The new and improved  CBS Evening News burst upon the scene with a fundamental promise of getting the story right. While this new iteration is a significant improvement over prior news product, there remain opportunities for improvement. Case in point, the most recent reporting out of Minneapolis. Correspondent Nicole Sganga is, for some reason, still on the scene in Minneapolis. The last time we examined Sganga’s reporting, she referred to the shooting of Renee Nicole Good as a “murder”. Now, she is framing the DHS as dishonest by default when talking about jail cooperation- a key component to helping keep ICE off the streets and out of dangerous situations. Her report begins with a setting meant to evoke fear: the empty Hmong marketplace, and a chat with the mayor of St. Paul, who claims that her parents are more afraid of ICE than of the communists during the Secret War in Laos.  Sganga’s then video package runs reel of the ICE official denouncing the state’s release of illegals in police or state custody. Sganga brings on the director of the state’s correctional system to refute ICE. Watch: WATCH: ICE official denounces Minnesota's release of criminal aliens in police or state custody", prior to CBS correspondent Nicole Sganga bringing on the director of the correctional system to refute. No consideration of the county jails. pic.twitter.com/tYc1YD88WJ — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) January 22, 2026 MARCOS CHARLES: Since President Trump took office one year ago today, the state of Minnesota has released nearly 500 criminal aliens who were in police or state custody, rather than turning them over to ICE. PAUL SCHNELL: If ICE has a detainer, they want them to take custody of them. We will facilitate the transfer of custody. Period. SGANGA: Commissioner Paul Schnell oversees Minnesota's Department of Corrections, including the state’s prison system.  Does it feel like the Department of Homeland Security is lying when it says that state authorities are not cooperating? SCHNELL: It is fundamentally false. We cooperate with ICE And ICE detainers. We have, as a matter of policy, done that for a long, long time. SGANGA: The Department of Homeland Security says roughly 450 criminals have been released into Minnesota's streets. And you say you don't know where that number comes from? SCHNELL: We have no idea where that number comes from. We know we released 84 people -- SGANGA: To ICE SCHNELL: -to ICE that were subject to detainers. And so this notion that Minnesota is not honoring federal ICE detainers is utterly untrue. State correctional agencies typically have oversight over state prisons and, in some states, juvenile detention facilities. These entities are separate from county jails, and so it is entirely plausible that there would be a discrepancy between what the state has and what DHS has.  The main sticking point with ICE has always been access into the county jails. Sanctuary jurisdictions deny ICE the access to detain illegal aliens housed in county jails. This is where the numerical discrepancy might come from. But this is never explored. ICE is left holding the bag and appearing to look deceitful. Narrative construction clearly on display. A reasonable individual might think that this is a minor distinction hardly worth examining. But once a correspondent refers to an unfortunate agent-involved shooting as a “murder,” without evidence, then it becomes time to examine everything else. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned transcript as aired on the CBS Evening News on Wednesday, January 21st, 2025: TONY DOKOUPIL: We are going to turn to new developments in the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Late today, we received a copy of an internal ICE memo authorizing federal agents to forcibly enter homes without a warrant from a judge. The directive was provided to Congress by whistleblowers who say this goes against standard training in the Department of Homeland Security. Tonight, Nicole Sganga has new reporting on how immigrants in Minnesota are responding to what is happening there. NICOLE SGANGA: In St. Paul, Minnesota’s Hmong Village, empty stalls line a once-busy marketplace. KAOHLY HER: On a normal day, all of these stalls would be open. SGANGA: It’s a sign, the city's mayor explains, of the deeply rooted fear spreading within immigrant communities. HER: They’re afraid to leave their homes, they’re afraid to let their children go to school. SGANGA: Mayor Kaohly Her says that fear has driven naturalized U.S. citizens, including her own parents, to hide in their homes. HER: When I talk to them they’re telling me they are more afraid now than they were fighting communism in Laos during the Secret War. SGANGA: Top Homeland Security officials have declared Operation Metro Surge, laser focused on arresting what DHS calls the worst of the worst, convicted felons and violent offenders, accusing Minnesota officials of not cooperating. MARCOS CHARLES: Since President Trump took office one year ago today, the state of Minnesota has released nearly 500 criminal aliens who were in police or state custody, rather than turning them over to ICE. PAUL SCHNELL: If ICE has a detainer, they want them to take custody of them. We will facilitate the transfer of custody. Period. SGANGA: Commissioner Paul Schnell oversees Minnesota's Department of Corrections, including the state’s prison system.  Does it feel like the Department of Homeland Security is lying when it says that state authorities are not cooperating? SCHNELL: It is fundamentally false. We cooperate with ICE And ICE detainers. We have, as a matter of policy, done that for a long, long time. SGANGA: The Department of Homeland Security says roughly 450 criminals have been released into Minnesota's streets. And you say you don't know where that number comes from? SCHNELL: We have no idea where that number comes from. We know we released 84 people -- SGANGA: To ICE SCHNELL: -to ICE that were subject to detainers. And so this notion that Minnesota is not honoring federal ICE detainers is utterly untrue. SGANGA: CBS News reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for clarity. The department responded just moments ago, doubling down on their numbers. They again are asking Minnesota elected officials to honor all ice detainers. Tony. DOKOUPIL: Nicole, thank you very much.  

Monday marked Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a national holiday honoring a man best remembered for urging Americans to judge one another by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. It is a legacy rooted in a specific historical struggle -- one that culminated in the Civil Rights Act after years of fierce resistance, largely from Southern Democrats, to dismantling Jim Crow. Since that era ended, the Democratic Party has repeatedly searched for what might come next: a successor to the civil rights movement that once defined its moral authority. Over the decades, a series of causes have been framed in those terms, often with strained comparisons to the racial discrimination of the mid-20th century. First came a movement centered on gender, casting women as victims of a patriarchal system in a way likened to black Americans’ experience under segregation. The analogy never quite fit. Later, similar language was applied to issues of sexual orientation and gender identity, with LGBTQ+ advocacy presented as the new front line of civil rights. Now, Democrats appear to have settled on a new cause: illegal immigration. In this framing, enforcing immigration law is portrayed not merely as a policy disagreement but as an expression of white supremacy itself. Illegal immigrants, the argument goes, must be allowed to remain in the country, and any attempt at enforcement is morally suspect. This is a stretch -- one that suggests demand for examples of systemic American racism has outpaced the available supply. Consider a recent example. On Monday, former Attorney General Eric Holder warned that the Voting Rights Act faces an abiding threat, claiming that the Trump administration is pursuing “unprecedented mid-decade gerrymandering attempts” and engaging in a “concerted effort to resegregate America.”      Such rhetoric dramatically overshoots reality. There is no serious movement in the United States to reinstate segregated schools, water fountains, restaurants or public accommodations. No credible constituency is calling for a return to Jim Crow, and no sentient observer believes America is on the verge of enforced racial separation. In fact, the post-Jim Crow story of race in America was, for decades, one of steadily improving relations. Polling data show that until around 2013, large majorities of both black and white Americans believed race relations were getting better and had improved significantly since the 1960s. That perception changed during the later Obama years and the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, which coincided with a sharp decline in public optimism about race relations. But declining optimism is not the same as renewed racial oppression, nor does it suggest that white supremacy now rules the roost. Yet the search continues. Democrats need a new civil rights struggle to justify claims of moral urgency and political authority. That case has become increasingly difficult to make. The party is now defined, for many voters, by abortion on demand, an inability to articulate basic distinctions about sex and gender, and a posture approaching open borders. So illegal immigration is being folded into the civil rights narrative. History suggests that this, too, will fall short. Ben Shapiro is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of “The Ben Shapiro Show,” and co-founder of Daily Wire+. He is a three-time New York Times bestselling author. To find out more about Ben Shapiro and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM

On Wednesday’s CNN This Morning, the network attempted to downplay possible criminal charges against protestors involved in storming a Saint Paul, Minnesota church in the recent anti-ICE unrest. CNN guest Sarah Krissoff, a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York, minimized the threat of arrests while complaining about so-called political persecutions of Minnesota Democrats. Guest host Erica Hill introduced the segment with news of subpoenas being issued to Democratic Minnesota leaders, including Governor Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, and Attorney General Keith Ellison.      “I was speaking with another former federal prosecutor yesterday who said this is highly unusual. This is not the way the DOJ does business. You don't issue a subpoena if you're potentially investigating someone,” Hill said. Krissoff agreed and rambled through an answer worrying of a pending clash between state and federal officials: Yeah, I mean, if they want to be overt about it, they certainly can, you know, issue a subpoena to someone. The really sort of unprecedented issue here is the nature of this investigation. (…) It just really sets up this showdown between the federal and local and state officials here. Hill then asked Krissoff about possible criminal action taken against anti-ICE agitators, which included disgraced former CNN host Don Lemon, who stormed a Minnesota church during its Sunday service. Hill did mention how the church was a private space and how there was a right to religion in that place, but played dumb about alleged violations of the FACE Act: And when we look at potential charges, when it comes to the protesters who were at that church in Saint Paul on Sunday - you know, we're hearing from protesters right to free speech. This is a private space, though, and there is, of course, also right to, to, to religion in that space. How do you see that playing out? This is what's calling it, I believe it's called the FACE Act, which is a lot of, which is a lot of what we're hearing. What could those charges potentially be? In response to Hill’s mention of the FACE Act, which was used against pro-life protestors during the Biden Administration, Krissoff remained fully skeptical of charges being able to survive a jury trial.  Instead of talking about the actual merits of criminal charges, Krissoff complained about the DOJ using too much force. “Yeah, a lot of these sort of circumstances, in addition, sort of the circumstances regarding the church, they seem like, you know, there are threats of charges. There are, there is, you know - the DOJ is very clearly trying to bring the full force of itself down upon people,” Krissoff responded. The segment concluded with Krissoff decrying perceived political persecutions, again basically scoffing at the premise of Hill’s question about the FACE Act: “But at the end of the day, it is very hard to imagine these types of charges stick and that they go forward and - ultimately criminal charges in our country have to be decided by a jury, right? The DOJ doesn't get to decide whether someone is guilty or not.” No mention of criminal campaigns taken against Trump by the likes of New York Attorney General Letitia James or New York City District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who got elected running on the political persecution of Trump. CNN squeezed the mention of the Minnesota church incident in a segment dominated by outrage over Trump DOJ actions in Minnesota, spawned by the state’s rampant fraud crisis. Of course, it is not unexpected, but CNN and their guest decided to not give the trending story any credence.  The transcript is below. Expand to read: CNN This Morning January 21, 2026 6:30:00 a.m. Eastern ERICA HILL: The Justice Department, meantime, is hitting at least five Minnesota officials with subpoenas, including Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, as well as the state's attorney general, Keith Ellison, the Mayor of Saint Paul, and a local county attorney. It's all part of a federal investigation, we’re told, into alleged obstruction of immigration enforcement efforts. And it comes as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem warns of arrests coming in connection to anti-ICE protests at a Minnesota church in Saint Paul over the weekend. [Cuts to video] KRISTI NOEM (DHS Secretary): And that pastor really did a remarkable thing there, trying to protect his parishioners. [Transition] And there's going to be arrests in the next several hours. [Transition] There will be arrests tied to that, and people will be brought to justice for how they violated the law in that situation. [Cuts back to live] HILL: Joining me now to discuss is Sarah Kristof. She's a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York. Sarah, it's good to have you with us. I want to start. If we could, on these subpoenas, which are reportedly being issued. We're talking about officials here. I was speaking with another former federal prosecutor yesterday who said this is highly unusual. This is not the way the DOJ does business. You don't issue a subpoena if you're potentially investigating someone. SARAH KRISSOFF: Yeah, I mean, if they want to be overt about it, they certainly can, you know, issue a subpoena to someone. The really sort of unprecedented issue here is the nature of this investigation. I mean, the - these officials have spoken out against ICE’s Operations. There's been a lawsuit filed that's pending in federal court in - in Minnesota. And so - to - in that context, to then issue a subpoena and say ‘oh, actually, there's a criminal investigation going on here by DOJ, we are now seeking documents from you in connection with that’. It just really sets up this showdown between the federal and local and state officials here. HILL: And that's something I think people are trying to wrap their head around. Part of what we heard from, uh, from Gregory Bovino yesterday is he was saying that some of the local leaders, in his words, and I'm quoting him here, “relied on heated rhetoric and allegations that distract from the facts.” Um, are words enough to lead to criminal charges? KRISSOFF: I mean, listen, the DOJ has very broad discretion to open an investigation, right? They open it on the slimmest of, of innuendo or belief. But to bring charges is an entirely different thing, which is what we've seen, frankly, in connection with these other politically motivated prosecutions of, of, of politicians that have been unsuccessful in other jurisdictions. So, I mean, I think it is, it is one thing to issue a subpoena and sort of, you know, try to make a show of force here. I think it will be an entirely different thing to try to proceed with some sort of charges or any type of charges, frankly.  [DISCUSSION ON CHURCH] HILL: And when we look at potential charges, when it comes to the protesters who were at that church in Saint Paul on Sunday - you know, we're hearing from protesters right to free speech. This is a private space, though, and there is, of course, also right to, to, to religion in that space. How do you see that playing out? This is what's calling it, I believe it's called the FACE Act, which is a lot of, which is a lot of what we're hearing. What could those charges potentially be? KRISSOFF: Yeah, a lot of these sort of circumstances, in addition, sort of the circumstances regarding the church, they seem like, you know, there are threats of charges. There are people are arrested. There are, there is, you know - the DOJ is very clearly trying to bring the full force of itself down upon people. But at the end of the day, it is very hard to imagine these types of charges stick and that they go forward and - ultimately criminal charges in our country have to be decided by a jury, right? The DOJ doesn't get to decide whether someone is guilty or not.” HILL: It is an excellent point. You talk about - but you talk about the government bringing the full force. We also have, of course, The Washington Post reporting DOJ is bringing in additional prosecutors to help when it comes to cases related to anti-ICE protests amid a staffing shortage. This comes on the heels of, I believe it was six prosecutors in Minnesota who resigned last week, although Pam Bondi then went on to say she was going to fire them. What does all this do in terms of pressure on prosecutors in this moment? KRISSOFF: It is very difficult to be a prosecutor in the Department of Justice at the moment. So there is a shortage of prosecutors across the DOJ, and there is also a shortage of career prosecutors, many folks who have been there for many years have that expertise and knowledge, how to bring these cases, how to proceed with them judiciously, have left the Department of Justice. There was a real flight from the Department of Justice. And so they are - the the DOJ is understaffed generally at the moment, and they are really scrambling to sort of do the work and then to be pulled in all of these different directions, right. To be told on Monday they're doing one thing and Tuesday they're doing another, and Wednesday they're investigating yet another, you know, political enemy really hinders the work that they are doing. It makes it very hard for them to do the work and, frankly, unlikely that any of these politically prosecuted, politically motivated prosecutions will go anywhere. HILL: Sara, really appreciate your insight on this. Thank you. KRISSOFF: Thank you.

NPR Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep is bringing his long-standing Obama-polishing interview style to the early contenders for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is the latest beneficiary, after Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. The primary subject was, inevitably, Donald Trump as a threat to democracy.  The online headline was er, helpful to the usual Democrat paranoia: Gretchen Whitmer says it's not 'paranoia' to fear Trump using homeland security personnel in elections Inskeep proclaimed at the top of the nearly eight-minute segment "she said her swing state is preparing for any efforts to disrupt elections this fall." GRETCHEN WHITMER: We know that there will be efforts to compromise the election or to dissuade people from showing up, to scare people away, to threaten people. We cannot let that stand. I'm concerned about it. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't. INSKEEP: Some people spin out theories, and they will say, well, Homeland Security people are everywhere, and they might be used in some way. WHITMER: I don't think it's paranoia to have that concern. The Morning Edition anchor also pushed this DHS/ICE angle on X:  Gretchen Whitmer warns in an NPR video that it’s not “paranoia” to fear immigration agents interfering in the 2026 elections. Her remark exposes a longstanding link between the immigration debate and election results. Read it here or watch at the link below. pic.twitter.com/nMcNOZSrC2 — Steve Inskeep (@NPRinskeep) January 21, 2026 Inskeep's questions were often just "you go, girl" prompts to whack Trump:  INSKEEP: Just before our interview, Trump's administration had promised not to prosecute immigration agents while also investigating Democrats, including a Michigan senator. [To Whitmer] What does that all add up to? WHITMER: I think an abuse of power. I think that's pretty clear. That's the through line there, and I think it's a very serious and scary moment in this country. The toughest NPR questions nudged Whitmer to explain why the Democrats aren't currently in a terrific position in the polls. INSKEEP: Democrats have the advantage of facing an unpopular president and his party, but Democrats are unpopular themselves. There are a lot of people who voted for Trump, not because they love him, but because they wanted drastic change. Do Democrats have anything to say to people who want drastic change in the way the country has been run? WHITMER: I think drastic change might be an oversimplification. I think that people want leaders who understand them and care about them. You know, I've met a lot of Michiganders who voted both for me and Donald Trump twice. I don't understand everything that makes that voter tick. But when I talk to them, they tell me, I think you're the one that understands what I'm going through. You're the one that's talking about the issues that matter to me. INSKEEP: Democrats did really badly with men in 2024. And then, in your State of the State speech in early 2025, about a year ago, you warned about a generation of men falling behind their fathers and their grandfathers. What were you saying, and is anything better now? Whitmer explained they couldn't get men to participate in some economic programs to the same degree as women, such as first-time home-buying help. There's nothing about transgender controversies, one mover of male voters: INSKEEP: There's a whole conversation about the demoralization of men, about men feeling left out, not seeing a way forward. Is society doing something to men? WHITMER: You know, I don't know all of the different pressures. I've been studying it. I'm listening to probably a lot of the same podcasts that you are to understand... INSKEEP: (Laughter). WHITMER: ...What can we do? How do we bridge this gap? Inskeep concluded the on-air story by asking Whitmer if Michelle Obama was right that America isn't ready for a female president. Unsurprisingly, for a potential 2028 candidate, she gently disagreed on that. A longer interview was posted on YouTube (with the same paranoid push): 

They want him overthrown. President Trump’s visit to Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum where he dressed down European leaders was the final straw for the leftists of ABC’s The View. They were so fed up that, on Wednesday’s episode, ABC moderator Whoopi Goldberg was openly calling for Trump to be overthrown via the 25th Amendment. It would be a move she didn’t seem educated on since it required his cabinet to act and she wanted them gone too. “25th Amendment! 25th Amendment! It’s time! 25th Amendment! It's time! It's time! It's time!,” Goldberg shouted after playing soundbites of Trump’s Davos address. With support from co-hosts Sunny Hostin and Joy Behar, Goldberg argued that it was long past when Trump needed to be removed from office: HOSTIN: You believe at this point that the President of the United States may not have his full faculties? GOLDBERG: I felt that before now! JOY BEHAR: Yeah, but the cherry on the cake was yesterday. GOLDBERG: Well, no. There's been a lot of cherries on the cake. There have been several cherries. The cherries on this cake are enormous! There are so many. BEHAR: It’s a cherry tree. GOLDBERG: The line's in the sand. I mean, it looks like a stamp! There's so many lines in the sand.   Whoopi Goldberg after hearing Trump's Davos speech: "It's time! 25th Amendment! It's time! It's time! It's time!" Additionally: SUNNY HOSTIN: To that point, Whoopi, you would be in a lot of company. You believe at this point that the president of the United States may not have… pic.twitter.com/4VPyGk1IH8 — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 21, 2026   “Look, he is sitting in a position that is uncomfortable to me. I'm sorry. I'm uncomfortable with him as president,” Goldberg proclaimed, as if her feelings were enough justification to overthrow a sitting president. Unfortunately for her, a majority of Americans did feel comfortable with him being president. That’s why he won the election. Faux conservative Alyssa Farah Griffin chimed in with a “dose of reality” to remind Goldberg the cabinet was need to invoke the 25th Amendment, but she shouted that she wanted them out too: FARAH GRIFFIN: But just remember, the 25th amendment requires the cabinet around him to act. GOLDBERG: I understand. FARAH GRIFFIN: I know, but just as a dose of reality, his cabinet is squarely with him, though I do think -- GOLDBERG: Yes, and it's time for them to go too!   Despite needing the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment, Whoopi wants them gone too: GOLDBERG: You know, look, he is sitting in a position that is uncomfortable to me. HOSTIN: Yeah. GOLDBERG: I'm sorry. I'm uncomfortable with him as president. BEHAR: A lot of people believe… pic.twitter.com/YPi3qsA1Kq — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 21, 2026   Farah Griffin would go on to gripe about Trump’s dressing down of European leaders, whining it sounded, “like he's more mad at them than he is our enemies.” According Behar’s conspiracy-theory-driven brain, it was because “Putin likes him” and “He's a Russian asset!” Behar’s regurgitation of the long-debunked Russia Collusion Hoax didn’t really square with her concern from two weeks prior, that Trump was pointlessly antagonizing Russia by seizing a ghost fleet oil tanker, and possibly leading us into a military confrontation.   Joy Behar regurgitates the Russia collusion hoax and claims - without evidence - that Trump is a "Russian asset." FARAH GRIFFIN: It frustrates me when he talks about our European allies. Like he's more mad at them than he is our enemies. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: You know why? You… pic.twitter.com/uSpJsVcvYf — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) January 21, 2026   Hostin chimed back in later in the show to claim that Trump was planning to take over the world unless Europe stood up to him: “[I]f Europe capitulates, as Whoopi just said, every single country is at risk! This is an imperialist president! He wants to colonize everybody! Every country!” Behar nearly had a mental breakdown after Farah Griffin reminded them that Trump still had three years left. “No, don't tell me he has three years left! I can't. I can't hear that,” she pleaded. Goldberg responded by hinting at her 25th Amendment plot: “You got to make some changes. You got to make changes. You know?” The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s The View January 21, 2026 11:04:25 a.m. Eastern (…) WHOOPI GOLDBERG: 25th Amendment! 25th Amendment! It’s time! 25th Amendment! It's time! It's time! It's time! [Applause] SUNNY HOSTIN: To that point, Whoopi, you would be in a lot of company. You believe at this point that the President of the United States may not have his full faculties? GOLDBERG: I felt that before now! JOY BEHAR: Yeah, but the cherry on the cake was yesterday. GOLDBERG: Well, no. There's been a lot of cherries on the cake. There have been several cherries. The cherries on this cake are enormous! There are so many. BEHAR: It’s a cherry tree. GOLDBERG: The line's in the sand. I mean, it looks like a stamp! There's so many lines in the sand. BEHAR: Even his former White House attorney Ty Cobb said that 'anybody outside the United States who believes that Trump is sane is' -- there is nobody outside this country that thinks he's sane. And his former Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said 'this presser is bizarre even for him. It's low energy and feels like he's mentally slipping.' These are people who would normally work for him. Who have worked for him. GOLDBERG: A two-hour – HOSTIN: Press conference. BEHAR: Ramble. GOLDBERG: Press conference about I don’t know what. It was – it – You know, look, he is sitting in a position that is uncomfortable to me. HOSTIN: Yeah. GOLDBERG: I'm sorry. I'm uncomfortable with him as president. BEHAR: A lot of people believe that. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: But just remember, the 25th amendment requires the cabinet around him to act. GOLDBERG: I understand. BEHAR: Well, we're talking to them. FARAH GRIFFIN: I know, but just as a dose of reality, his cabinet is squarely with him, though I do think -- GOLDBERG: Yes, and it's time for them to go too! FARAH GRIFFIN: This is where midterms, elections, and Congress comes into pay. (…) 11:07:29 a.m. Eastern FARAH GRIFFIN: It frustrates me when I hear him talk about our European allies. It’s like he's more mad at them than he is our enemies. [Crosstalk] BEHAR: You know why? You know why? Because they don't like him and they don't support him! Putin likes him because he likes what is going on with him! FARAH GRIFFIN: I don't think Putin likes him. BEHAR: Well, Putin is on his side! He's a Russian asset! (…) 11:11:51 a.m. Eastern HOSTIN: [I]f Europe capitulates, as Whoopi just said, every single country is at risk! This is an imperialist president! He wants to colonize everybody! Every country! (…) 11:21:29 a.m. Eastern FARAH GRIFFIN: It all just feels like a distraction from the one thing he was asked to and it’s like you've got three years left and Americans are hurting. BEHAR: No, don't tell me he has three years left! I can't. GOLDBERG: Well, you know -- BEHAR: I can't hear that. GOLDBERG: You got to make some changes. You got to make changes. You know? (…)