: Yeah. They'd probably welcome a cabbage if it meant another vote in the Senate, right?. . . ELLIOT WILLIAMS: Luke, let me ask you a, a quick question. I'm just genuinely curious. Would you be content with John Fetterman leaving the, the Democratic Party if it meant Republicans kept the majority in the Senate?LUKE THOMAS: I mean, these are complex questions about how power is shared, and I, I have to, I'd have to think more about it. But just as a basic kind of overview, losing a guy like this would only make the Democratic Party richer. I am sorry to say that.WILLIAMS: If they were in the minority? I mean, it's a serious question. CORNISH: Yeah, this is why people care about this actually. WILLIAMS: I mean, because literally, if, if, if the Senate's at play, it's really gonna be by a matter of a seat or two. And you're talking about whether it's Supreme Court Justices, or the passage of legislation, or whatever check on the president, do you think like-- And it's a fair question! A lot of people think, no, you want a narrow party that is ideologically cohesive or whatever else. But getting that will mean potentially losing-- And I'm curious as to your thoughts on that.THOMAS: I don't know how it would change how he actually votes, right? So if he actually votes in the way that he has, where he voted in committee for Markwayne Mullin, he voted for Pam Bondi. If he's going to continue to vote for this or to give a blank check to Israel, what is -- this is a difference without a distinction. WILLIAMS: But it's not just a vote, it's not just a vote. It's who's the chair of the committee? Who's setting the agenda? THOMAS: It's a fair point.

NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Llamas sat down with actor John Leguizamo for Friday’s “Great Americans” segment to help him promote both his far-left identity politics and his appearance in The Odyssey. However, neither man appeared to realize the hypocrisy inherent in that.Llamas recalled how Leguizamo has over 100 screen credits but wondered, “You've been so successful, but it's rejection. It’s auditioning, not getting a role, people tell you, ‘We're not into you,’ or whatever, you're too Latin, you're not Latin enough. How did you deal with that?”Leguizamo replied, “You have to have tough skin, but luckily for me, coming from the ghetto and underprivileged, I felt everything was a success. Every crumb, every tiny molecule of success was a huge win.” NBC's Tom Llamas helps actor John Leguizmo push his identity politics game, "it’s auditioning, not getting a role, people tell you, 'We're not into you,' or whatever, you're too Latin, you're not Latin enough. How did you deal with that?"Later, after ironically promoting his… pic.twitter.com/1Ar74aItBD— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 18, 2026 Llamas then transitioned to promoting Leguizamo’s role in The Odyssey. Interestingly enough, there weren’t too many Colombian-born immigrants in ancient Greece. Most people wouldn’t have a problem with that when it comes to adapting The Odyssey, but for Leguizamo such considerations are sometimes so important that he will boycott a film if he doesn’t approve of casting choices. Therefore, it is interesting to note some Greeks have voiced frustration that Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey doesn’t have any Greek actors in it.After recalling how Leguizamo landed the role of Eumaeus, Llamas returned to identity politics, “But even with all his success, Leguizamo has never forgotten where he's come from, delivering this message to Hollywood at the 2024 Emmys.”In a clip, Leguizamo was shown declaring, “For years I didn't complain about the limited roles my people were offered: the spicy sexpot, the Latin lover, the maid, the gangbanger. Turns not complaining doesn't change anything.”Llamas then wondered, “So, you're at the podium behind that mic and you light the place on fire. Why?”Hollywood may be one of the most liberal places in the country, but Leguizamo insisted it was “Because of the world we're living in, man. I see myself as an artist, and artists are political. Artists take risks. I think you have to risk things in life to get more things, especially for your people.”In a voiceover, Llamas added, “And for Leguizamo, that's all part of being an American.” Back with Leguizamo, he asked, “What is an American?”The bitterly divisive Leguizamo claimed a true American helps unite people, “An American is a person who is considerate, respectful, who believes in others, who protects the vulnerable, who helps others achieve their dreams. Who unites, who saves the world, and keeps peace.”Leguizamo may live in a world of identity politics, but when the opportunity to make some money provided itself, he did not hold himself to the same standards he demands of everyone else. One would hope he would learn from his experience, but he’ll probably just go back to cursing at President Trump while torturing a piñata and calling it comedy.Here is a transcript for the July 17 show:NBC Nightly News7/17/20266:56 PM ETTOM LLAMAS: Today, he has more than 100 screen credits.100, that's a big number, and you've been so successful, but it's rejection—JOHN LEGUIZAMO: Oh, absolutely.LLAMAS: —it’s auditioning, not getting a role, people tell you, "We're not into you," or whatever, you're too Latin, you're not Latin enough. How did you deal with that?LEGUIZAMO: Absolutely, you have to have tough skin, but luckily for me, coming from the ghetto and underprivileged, I felt everything was a success. Every crumb, every tiny molecule of success was a huge win.MATT DAMON [As Odysseus]: Let's go!LLAMAS: And his biggest success could happen this weekend. Starring in The Odyssey produced by NBC Universal and made by Oscar-winning director Christopher Nolan.LEGUIZAMO: We spent two hours at lunch, told me about his life, his career, which was incredible. And then he told me, I'm doing The Odyssey, and he got this character, Eumaeus, he goes, “He's the most loyal character in Western literature,” and I was like “Oh, that's a heavy lift, I like it.”And then at dessert time he said you have the role, and I was like, “Excuse me?” because I thought I misunderstood him. “You got the role.” “Oh, wow.”LLAMAS: Did you say yes or did you have to, kind of, wait?LEGUIZAMO: No, I said yes. Of course I said yes. As soon as he left I ran home, you know, hugged my wife, kissed my children, called my friends, because it was the most exciting thing ever.LLAMAS: But even with all his success, Leguizamo has never forgotten where he's come from, delivering this message to Hollywood at the 2024 Emmys.LEGUIZAMO [2024]: For years I didn't complain about the limited roles my people were offered: the spicy sexpot, the Latin lover, the maid, the gangbanger. Turns not complaining doesn't change anything.LLAMAS: So, you're at the podium—LEGUIZAMO: Yeah, yeah.LLAMAS: —behind that mic—LEGUIZAMO: Right.LLAMAS: —and you light the place on fire.LEGUIZAMO: Oh, yeah.LLAMAS: Why?LEGUIZAMO: Because of the world we're living in, man. I see myself as an artist, and artists are political. Artists take risks. I think you have to risk things in life to get more things, especially for your people.LLAMAS: And for Leguizamo, that's all part of being an American.What is an American?LEGUIZAMO: An American is a person who is considerate, respectful, who believes in others, who protects the vulnerable, who helps others achieve their dreams. Who unites, who saves the world, and keeps peace. 

After Donald Trump was elected, The Washington Post took up the motto “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” The paper would fight "the darkness."Obviously, word of this has not reached the ABC and NBC television networks. The networks flatly refused to carry an address to the nation from the President of the United States. The President’s subject: Accusing China of meddling in US elections and “shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure.”One would be hard pressed to think of subjects more worthy of hearing from a President than on interference by a foreign government in American elections and the state of the American election system.Indeed, The Washington Times was concerned enough to report this from the President: China has scooped up America’s voter lists, U.S. states’ voter rolls are filled with noncitizens who have managed to register, and Venezuela has tried to develop methods to alter electronic voting machines, President Trump said Thursday in a primetime speech to alert the country to what he called “shocking” vulnerabilities.The fact of the matter is, even leaving China out of the story, America has had a long and not-so-good history as the target of voter fraud and election mischief.As a Pennsylvanian, I am aware of my own state’s long and sordid history when it comes to running honest elections.Whether it was early 20th century mischief in Philadelphia where systemic voter fraud was relied on by the GOP Philadelphia political machine, or whether in later years it was voter fraud depended on by the Democrat Philadelphia political machine, the historical fact of the matter is that William Penn’s beloved Commonwealth of brotherly love developed a hard core reputation inside the state’s political circles for voting funny-business in various elections.Which is to say, the President was hardly off-base in bringing into focus current allegations, revolving this time around the Chinese Communist Party government seeking to use high tech wizardry to manipulate the 2020 elections.The charge from the President has grounding. Not only serious discussion but serious investigation should clearly be had.Yet there are ABC and NBC quite literally making themselves the embodiment of that Washington Post motto that “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” Leaving one to wonder: What are ABC and NBC so afraid of in reporting the facts of an American election? If they disagree with what the President was saying? Fine. Then delve into the facts they feel he has ignored and present them to the American people. But don’t -- for heaven’s sake! -- refuse to shed light on his concerns and what he sees as the facts of an assault by a foreign government on the integrity of the American election system. After all, these networks were eager to share the theory that the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign against Hillary Clinton in 2016.Among the issues at hand are charges that some 220 million voter files have been hacked by China -- if true making it the largest compromise of election data in history.DHS Secretary Mullin charges that California, Nevada, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania between them have some 250,000 non-citizens registered to vote in elections.The way to resolving the problem is to shine the sunlight of journalistic investigation on them and find out what, exactly, is going on. The answer is decidedly not what ABC and NBC have done -- which is to ignore the issue and leave Americans in the dark on the subject, refusing to carry the President’s speech and investigate his charges. They claim "no evidence" and move on.The real question: Why would ABC and NBC do this? And, alas, the answer is as plain as it is decidedly wrong-headed. The answer is that the two networks (and they are not alone) are not real journalists. They are, in fact, left-wing political activists. Political activists who cannot stand this President. And so real journalism is not their real job. Their real job is to target President Donald Trump and, by extension, his voters/supporters. Making sure that anything he has to say is just not reported. Or, if reported, skewed in presentation. So that when the President chooses to address the nation on a subject he believes is important - these activists will simply leave the American people in the dark as to what he said.Which is to say, in their own way they show they don't believe in democracy.As the late CBS anchor Walter Cronkite use to say: “And that’s the way it is.”It is. But thankfully, the American people are entitled to disagree -- and they do.

With military operations kicking back up in Iran, ABC chief international correspondent James Longman joined Friday’s World News Tonight to play up the possibility that U.S. has committed, or is about to commit, war crimes.Longman began by recapping recent days’ events, “CENTCOM has tonight released this footage of a strike on a surveillance tower at an Iranian port, which they say the regime used to track and target commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. Although the White House says the strait is open to shipping, maritime tracking shows the reality is that only a handful have been able to pass through under the threat of Iranian attack. And after President Trump's threat to strike at civilian infrastructure next week, Iranian state media reports two bridges being hit by U.S. airstrikes, as well as a train station and an airport.” ABC's chief international correspondent James Longman tries to bring back war crime accusations, "President Trump's threat to strike at civilian infrastructure next week, Iranian state media reports two bridges being hit by U.S. airstrikes, as well as a train station and an… pic.twitter.com/dKKSNmLQTq— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 18, 2026 He then added, “Legal experts say striking civilian targets could be a war crime. CENTCOM says they never target civilians.”Bridges, train stations, and airports can all be used for military purposes.In Trump’s “threat to strike at civilian infrastructure,” Trump threatened “next week comes the power plants” and “next week comes the bridges.” As Longman noted, the U.S. has already started hitting bridges. Power plants can also be considered military targets, and the U.S. has historically hit them with graphite bombs, which are designed to disable electrical grids but are considered non-lethal.What is not up for debate is that Iran actually is hitting civilian infrastructure in non-belligerent countries, but Longman didn’t throw the phrase “war crime” around for that. Instead, he simply reported, “Iran is still firing back with alerts in Qatar, Jordan, and Bahrain and major damage to a power and water desalination plant in Kuwait today that forced the government there to advise citizens to conserve energy while they stabilize the grid.”War crimes are real things, and Iran has spent this war committing scores of them. From attacks on neutral shipping to attacks on civilians. The American media should focus more on that than launching into unfounded allegations against the U.S. military.Here is a transcript for the July 17 show:ABC World News Tonight7/17/20266:41 PM ETJAMES LONGMAN: Mary, CENTCOM has tonight released this footage of a strike on a surveillance tower at an Iranian port, which they say the regime used to track and target commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. Although the White House says the strait is open to shipping, maritime tracking shows the reality is that only a handful have been able to pass through under the threat of Iranian attack. And after President Trump's threat to strike at civilian infrastructure next week, Iranian state media reports two bridges being hit by U.S. airstrikes, as well as a train station, and an airport.Legal experts say striking civilian targets could be a war crime. CENTCOM says they never target civilians.And Iran is still firing back with alerts in Qatar, Jordan, and Bahrain and major damage to a power and water desalination plant in Kuwait today that forced the government there to advise citizens to conserve energy while they stabilize the grid. Mary.

MS NOW host Jonathan Capehart joined PBS News Hour on Friday for his weekly participation in recapping the week’s news, which focused heavily on President Trump’s Thursday speech about election integrity. As Capehart spread wild conspiracy theories about Trump seizing ballot boxes, Capehart insisted that such conspiracy theorizing is really just proof that he has “a healthy imagination.”Earlier in the discussion, host Geoff Bennett asked The Atlantic staff writer David Brooks, “We spoke on this program last night with Ty Cobb, who was the special counsel during the first Trump administration, and he offered an extraordinary warning. He said that he believes that President Trump is laying the predicate for an emergency declaration around the elections. Do you see the guardrails holding if President Trump tries to use the apparatus of the federal government to intervene more directly in how elections are administered? Reacting to Trump's Thursday speech, Jonathan Capehart tells PBS that "I am a little concerned about what happens on Election Day. Congressman Jim Himes was on with my colleague Lawrence O'Donnell last night, and he warned that, yes, what the president is doing is laying the… pic.twitter.com/0KuLqk20y2— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) July 18, 2026 Brooks answered that he does, which led Bennett to ask the same question of Capehart, “How do you see it, Jonathan?”Capehart began by offering up a theory on how everything could go wrong, “Although I am a little concerned about what happens on Election Day. Congressman Jim Himes was on with my colleague Lawrence O'Donnell last night, and he warned that, yes, what the president is doing is laying the predicate for stealing the election, and he said, for instance, what happens if they seize the ballot boxes from particular jurisdictions? What happens to the chain of custody? That is when democracy will be at its most tenuous.”He was also less optimistic than Brooks, “And, sure, you can race to court and try to get them back, but the action's already done. And so I hope you're right that we are going to have a free and fair election this November.”When conservatives offer up various “what if” scenarios to justify being concerned about elections, the media likes to say in response that they are “without evidence,” but when Capehart offered up his, he insisted that he merely has “a healthy imagination, and I hope that folks who care about free and fair elections also have a healthy imagination and are prepared for any and every scenario that could happen.”If Trump stated that he simply has “a healthy imagination” of what could go wrong in November, nobody at PBS would say that was sufficient evidence for anything, but Capehart can muse about baseless suggestions about seizing ballot boxes unchallenged.Here is a transcript for the July 17 show:PBS News Hour7/17/20267:40 PM ETGEOFF BENNETT: How do you see it, Jonathan?JONATHAN CAPEHART: Although I am a little concerned about what happens on Election Day. Congressman Jim Himes was on with my colleague Lawrence O'Donnell last night, and he warned that, yes, what the president is doing is laying the predicate for stealing the election, and he said, for instance, what happens if they seize the ballot boxes from particular jurisdictions? What happens to the chain of custody? That is when democracy will be at its most tenuous.And, sure, you can race to court and try to get them back, but the action's already done. And so I hope you're right that we are going to have a free and fair election this November. But I have a healthy imagination, and I hope that folks who care about free and fair elections also have a healthy imagination and are prepared for any and every scenario that could happen.