On Thursday’s CNN This Morning, host Audie Cornish battled with panel guest and CNN national security analyst Alex Plitsas about the alleged strike on an Iranian school in the opening days of the conflict. She implied Pete Hegseth’s Department of War may strike more civilians because of “red tape” cuts at the Pentagon. The bombing at an Iranian school close to IRGC facilities has been a top topic among media outlets. Cornish opened with, “But one of the reasons why I think people are interested is if there was an imminent threat, if we've modeled going into Iran for years, why out of the gate would there be an error in a strike?”   On Thursday's CNN This Morning, Audie Cornish implied the Department of War under Hegseth has no oversight and took issue with the idea of a "more lethal" military. As Alex Plitsas tried to explain the measures taken to prevent civilian death, Cornish repeatedly interrupted. pic.twitter.com/j1qbfAIkJg — Nick (@nspin310) March 12, 2026   Plitsas tried to point out the isolated nature of the alleged incident, but Cornish repeatedly interrupted as he tried to discuss the safeguards that were in place: PLITSAS: So. I mean, at this point, we've struck something like 5,000 targets, and this is the only time we've heard of a target like this being struck by accident. CORNISH: That’s a pretty big one, right? I mean, to me, this feel, it's not like - PLITSAS: It's big because of the outcome that happened, and I'm not going to diminish that by any means. There were 168 innocent people that were reportedly killed, and that is a travesty that we can't ignore. CORNISH: And it was near a base. So, that’s why I’m asking. PLITSAS: That’s precisely - CORNISH: That sense of like, wait a second, was it an error? Someone on the panel was talking about the idea of there being somehow an actual error in the intelligence, or is it outdated? Did we launch something and not really have a grasp on where we were aiming those missiles? Most would agree any strikes that lead to civilian deaths are a tragedy, but it should also be noted the proximity of the school to IRGC targets, specifically naval base targets in a military compounds. Then, Cornish implied that Secretary Hegseth and his department would strike more civilians because of his mission to make the department “more lethal” while another implication suggested he was removing civilian safeguards: One of the reasons why I'm also interested in this is under Pete Hegseth and his Defense Department posture, which says we need to be more lethal, we need to streamline the red tape, he has downgraded some attorneys. He has said they shouldn't be clouding or muddying the line of decision-making. Can we expect oversight from a military that is literally downgrading the legal observers, the legal guys? It’s pretty clear Hegseth’s mission of increased lethality did not mean killing civilians, but more of an actual focus on training soldiers to be better fighters if they need to fight. Even as Plitsas was trying to explain how DoW lawyers were still involved in approving strike packages, Cornish just wasn’t having it seemingly adamant there was no oversight: PLITSAS: Sure. So, there's still operations law attorneys who have to review all the strikes that are going on. So, US Central Command, which is our military command that's responsible for the Middle East and Central Asia, is overseeing this at a four-star level, which is Admiral Brad Cooper. He has lawyers in there as well that review the strike packages when they come in and make sure that they're legal. We're not seeing illegal targets being struck. These all appear to be to conform with the law. CORNISH: But do you know what I mean, are the watchers there? Are the watchmen doing any watching? PLITSAS: So, at the command where it's happening, yes, and then I think the question for you is an oversight, right, at the most senior level. Plitsas responded with the same and correct response that there is oversight and the incident is under investigation. The media’s derangement over Hegseth has continued since he was first nominated after Trump’s election win and might be headed to its top point during these Iran operations. The transcript is below. Click "expand": CNN This Morning March 12, 2026 6:37:26 AM Eastern (...) AUDIE CORNISH: Ok. Alex Plitsas, CNN national security analyst and director of the counterterrorism program for the Atlantic Council, is here in the chat. And man we needed you. So here is the thing I'm hearing from, you know, the White House, the Republican establishment, and it is saying this, the media is making a big deal out of this thing and that that is not fair.  But one of the reasons why I think people are interested is if there was an imminent threat, if we've modeled going into Iran for years, why out of the gate would there be an error in a strike? ALEX PLITSAS (CNN Analyst and Director of Counterterrorism Program at Atlantic Council): So. I mean, at this point, we've struck something like 5,000 targets, and this is the only time we've heard of a target like this being struck by accident. CORNISH: That’s a pretty big one, right? I mean, to me, this feel, it's not like - PLITSAS: It's big because of the outcome that happened, and I'm not going to diminish that by any means. There were 168 innocent people that were reportedly killed, and that is a travesty that we can't ignore. CORNISH: And it was near a base. So, that’s why I’m asking. PLITSAS: That’s precisely - CORNISH: That sense of like, wait a second, was it an error? Someone on the panel was talking about the idea of there being somehow an actual error in the intelligence, or is it outdated? Did we launch something and not really have a grasp on where we were aiming those missiles? PLITSAS: So, it appears to be outdated intelligence, and here's why. The compound itself, there were about six buildings right adjacent to each other, and then the school was sort of adjacent to the side. It appears that a wall had been built in between somewhere over the last decade or so when the building transitioned to a school. So, it appears it was part of an old target deck. And the pilots are moving through, we call it an air-tasking order. So, they're moving down a series of targets in order. They're not hitting targets of opportunity. So, it wasn't that a pilot saw something and dropped, you know, a bomb. It was a missile, by all accounts, that came in. So, unfortunately, it appears coordinates were entered for an old building based on outdated intelligence. So, it would have actually been a targeting error. CORNISH: So, you can see how people would then be like, well, wait a second. I thought we were ready for this. I thought we had all the intelligence. I thought the Israelis were helping us. Like, what happened? PLITSAS: Sure. I mean, this is - again, it appears to be an isolated incident out of 5,000 strikes. We're not hearing like a lot of these. So, unfortunately, it does appear that one slipped through on this one and led to catastrophic circumstances where 168 innocent people were killed. CORNISH: One of the reasons why I'm also interested in this is under Pete Hegseth and his Defense Department posture, which says we need to be more lethal, we need to streamline the red tape, he has downgraded some attorneys. He has said they shouldn't be clouding or muddying the line of decision-making. Can we expect oversight from a military that is literally downgrading the legal observers, the legal guys? PLITSAS: Sure. So, there's still operations law attorneys who have to review all the strikes that are going on. So, US Central Command, which is our military command that's responsible for the Middle East and Central Asia, is overseeing this at a four-star level, which is Admiral Brad Cooper. He has lawyers in there as well that review the strike packages when they come in and make sure that they're legal. We're not seeing illegal targets being struck. These all appear to be to conform with the law. CORNISH: But do you know what I mean, are the watchers there? Are the watchmen doing any watching?  PLITSAS: So, at the command where it's happening, yes, and then I think the question for you is an oversight, right, at the most senior level. So, at least it appears now the Pentagon is investigating and they're going to come forth with the report, so I think we'll find out very quickly if the oversight is as robust as it is. (...)

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth told reporters Friday that they should replace their fake news headlines about the war with Iran with honest ones – and provided examples. “I used to be in that business and I know everything is written intentionally,” Hegseth said, taking on the unjustifiably negative spin of legacy media headlines used to mislead the public. “Allow me to make a few suggestions,” Hegseth told the reporters: “For example, a banner or a headline: ‘Mideast War Intensifies.’ Splashing on the screen the last couple of days, alongside visuals of civilian or energy targets that Iran has hit because that’s what they do. “What should the banner read, instead? “How about: ‘Iran Increasingly Desperate’ – because they are. They know it and so do you, if it can be admitted.”   .@SECWAR JUST LIT UP THE FAKE NEWS: pic.twitter.com/oAnTZbOuaC — DOW Rapid Response (@DOWResponse) March 13, 2026   “Or more fake news from CNN, [which] reports ‘the Trump Administration underestimated the war’s impact on the Strait of Hormus,’” Hegseth said, declaring the claim “Patently ridiculous, of course.” “CNN doesn’t think we’ve thought of that. It’s a fundamentally unserious report,” he explained, continuing on: “Another example of a fake headline that I saw yesterday: ‘War Widening.’ “Here’s a real headline for you for a patriotic press. How about: ‘Iran Shrinking, Going Underground.’ “You see, Iran’s leaders are hiding in bunkers and moving into civilian areas.” “The only think that is widening is our advantage. Not to mention, our Gulf partners stepping up even more now, going on the offensive,” Sec. Hegseth noted.

Clay Waters just demonstrated for us how PBS and reporters like Minnesota-based Fred de Sam Lazaro sound like lobbyists for illegal immigrants. This is so-called "public" broadcasting, which until recently was subsidized by American taxpayers. The same thing is happening at National “Public” Radio. On Thursday’s Morning Edition, they aired a story under the online headline “Blue cities in red states debate over how to respond to efforts to resist ICE.” Democrats want to resist any attempt to deport people, and that’s the only people Austin-based reporter Mose Buchele talked to for this report. NPR host Steve Inskeep introduced it: “In many Republican-led states, police officers are required to cooperate with federal immigration agents. [Horrors!] And that leaves liberal cities in those conservative states debating how to respond when they don't want to spend time on immigration enforcement.” In other words, they don’t want any immigration enforcement. A state law (that the Left hates) prohibits police departments from telling officers they cannot contact federal immigration agents. The reporter explained: MOSE BUCHELE:  In Texas, state police are empowered to arrest suspected unauthorized immigrants. Many counties partner with ICE to get grants and funding. Those agreements will become mandatory for all counties by the end of the year. And [Austin police chief Lisa] Davis said Texas cities cannot prevent local officers from calling ICE if they see fit. LISA DAVIS: There is a rule of law that I have to follow as the chief of police here in the state of Texas. But what we can do... (BOOING) Leftists booing the "rule of law"? It depends on what the meaning of the "rule of law" is, apparently. Davis ends up sounding like the most right-leaning speaker in the piece.  BUCHELE: It was a tense evening. On one side, local officials explaining that breaking state law could lead to cuts to funding or them getting removed from office, on the other side, many in the audience calling for resistance, no matter the cost. Robert Saulter is a criminal defense lawyer who was one of the most vocal that night. ROBERT SAULTER: There is nothing that prevents this police chief, these city council members from refusing to cooperate with the state. BUCHELE: Heated public debates like this have also erupted in San Antonio, Dallas and Houston. Democratic cities in Tennessee, Georgia and Florida are also seeing locals push back against red state laws that mandate ICE-police partnerships. Later, NPR explains that Davis can't tell her officers not to contact ICE, but she can encourage "higher-ups" to release illegal immigrants before ICE arrives. BUCHELE: Officers can still contact ICE. But the new rules will give police higher-ups a say in whether they can hold people until ICE arrives to arrest them. DAVIS: And I can tell you, the priority is not waiting for ICE to respond on a civil detainer. BUCHELE: Officials think it's a way to thread the needle between local priorities [amnesty/sanctuary] and state law. But after the event, immigrant advocate Carmen Zuvieta said it won't help people who fear deportation feel any better about calling the police for help. CARMEN ZUVIETA: (Speaking Spanish). BUCHELE: "To gain confidence, you have to earn it. And nothing they're doing is giving us confidence," she said. For NPR News, I'm Mose Buchele in Austin. That ending is a chef-kiss of anti-ICE bias -- the dissatisfied leftists get to chew out the local cops in Spanish, and no one cringes at the notion that immigration policy is being run by people who don't feel the need to speak English. No one identifies leftists as leftists. They get generically positive descriptions like "immigrant advocate." It turns out Zuvieta is with the "Austin Sanctuary Network" -- and this meeting didn't happen this week! Buchele reported this story for Austin NPR station KUT on February 6.  Nowhere in this entire story on leftists pressuring the blue-city cops is any quote or argument from a Republican, from Gov. Greg Abbott on down. Their principle: Who needs both sides of the public on a "public" radio show?  

The hits just kept coming for CNN this week. Amid criticism of the network’s biased reporting from Iran, bias about the conflict, and how they got access to the country, two high-ranking CNN officials were caught at the Iranian Embassy in London attending a celebration for the founding of the Islamic regime. Additionally, the daytime edition of CNN News Central on Thursday aired four-uninterrupted minutes of Iranian state television delivering a purported written statement from the latest ayatollah, who’s in a coma. On March 12, the U.K.-based newspaper The Telegraph published an article about the unfolding scandal engulfing Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government where his Foreign Ministry attended a February 12 celebration at the Iranian Embassy to mark the founding of the Islamic Republic. The party was happening at the same time they were slaughtering thousands of their own citizens in the streets. The newspaper reported: Foreign Office staff attended a party at the Iranian embassy to celebrate the Islamic revolution just weeks after the regime massacred thousands of its own people. As smartly dressed guests, including UK civil servants, gathered at the London event, embassy officials hailed Iran’s “remarkable accomplishments” in spite of “unjust” Western sanctions. Video footage shows attendees standing in silence for a rendition of Iran’s national anthem. On the same day as the event, Feb 12, the US-based group Human Rights Activists News Agency announced that at least 7,000 people had been killed in Iran, including 219 children. Anti-regime campaigners previously said up to 30,000 protesters may have been murdered. In one of the images captured by Iranian state media (pictured above), Iran Press and shared by The Telegraph, CNN London bureau chief Andrew Roy and CNN chief global affairs correspondent Matthew Chance can be seen meeting and shaking hands with Iran's Ambassador to the U.K., Seyed Ali Mousavi. The CNN officials didn’t appear to be attending to event as journalists. No camera crew are visible and neither was there any form of recording equipment. No voice recorders. No note pads. No visible press credentials that would show they were there for work. As of the publication of this piece (March 13, 2026), Chance had not filed any report about it. According to his profile page on the CNN website, the only things he reported on in February were about Ukraine and Russia. A SnapStream search of on-air reports from Matthew Chance confirmed this.     Neither Roy nor Chance had even posted on X about attending the regime party. As of the publication of this piece, CNN was the only American outlet to be granted permission by the regime to operate inside country during the current conflict. Senior international correspondent Fred Pleitgen was their man on the ground. It’s unclear if the connects made during the Embassy celebration played a role in CNN scoring permission. In a statement to NewsBusters, a CNN spokesperson defended Roy and Chance attending the party for the regime, saying: “Journalists attend different functions as part of normal work as an opportunity to speak with government officials whom they cover. The individuals photographed were there briefly for that reason and joined journalists from several different news outlets at this event.” These are the questions we asked: -Why was CNN attending an Iranian Embassy event to celebrate the creation of the Iranian regime that has murdered thousands of its own people? -If they were there to cover it, why was no report apparently filed? -Did Roy or Chance press the ambassador on the reports of slaughtered civilians? -Did their connections with the Embassy play a role in CNN getting permission to operate in the country? Things weren’t looking particularly good for CNN. Not only did their journalists attend a party for the regime, but part of Thursday’s CNN News Central ran four-uninterrupted minutes of Iranian state television announcing the new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei and reading a purported statement written by him.   IRGCNN Yesterday, CNN aired ran four-uninterrupted minutes of Iranian state television announcing the new supreme leader and reading a purported statement written by him. We later found out he's been in a coma. pic.twitter.com/DOn9eELkIT — Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) March 13, 2026   Only later did the world find out that Mojtaba was actually comatose and missing a leg following an airstrike. “Due to his condition, he does not know of the ongoing war, the death of his family members, including his wife and son and of his own election as Supreme leader, the source said,” reported the U.K.-based Daily Mail. On sharing Iranian state TV, a CNN spokesperson told NewsBusters: “The world is watching with anticipation which direction this war will take. Purported remarks from Iran’s new Supreme Leader are a critical component in helping audiences understand where this conflict is heading and were aired for their obvious news value.”

Americans’ personal savings rate jumped to its highest level in six months in January, as seasonally-adjusted tax expenditures dropped, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) reported Friday. The BEA report for January 2026 was originally scheduled for February 26, 2026, was rescheduled until Friday due to the record-long government shutdown, spanning from October into November, caused by Congressional Democrats’ refusal to approve a continuing resolution to keep the government open by maintaining previous spending levels. At 4.5%, the personal savings rate in January rose from 4.0% in December, hitting the highest level since last July when it was also 4.5%. The savings rate is calculated by dividing Disposable Personal Income - which is income remaining (savings) after current taxes and expenditures – by total personal income. Total personal income increased 0.4% from the previous month, up from December’s 0.3% increase from November. The increase in personal income in January primarily reflected increases in compensation, personal dividend income, and personal current transfer receipts. Disposable Personal Income (DPI) increased 0.9%, up from December’s 0.3% gain. Adjusted for inflation, DPI rose 0.7% - up from 0.0% in December and the largest increase since March of 2025. Consumer spending, which accounts for about two-thirds of the U.S. economy, rose 0.4% in January, matching the previous month’s increase. Monthly taxes declined a seasonally-adjusted 3.2% from December to January. The Social Security Fairness Act signed by President Donald Trump last July went into effect in January, contributing to the decline. BEA’s Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) price index, which factors takes into account higher the cost of goods and services and is used as a measure of inflation, increased 0.3% in January after rising 0.4% in December. Excluding the volatile food and energy sectors, the so-called “core” PCE index advanced 0.4%, the same as it did the prior month. The PCE index is the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation measure used in determining interest rate changes in its pursuit of a target inflation rate of 2.0%. The January PCE index rose 2.8% from a year earlier, while the core number increased 3.1%.