Infamous for his soft-on-illegal-immigrant-crime policies, Virginia Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano is now under federal investigation for suspected discriminatory treatment of cases, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Wednesday. “Today, the Justice Department notified the Fairfax County, Virginia Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano of the initiation of a federal investigation into the Commonwealth’s Attorney Plea Bargaining, Charging Decisions, and Sentencing Policy,” DOJ reported in a press release describing the reason the probe has been launched: “The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division will investigate whether the Office of the Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney discriminated against United States citizens by offering preferential treatment only to illegal alien criminal defendants.” The notification provided to Descano by Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division, cites the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Safe Streets Act, “both of which prohibit recipients of Federal financial assistance from discriminating based upon race, color, or national origin”: “Our investigation will also determine whether your office is engaged in a pattern or practice of depriving persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, pursuant to 34 U.S.C. § 12601. “Our investigation is based on information that on or about December 15, 2020, OFCA adopted the Commonwealth's Attorney Plea Bargaining, Charging Decisions, and Sentencing Policy. That policy states in relevant part ‘ACAs [Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys] shall consider immigration consequences where possible’ and that ‘prosecutors shall consider ... the collateral immigration consequences of the specific crime(s) the defendant is charged with[.]’” Descano’s soft treatment of illegal alien criminals has made national news and drawn harsh criticism, especially in recent months. In March, for example, documents obtained through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) revealed that Fairfax County, Virginia police previously warned Descano’s office at least three times not to release an illegal alien later charged with stabbing to death a woman at a bus stop – but, Descano’s office released him, anyway. The illegal immigrant had been continually released back into the Northern Virginia community with charges dropped by Descano’s office. In another case this year, two illegal aliens in Fairfax County, Virginia pleaded guilty to murder, but could be back out on the street in three years, thanks to a sweetheart deal given them by Descano’s office. “The reason why the two men will be serving five years behind bars for murder is that Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano’s office offered them a generous plea deal. And both men took it,” local station WJLA’s Nick Minock reported at the time. “Wherever possible, Steve will make charging and plea decisions that limit or avoid immigration consequences,” Descano’s website vows. Financial records and donation records tie Descano to far-left activist billionaire George Soros, according to a recap of news sources by The Daily Caller. Descano describes himself as a “progressive prosecutor” on his X.com account. There have been two recall efforts waged against Descano since he assumed office in 2019. “We are grateful to the Department of Justice for taking up the cause of victims, and investigating Commonwealth’s Attorney Descano’s leniency in criminal cases involving illegal immigrants,” Victims Rights Reform Council Executive Director Jennifer Harrison said in a statement Wednesday.  “This has been a long time in coming, and will be a great step in justice for victims.” Individuals with relevant information regarding the DOJ’s investigation of Descano are encouraged to contact the Department via civilrights.justice.gov/report/.

Abortion proponents love to claim abortion pills are "safe," but for whom? It's not "safe" for the baby being killed. One half of the humans involved in abortion are utterly dehumanized, not even considered in the safety equation. On the PBS show Amanpour & Co., guest host Bianna Golodryga and her abortion-lobbyist guest touted the pills as "safe" (and typically "safe and effective") 12 times in ten minutes.  These words did not cross anyone's lips in ten minutes, terms like "baby" or "infant" or even "fetus," not to mention words like "kill," "death," or "murder." The talk was incredibly clinical with Nancy Northup, CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. The host began the Tuesday segment:  GOLODRYGA: There's a new threat to reproductive rights in America. On Monday, the Supreme Court restored telehealth and mail access to the abortion pill Mifepristone, at least for now, putting on hold a ruling from the conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which requires the medication to be obtained in person. Mifepristone is one of two drugs used in the medical abortion regimen. A CNN analysis shows that it's overwhelmingly safe.... In the leftist mindset, a "conservative" court limits "rights," and "abortion rights" are their favorite rights. The right to life of the unborn isn't considered. The conservative rebuttal gets aborted by CNN and PBS. In the midst of touting abortion pills as "safe" 12 TIMES, CNN/PBS 'Amanpour' guest host Bianna Golodryga urgently noted: "It's important to take a step back and remind our viewers that several decades ago, the FDA had ruled for Mifepristone to be safe and effective for women to… pic.twitter.com/Z1u2gYDTuv — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) May 6, 2026 NORTHUP: And we have a lot of states in the United States where millions and millions of people live where abortion is legal and those states follow what the FDA has said is safe and effective, which is that you can have a telehealth visit, get your abortion pills by mail or pick them up at a pharmacy.... The Supreme Court, in the end of the day, should make sure that the FDA's decision that you can get a telehealth visit and get your abortion pills by mail is safe and effective. That scientific decision, that decision based on studies should stand.... GOLODRYGA: Louisiana is arguing that mailing these pills deliberately circumvents the state's abortion ban. And they go on to say that dealing with potential complication from the drugs drives up health costs. What is your legal response to that claim? NORTHUP: Well, the response to that claim is number one, in terms of driving up costs, medication abortion has been established by many studies, safe and effective. After four invocations of safety and effectiveness, Golodryga sounded ridiculous when she circled back to restate the point:  GOLODRYGA: It's important to take a step back and remind our viewers that several decades ago, the FDA had ruled for Mifepristone to be safe and effective for women to use. And then we heard the arguments leading up to the 2024 case. The Supreme Court actually threw out a challenge because they said the physicians bringing the suit lack standing. Now, that you've got Louisiana, a state as the plaintiff, do you think that this gives the justices, the conservative justices at least, the legal opening that they perhaps have been waiting for to override the FDA once and for all? NORTHUP: Well, I certainly hope not, because Louisiana should not be able to be making policy for the FDA across the nation. That should be done by the FDA, which has said that it's safe and effective. You know, litigating that case, unfortunately, the Trump administration is trying to take a second look at that decision. But again, all of this, whether it's what Louisiana is doing or what the Trump administration is doing, is politics. The science, the research are clear. Medication abortion is safe and effective.... The whole segment was repetitive, like the talking point had to be delivered over and over again:  GOLODRYGA: The HHS is currently conducting, quote, "a complete review of Mifepristone." I'm just curious, what does a complete review at this point, so many decades later look like? Is it warranted? NORTHUP: It's certainly not warranted. You'll have to ask the Trump administration what is going on with that review. It is not warranted. It has been proven again and again to be safe and effective.... GOLODRYGA: If we see a nationwide surge in Misoprostol-only abortions, what is the medical reality going to look like in this country for women? NORTHUP: Well, look, there are safe protocols for using the other medication that is used in abortion pills, which is using Misoprostol. But that should be a decision that each provider is making based on the patient's circumstances, based on the experience of the evidence. So, there are other safe protocols. But the point is, you don't take a safe method away from providers to make a decision for political reasons, which is what Louisiana is up to here. Northup concluded that “it's really important that supporters of access to safe and legal abortion be aware” that the ban on medication abortion by mail could be banned nationwide.

The still far-left CBS Mornings began Wednesday with five minutes of fawning over soon-to-be-ex-colleague Stephen Colbert teaming up for Tuesday’s Late Show with former President Barack Obama ahead of the latter’s Presidential Center to attack President Trump through a series of serious projections about norms. In other words, they treated water being wet as breaking news. WATCH: Wednesday's 'CBS Mornings' opened with *FIVE* minutes on Stephen Colbert and Barack Obama trashing Trump at the Obama library pic.twitter.com/37MSIOxTUG — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) May 6, 2026 It began with the end of the show’s “Eye Opener” as the two held a game of waste-basketball basketball as a follow-up to Colbert defeating Obama during a 2020 interview. Reacting to Colbert trouncing Obama, the CBS co-hosts were giggly over this supposedly amazing bit: GAYLE KING: Well, those two have a bond. VLADIMIR DUTHIERS: Hey, yeah, they’re clearly do. NATE BURLESON: That kind of spirit came out of Barack at the end. An Obama donor and family friend (who’s even vacationed with them and never faced public pushback from CBS), King gushed that they would “begin with what appeared to be some very pointed comments for President Trump from former President Barack Obama in an interview with Stephen Colbert,” “criticizing the expanding powers of the executive branch, including President Trump’s use of the Justice Department.” Nevermind how Obama’s first attorney general — Eric Holder — was dubbed his “wingman.” Sadly, CBS gave senior White House correspondent Weijia Jiang the task of dressing up this blatant corporate synergy and partisan pandering as legitimate news. “[H]e had plenty to say about the presidency and how the Oval Office has changed since he was in charge...During a taped interview on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, Colbert asked former President Barack Obama about the expanding powers of the executive branch, and what powers he believes whoever is the president should not have,” Jiang stated in part. Following a back-and-forth with Obama giving the liberal audience predictable yet fake slop about how an attorney general should be independent from the whims of a president and this “norm” should be respected, Jiang conceded: Obama did not mention President Trump by name, but he nodded to critics who say Trump has leaned on the role of Attorney General and the Justice Department to pursue investigations into his political adversaries, including former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Leitia James. Obama also spoke about the President’s power as commander-in-chief. She was sent out to treat another portion of the interview about conflicts of interest as newsy: “Obama also seemed to criticize the President for using the office to advance business interests for his family and friends.” The third and final portion she highlighted was discussion of Colbert running for president (as a Democrat, but such a fact was left out). She tied it all together by citing a recent poll on Trump’s approval  A recent Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos poll on Trump’s approval rating found only 37 percent of Americans approve of his job performance. This interview dropped just six months before a contentious midterm election when the U.S. is wrapped up in a war with Iran and gas prices continue to climb. We have asked the White House for a response to Obama, but have not heard back this morning[.] The show shamelessly had a second segment about this interview with chief Washington analyst Robert Costa, who had the gall to tell featured co-host Vladimir Duthiers that former presidents “don’t always want to weigh in on current affairs,” but Obama chose to given the opening of this so-called “Presidential Center” (click “expand”): DUTHIERS: Bob, as Weijia outlined, this criticism comes as President Trump faces some very, very tough political headwinds. You frequently speak to President Trump, what do you make of this and how might President Trump respond? COSTA: Good morning. There’s always a political dance for former presidents. They don’t always want to weigh in on current affairs. But with the opening of the library, we see former President Obama doing just that, not using President Trump’s name. But his comments reflect a growing confidence among many Democrats nationally that ahead of these midterm elections. The headwinds are around the White House right now that the Democrats have a real shot of winning the majority. But we can expect, based on my conversations with White House officials and top advisors to President Trump, he is going to fight back. He believes he has executive authority blessed by the Supreme Court, and he has the political will to fight. First, Obama has made endorsements in nearly every election since leaving office. Secondly, he spent months appearing in ads for the Virginia Democrat move to gerrymander the state from a six Democrat-five Republican map to 10 Democrats to one Republican. And finally, this is not a library, thus breaking a norm set by every presidential center going back to Herbert Hoover. Unsurprisingly, CBS didn’t have a word about its controversial history that featured years of delays and a doubling of costs to build it on the South Side of Chicago. To see the relevant CBS transcript from May 6, click here.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court denied a last-ditch effort to stop Louisiana from immediately complying with the High Court’s ruling requiring redistricting to erase the state's race-based map, setting the stage for the redistricting effort to begin on Friday. “A Louisiana legislative committee that oversees redistricting will meet Friday to hear public comments on a new congressional district map after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last week to overturn the existing version,” Louisiana Illuminator reported Monday, citing State Senator Caleb Kleinpeter (R-Port Allen): “After public testimony Friday, Kleinpeter said his committee will meet again early next week to vote on a map.” On April 29, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Louisiana’s 2024 redistricting, which created an additional majority-Black district, is unconstitutional because its map was drawn based on race without meeting the extremely limited and strictly-defined legal justifications for race-based redistricting. Typically, the Clerk of the Court will not direct a copy of the Supreme Court’s opinion and certified copy of the judgment to the District Court for at least 32 days after entry of judgment - unless the High Court shortens the time for issuance. On Monday, the Supreme Court did just that, granting an “Application For Issuance Of A Copy Of The Opinion And Certified Copy Of The Judgment Forthwith,” concluding that “Those 32 days could matter” and time is of the essence. "The best way to end race-based discrimination is to stop making decisions based on race," Republican Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry said Thursday: "Here in Louisiana, we’re proud to lead the nation on this charge. Allowing elections to proceed under an unconstitutional map would undermine the integrity of our system and violate the rights of our voters.” The new redistricting is expected to restore Louisiana’s pre-2024 map by removing the one minority-Black district created based on race. On Tuesday, the Black voters who had defended the 2024 map asked the Supreme Court to reverse Monday’s order and reinstate the 32-day waiting period. By denying the request on Wednesday, the Supreme Court appears to have put an end to the dispute, SCOTUSblog reports: “In a brief, unsigned order on Wednesday morning, the Supreme Court turned down the request by the Black voters who had defended the 2024 map that the justices struck down in Louisiana v. Callais to roll back the court's order on Monday that immediately finalized its judgment – presumably ending the dispute at the Supreme Court, at least for the foreseeable future. As is often the case for orders on its emergency docket, the justices did not provide any explanation for their decision.”

During Wednesday’s The View, ABC News moderator Whoopi Goldberg delivered what sounded like an ominous warning for the Trump administration and the Republican Party. According to her, they needed to see "the writing on the wall" that America was "not going to spiral with you," and that "we will do whatever we have to do to take care of our own." Co-host Joy Behar, once again, insisted that the midterm elections were going to be stolen and that Republican victories only happen because of cheating. Amid The View’s usual Orwellian hate session against President Trump at the top of the show, Goldberg falsely claimed that Trump expected taxpayers to foot the bill for the ballroom. “The bottom line is, the people who are getting hit are us. We're getting hit. We're getting hit. You know, the people have the easiest time saying, ‘yeah, we'll go to the taxpayers and get them to build the ballroom,’” she lied. Goldberg then unloaded her ominous warning to Trump and Republicans about people being willing to “do whatever we have to do to”: And you know what, I'm sorry, you know [laughs] I need y'all to just stay over there so we can get on with our lives, so we can take car of our families. Because bottom line is, we will do whatever we have to do to take care of our own. That's what's going to happen. And, you know, you can continue to spiral out of control, we're not going to spiral. The United States of America is not going to spiral with you. The people are saying, you know what, farmers are saying, we don't like what's going on, people who said, I voted for him and I don't like what's going on. “This is a sign and if you can't see the wring on the wall, that's the problem,” she chided.   Hinting at political violence? Goldberg says the administration and Republican need to see "the writing on the wall" that America is "not going to spiral with you" and that "we will do whatever we have to do to take care of our own." "That's what's going to happen," she adds. pic.twitter.com/nqcOuot3Av — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 6, 2026   Behar immediately followed up with a conspiracy theory that Republican victories in the midterms would be the result of cheating and nothing else. She even claimed Elon Musk was going to do something to manipulate things: BEHAR: I'm really worried about the November elections, even though it looks like the Democrats are going to pull it off. SUNNY HOSTIN: Democrats are up by ten points. BEHAR: I know that but I don't trust them to not cheat. I don't. GOLDBERG: Who? BEHAR: The Republicans. I don't trust the Republicans. HOSTIN: It’s because of the gerrymandering? [Begin to be played off] BEHAR: They’re trying it with gerrymandering and then they'll fool around with everything else. I don't trust that Elon Musk. Her fears about Musk were an echo of what The View repeatedly claimed last year, that Trump rigged the 2024 presidential election and Musk had something to do with it. Even their producers thought Behar was saying something problematic because they started playing them off as Behar was making her baseless claims.   "I don't trust them to not cheat." Behar claims that Republican victories in mid terms would be the results of the cheating and nothing else. She claims Florida has stopped running their own elections. pic.twitter.com/pBLCtTh8D4 — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) May 6, 2026   With the music rising, Goldberg tried to talk her off the ledge by declaring that she still believed in the people to make things right (in her view). But Behar wasn’t having it and insanely asserted that Florida didn’t run its own elections: GOLDBERG: Yes, because he can't take it out of the hands of the states. It's in the hands -- your vote something in the hands of the states, so I believe in the states. I believe the states who are not afraid are going to let elections happen the way they're supposed to. BEHAR: What about the ones that don't like Florida? “I think the people will gather themselves up as they are been doing and going out and voting for the right direction for their issue, for their city, for their town. I believe in the people. I got faith in us. We'll be right back,” Goldberg quickly wrapped them up. Reminder: ABC News considers The View as a news program. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View May 6, 2026 11:10:00 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: The bottom line is, the people who are getting hit are us. We're getting hit. We're getting hit. You know, the people have the easiest time saying, ‘yeah, we'll go to the taxpayers and get them to build the ballroom. We'll go to the taxpayers and get them to do this. They'll pay for this.’ And you know what, I'm sorry, you know [laughs] I need y'all to just stay over there so we can get on with our lives, so we can take car of our families. Because bottom line is, we will do whatever we have to do to take care of our own. That's what's going to happen. And, you know, you can continue to spiral out of control, we're not going to spiral. The United States of America is not going to spiral with you. The people are saying, you know what, farmers are saying, we don't like what's going on, people who said, I voted for him and I don't like what's going on. This is a sign and if you can't see the wring on the wall, that's the problem. JOY BEHAR: But I have to say, to your point, I'm really worried about the November elections, even though it looks like the Democrats are going to pull it off. SUNNY HOSTIN: Democrats are up by ten points. BEHAR: I know that but I don't trust them to not cheat. I don't. GOLDBERG: Who? BEHAR: The Republicans. I don't trust the Republicans. HOSTIN: It’s because of the gerrymandering? [Begin to be played off] BEHAR: They’re trying it with gerrymandering and then they'll fool around with everything else. I don't trust that Elon Musk. GOLDBERG: That is still in the hands of the states and you'll know where it's happening and people can get -- BEHAR: Well, I hope so. GOLDBERG: Yes, because he can't take it out of the hands of the states. It's in the hands -- your vote something in the hands of the states, so I believe in the states. I believe the states who are not afraid are going to let elections happen the way they're supposed to. BEHAR: What about the ones that don't like Florida? GOLDBERG: I think the people will gather themselves up as they are been doing and going out and voting for the right direction for their issue, for their city, for their town. I believe in the people. I got faith in us. We'll be right back.