The liberal media delights in reports of friction within the Trump administration, and Jake Tapper tried to turn one into reality on Sunday’s edition of CNN’s State of the Union. With border czar Tom Homan as his guest, Tapper repeatedly attempted to lure him into criticizing DHS Secretary Kristi Noem. Axios recently reported friction between the two, and Tapper clearly sought to exploit the issue. Tapper began by playing a clip of Noem saying that when it comes to elections, it’s important for DHS to be proactive “to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.” Tapper invited Homan to interpret Noem’s statement about “electing the right leaders.” Homan demurred, saying that would be a question for the Secretary. But he added, actually defending Noem: “If I had to guess, probably that only those legally eligible to vote would vote.” @JakeTapper Tries To Lure Homan Into Bashing Noem — Border Czar Won't Bite pic.twitter.com/4tsLbpMhXm — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) February 15, 2026 Tapper then pivoted to flattery. Quoting an unidentified Minnesota official, Tapper said Homan had been a “straight shooter,” “easier to work with,” and “a career cop,” whereas Noem and Greg Bovino, the former Border Patrol commander at large, were “actually insane.” Tapper pressed: “Why do you think Noem and Bovino struggled so much to work with local officials, the way you have successfully?” Homan wouldn’t bite, explaining instead that he met with Minnesota’s governor and attorney general, and the Minneapolis mayor because, “You can’t fix problems talking in an echo chamber. You’ve got to talk to the people that you may disagree with.” Tapper gushed: “You sound like an adult. You sound like an official who should be in charge of things.” Hoping the buttering-up had worked, Tapper tried again to get Homan to shiv Noem: “We’ve seen countless examples, again, this is not you, but do you agree that there are people in the Trump administration that are causing DHS to have a credibility problem?” The border czar refused to take the bait. “I’m not going to let the media divide this administration. Look, it’s one team, one fight.” Homan acknowledged that he and Noem don’t always agree, but said that’s what makes a strong team: “We bring different ideas to the table, then agree on a mission.” He then repeated the key line of the day: “It’s one team, one fight. I’m not going to divide this administration.” Poor Jake was forced to throw in the towel: “I hear what you’re saying. I’m not going to get you to criticize anybody.” In admitting defeat, Tapper exposed his goal: to tempt Homan into criticizing Noem. Tapper wouldn't want someone to goad him repeatedly into criticizing Anderson Cooper or Brian Stelter.  A for effort, Jake — but no cigar. Here's the transcript. CNN State of the Union 2/15/26 9:17 am ET JAKE TAPPER: DHS Secretary Noem made some comments that Democratic leader Schumer just commented on earlier in the show. I want to play them for you.  KRISTI NOEM: It may be one of the most important things that we need to make sure we trust, is reliable, and that when it gets to election day that we've been proactive to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.  TAPPER: So, what does she mean when she says, electing the right leaders? That's not really immigration enforcement or DHS responsibility.  TOM HOMAN: I don't know. That'd be a question for the Secretary. If I had to guess, probably that, you know, only those legally eligible to vote would vote. But I have not talked to the Secretary about those statements. That'd be something she'd have to answer.  TAPPER: This week, after 74 days, you declared the immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota officially over. I talked to a local Minnesota official who told me the following, quote, Homan has been a straight shooter with us. He's easier for us to work with because he's a career cop and he knows how to talk with our law enforcement. Noem and Bovino were actually insane and not here to do anything other than put on a show, unquote.  Why do you think Noem and Bovino struggled so much to work with local officials, the way you have successfully, and carry out the kind of targeted operations that you've always advocated for?  HOMAN: Look, the president called me and asked me to go to Minnesota and asked me to get up there that same day, and I went up there. I just did things the way I've done for 40 years.  And I know a lot of people questioned, why are you meeting with the governor? Why are you meeting with the attorney general and Mayor Frey? I've always been, you can't fix problems talking in an echo chamber. You've got to talk to the people that you may disagree with. People have a different opinion on how you're doing it. I want to hear. I want to see what do you see as the issue? Why do you not agree with certain aspects of the operation? That's how you, in my experience, that's how you fix problems. You don't fix it in an echo chamber.  So I met with them, and look, we came out, I think it's safer in Minnesota, safer in Minneapolis, because now we have coordination in the jails that we didn't have before.  . . .  TAPPER: I mean, you sound like an adult. You sound like an official who should be in charge of things because you work with local officials and seek to deescalate and have targeted operations.  But there's this credibility issue now that DHS has had, not because of you, sir, but over and over, your colleagues who work on this issue, Noem, Bovino, DHS on social media, have said things to the American people that are simply not true.  The most recent example, perhaps, two immigration agents last month said that they shot a Venezuelan man in Minnesota after they were attacked with shovels and broom handles. Noem went on social media. She attacked Governor Walz and Mayor Frey over what she called an attempted murder of federal law enforcement. But then, testimony and video shown in court didn't back up the claim, and now ICE and the Justice Department are investigating whether those immigration officers lied. And we've seen countless examples, again, this is not you, but do you agree that there are people in the Trump administration that are causing DHS to have a credibility problem? HOMAN: Well, like I said in my first press conference in Minnesota, in those comments, the first thing I thought I was going to do, and I did, was bring more internal affairs officers to Minnesota to investigate the allegations. Allegations made, they need to be investigated. And, again, I won't discuss the investigations. We'll let the internal affairs and the Bureau investigate these allegations, and that's the right thing to do.  But I'm not going to let the media divide this administration. Look, it's one team, one fight.  And, you know, do me and Secretary Noem agree on everything? No. We have discussions and we have differences of opinion. That's what makes it a strong team. We bring different ideas to the table, then agree on a mission. But based on, you know, again, you can't work in an echo chamber. You want to hear different opinions, different, you know, how you think this should happen or that should happen. But in the end, we clear a mission. We have great success on it.  But it's one team, one fight. I'm not going to divide this administration. I'm going to just keep doing what the president wants me to do as the border czar, and we'll just keep going and doing what the president promised the American people. We've got the most secure border in the history of this nation, and we're arresting record numbers of criminal aliens in this country and deporting them, and we're going to keep doing it.  TAPPER: So, I'm not talking about differences of opinion. I'm just talking about facts and things that are not facts. But I hear what you're saying. I'm not going to get you to criticize anybody.  I appreciate your time today, Mr. Homan. Thanks so much.  HOMAN: Thank you, sir. 

A ghost story falls in the category of fantasy. And former ABC reporter Tara Palmeri's Halloween-in-February hot take in Vanity Fair on Thursday, "Epstein’s Ghost Is Calling All the Shots in Trump’s White House," certainly falls within the realm of fantasy. She updates Banquo's ghost to the 21st century and engages in the fantasy that Epstein's ghost is somehow haunting Trump's every move. Since no incriminating facts in the Epstein files could be found about Trump, Palmeri performs the pretense of somehow channeling the president's soul and concluding that his every waking (and sleeping) moment is being haunted by Epstein's ghost. So let us now join Palmeri with a few laughable excerpts from Vanity Fair's Fantasyland: He bristles. He huffs. He snaps. You can feel it: incredulity boiling into ire as the president confronts the expectation that he must answer for a pedophile. ...The president who relishes causing offense now takes offense at the ongoing intrusion from a ghost of his past. ...Epstein’s shadow has darkened nearly every corner of Trump’s first year back in office, from DOJ inertia and congressional paralysis to personnel decisions and sinking poll numbers. Inside the White House, the issue is treated less like unfinished business and more like radioactive waste—something to be managed, contained, and cleared away daily. And it has clearly rattled a president determined to shape the narrative of his legacy in what is ostensibly his final term. ...Now, in death, Epstein has achieved something more enduring. He has hijacked Trump’s presidency. ...Trump’s presidency has become about Epstein. For proof of this, look no further than the New York Times homepage, where the layout of coverage of the administration paints a clear picture of what matters: “Epstein Fallout” comes first, before news about his official policies or his geopolitical maneuvers. So there you have it. Palmeri's sole "proof" is that the New York Times (and the media), not Trump, is obsessed with uncovering something, ANYTHING that might link Trump in a deleterious way to Epstein, whether ghost or not. This is the media touting its own haunting power.  "The Epstein files tell a number of stories about the president," she insists. And obviously none of those stories are damaging to Trump since if they were, we would be hearing about it 24/7 from Palmeri and the rest of the ghost-story media. Palmeri pulls this final highly laughable fact-free fantasy from her fervid imagination: To say that Epstein is haunting Trump from the grave doesn’t quite go far enough. Epstein has effectively risen from the dead to dominate Trump’s presidency and threaten his legacy. Trump can start wars, deploy troops, manufacture crises, but none of it shakes Epstein loose. Ironically, if anyone should be haunted by the ghost of Epstein, it would be the folks at Vanity Fair since they were the ones who published this generally upbeat story in March 2003 about the one supposedly haunting Trump, "The Talented Mr. Epstein."

As you may know by now, there is an ongoing environmental disaster that threatens to, well, soil our nation’s 250th birthday celebration in the Washington, D.C. metro area and beyond. A burst pipe has dumped millions of gallons of raw sewage into the Potomac River, which poses a major problem once springtime comes to the nation’s Capital. And the media refuse to talk about it. Our own Curtis Houck summed the spill (and its early lack of coverage) thusly: Back on January 19, a D.C. Water sewer pipe burst ahead of a major winter storm, sending hundreds of millions of gallons of untreated sewage — collected from homes and businesses in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs — into the Potomac River and triggering not only a foul smell and unspeakable solids, but levels for bacteria such as e. coli soaring to 4,000 times above safe levels for recreational use. As of this week, concerns remain and questions have arisen as to D.C. Water’s grasp of the situation and basic transparency. And with a major waterway in the greater Washington D.C. area serving as both a source of drinking water and the backdrop to major events celebrating America’s 250th birthday, one would think story would merit national attention. Instead, the major broadcast networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC have refused to mention it on their flagship broadcast network morning or evening shows. It is my duty to inform you that this blackout has extended to the Elitist Media’s Sunday political affairs programs. This is not unexpected as they will often cover local news when it suits their purpose. The deployment of the National Guard into D.C. streets provided tons of fodder- that is, until the crime numbers demonstrably plummeted.  And you will recall that, while providing adversarial coverage to the federal takeover, the national media omitted reporting on the concurrent crime data scandal that rocked the Metro Police. They cited the cooked data as gospel because it served and furthered The Narrative. What does this have to do with the poop storm currently assaulting the DMV? The same principles apply. This story will draw as little coverage as possible for as long as possible because it reflects poorly on Democrat governance. We saw this in their omissive coverage of the Mamdani administration’s deadly mismanagement of a snowstorm, a timely reminder of Iowahawk’s Iron Law of Journalism: Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving. — David Burge (@iowahawkblog) September 26, 2014 Shocking no one whatsoever, the Sunday shows joined the nightlies in not covering a D.C. local story with national implications (in fairness, we note that NBC's Meet the Depressed is on Olympic hiatus). If past is prologue, they are very likely to say nothing on the matter until after President Trump weighs in (it is an environmental disaster, after all), after which point the story will be Trumpwashed. Whatever thing Trump says will then be the scandal, as opposed to the decay that led a 72-inch sewage pipe to burst in Maryland, spewing millions of gallons of wastewater into the Potomac. At that point, the media’s collective scheisfrendschamen will magically disappear.

As you may know by now, there is an ongoing environmental disaster that threatens to, well, soil our nation’s 250th birthday celebration in the Washington, D.C. metro area and beyond. A burst pipe has dumped millions of gallons of raw sewage into the Potomac River, which poses a major problem once springtime comes to the nation’s Capital. Our own Curtis Houck summed the spill (and its early lack of coverage) thusly: Back on January 19, a D.C. Water sewer pipe burst ahead of a major winter storm, sending hundreds of millions of gallons of untreated sewage — collected from homes and businesses in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs — into the Potomac River and triggering not only a foul smell and unspeakable solids, but levels for bacteria such as e. coli soaring to 4,000 times above safe levels for recreational use. As of this week, concerns remain and questions have arisen as to D.C. Water’s grasp of the situation and basic transparency. And with a major waterway in the greater Washington D.C. area serving as both a source of drinking water and the backdrop to major events celebrating America’s 250th birthday, one would think story would merit national attention. Instead, the major broadcast networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC have refused to mention it on their flagship broadcast network morning or evening shows. It is my duty to inform you that this blackout has extended to the Elitist Media’s Sunday political affairs programs. This is not unexpected as they will often cover local news when it suits their purpose. The deployment of the National Guard into D.C. streets provided tons of fodder- that is, until the crime numbers demonstrably plummeted.  And you will recall that, while providing adversarial coverage to the federal takeover, the national media omitted reporting on the concurrent crime data scandal that rocked the Metro Police. They cited the cooked data as gospel because it served and furthered The Narrative. What does this have to do with the poop storm currently assaulting the DMV? The same principles apply. This story will draw as little coverage as possible for as long as possible because it reflects poorly on Democrat governance. We saw this in their omissive coverage of the Mamdani administration’s deadly mismanagement of a snowstorm, a timely reminder of Iowahawk’s Iron Law of Journalism: Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving. — David Burge (@iowahawkblog) September 26, 2014 Shocking no one whatsoever, the Sunday shows joined the nightlies in not covering a D.C. local story with national implications (in fairness, we note that NBC's Meet the Depressed is on Olympic hiatus). If past is prologue, they are very likely to say nothing on the matter until after President Trump weighs in (it is an environmental disaster, after all), after which point the story will be Trumpwashed. Whatever thing Trump says will then be the scandal, as opposed to the decay that led a 72-inch sewage pipe to burst in Maryland, spewing millions of gallons of wastewater into the Potomac. At that point, the media’s scheisfrendschamen will magically disappear.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered an address before the Munich Security Conference that was warmly received and met with rapturous applause. And if you were waiting for the Elitist Media’s Sunday shows’ analyses, you might think the speech never happened at all.  The sole mention of Rubio’s speech was on CBS’s Face the Nation, where substitute host Ed O’Keefe referenced the speech in passing before throwing to an interview with Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) recorded before the speech was delivered: WATCH: These 14 seconds on CBS's Face the Nation are the sole legacy Sunday show mention of SECSTATE Rubio's Munich speech- a stark departure from last year's collective meltdown over the speech delivered by VP Vance. pic.twitter.com/ccQqObBdbr — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) February 15, 2026 ED O’KEEFE: Secretary of State Marco Rubio left the annual Munich Security Conference after offering some reassurance to European allies wary of the Trump administration’s posture on NATO, but remained firm on the administration’s ambitions to reshape the transatlantic alliance.  That’s it. Nothing on CNN’s State of the Union or ABC’s This Week (NBC’s Meet the Press remains in Olympics hiatus). Both of those other shows were focused 100% on domestic matters as Rubio reemphasized the Trump administration’s European policy. Per Fox News: Standing in Germany, whose Cold War fault line once symbolized the division of a continent, Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered President Donald Trump’s red line for Europe. "We in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West’s managed decline," Rubio said during his Friday remarks before the Munich Security Conference. America's top diplomat called for tighter borders, revived industry and a reassertion of national sovereignty, arguing that the West’s drift was not inevitable but the result of policy choices the Trump administration now intends to reverse. This lack of coverage marks a stark contrast from how the networks covered Vice President JD Vance’s remarks the year prior, which were similar in substance if not tone. CBS’s Margaret Brennan had a full meltdown and tried to attribute the rise of Nazism to free speech. And it was Secretary Rubio who took her to school: FLASHBACK: Here's Margaret Brennan melting down over VP Vance's Munich speech last year and getting COOKED by SECSTATE Rubio for blaming the Holocaust on free speech. pic.twitter.com/i2R5Oyq8Cn — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) February 15, 2026 MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about what happened in Munich, Germany, at the Security Conference. Vice President Vance gave a speech, and he told U.S. allies that the threat he worries about the most is not Russia. It is not China. He called it the threat from within, and he lectured about what he described as censorship, mainly focusing, though, on including more views from the right. He also met with the leader of a far-right party known as the AfD, which, as you know, is under investigation and monitoring by German intelligence because of extremism. What did all of this accomplish, other than irritating our allies? MARCO RUBIO: Why would our allies or anybody be irritated by free speech and by someone giving their opinion? We are, after all, democracies. The Munich – Munich Security Conference is largely a conference of democracies, in which one of the things that we cherish and value is the ability to speak freely and provide your opinions. And so I think if anyone's angry about his words, they don't have to agree with him, but to be angry about it, I think, actually makes his point. I thought it was actually a pretty historic speech. Whether you agree with him or not, I think the valid points he's making to Europe is, we are concerned that the true values that we share, the values that bind us together with Europe are things like free speech and democracy and our shared history in winning two World Wars and defeating Soviet communism and the like. These are the values that we shared in common. And, in that Cold War, we fought against things like censorship and oppression and so forth. BRENNAN: Right. RUBIO: And when you see backsliding, and you raise that, that's a very valid concern. We can't tell them how to run their countries. We are – he simply expressed in a speech his view of it, which a lot of people, frankly, share. And I thought he said a lot of things in that speech that needed to be said. And, honestly, I don't know why anybody would be upset about it. People are allowed – you know, you don't have to agree on someone's speech. I happen to agree with a lot of what he said, but you don't have to agree with someone's speech to – to at least appreciate the fact they have a right to say it and that you should listen to it and see whether those criticisms are valid. BRENNAN: Yes. RUBIO: I assure you, the United States has come under withering criticism on many occasions from many leaders in Europe, and we don't go around throwing temper tantrums about it. BRENNAN: Well, he was standing in a country where free speech was weaponized to conduct a genocide. And he met with the head of a political party that has far right views and some historic ties to extreme groups. The context of that was changing the tone of it. And you know that, that the censorship was specifically about the right. RUBIO: Well, I have to disagree with you. No, I have – I have to disagree with you. Free speech was not used to conduct a genocide. The genocide was conducted by an authoritarian Nazi regime that happened to also be genocidal because they hated Jews and they hated minorities and they hated those that they – they had a list of people they hated, but primarily the Jews. There was no free speech in Nazi Germany. There was none. There was also no opposition in Nazi Germany. They were a sole and only party that governed that country. So that's not an accurate reflection of history. I also think it's wrong – again, I go back to the point of his speech. The point of his speech was basically that there is an erosion in free speech and intolerance for opposing points of view within Europe, and that's of concern, because that is eroding. That's not an erosion of your military capabilities. That's not an erosion of your economic standing. That's an erosion of the actual values that bind us together in this transatlantic union that everybody talks about. And I think allies and friends and partners that have worked together now for 80 years should be able to speak frankly to one another in open forums without being offended, insulted, or upset. And I spoke to Foreign Ministers from multiple countries throughout Europe. Many of them probably didn't like the speech or didn't agree with it, but they were continuing to engage with us on all sorts of issues that unite us. So, again, at the end of the day, I think that, you know, people give all - - that is a forum in which you're supposed to be inviting people to give speeches, not basically a chorus where everyone is saying the exact same thing. That's not always going to be the case when it's a collection of democracies where leaders have the right and the privilege to speak their minds in forums such as these. BRENNAN: Mr. Secretary, I'm told that we are out of time. A lot to get through with you. We appreciate you making time today. RUBIO: Yes. BRENNAN: We’ll be back in a minute. The media had quite a bit to say back then, but not so much today. If Vance’s and Rubio’s speeches are similar, why did one draw a full meltdown but not the other? Consider this one alternative explanation: Hiding Rubio’s speech provides cover for also hiding the fact that two prominent Democrats completely embarrassed themselves under the Munich spotlight, a benefit that would certainly not be extended to an individual with an R after their name.  Watch as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez gets caught flat-footed on Taiwan... Imagine going to Munich thinking you’re going to frame yourself as a serious 2028 contender, only to drop the Kraftwerk remix of the “I’m not an expert” Firing Line disaster pic.twitter.com/ruwcaloLgw — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) February 14, 2026  ...only to be followed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer whiffing on Ukraine and then DEFERRING TO AOC: You thought AOC’s implosion on Taiwan was bad? Here’s Gretch getting caught flatfooted on Ukraine, then deferring to AOC on foreign policy! Instant disqualifier pic.twitter.com/uMHTocIyMr — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) February 14, 2026 These would won on a constant loop on cable TV had the shoe been on the other partisan foot. Double standards, indeed.