Media

Fox News says South Carolina Senate seat is no longer 'solid Republican'

Reports say President Donald Trump spent $5 million on ads supporting U.S. Senate candidate Darline Graham hours before Fox News announced it was shifting the South Carolina race from "solid Republican" to "likely Republican."

Graham has had several very public missteps, particularly during her primary debate against Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.).

While the Fox News network leans heavily to the right, political experts generally consider Fox polling to be reliable. It's all the more shocking that both the network and the Republicans see a shift happening. The Republicans clearly saw enough movement in the polls to do a last-minute infusion of cash for the GOP candidate.

Graham, the late Senator's sister, saw rough polling throughout the summer, but as of early September she's seen more and more support turn in her direction.

With 28 days until the election, Fox said they still see an 11-point advantage for Democratic candidates on the generic ballot.

According to Fox, doubts about Graham remain enough to shift the polling.

"There are lingering questions about Graham’s ability to turn out a broad spectrum of Republican voters against a Democratic candidate who, like her counterparts in Kansas and Nebraska, is pushing hard on the price of diesel," the report said. It was enough for Fox News to see that she'll likely win, but they have less assurance than previously.

Trump has already appeared in the state once to beg his supporters to come out for Graham. Axios reported Tuesday morning that he's also thrown an extra $5 million her way.

Meanwhile, the same poll shows Trump is down 23 points in approval. It puts him at 38 percent, slightly better than it has been over the summer.

Fox now sees a longer list of states that "could surprise Republicans" than those that could "surprise Democrats." The results show that there are possibilities of upsets in Arkansas, Florida, Ohio, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Carolina and South Dakota.

In Arkansas, Vice President JD Vance sent a letter supporting Sen. Tom Cotton (R), warning that Democrats would invest millions in the race and that their votes were desperately needed. Cotton has outspent his Democratic opponent 65 to 1. That said, in 2020, when Cotton was up for reelection, he spent less than $1 million. Now he has thrown $13.6 million to ensure he makes it through November.

An August poll by Talk Business & Politics-Hendrix College Poll of 1,217 likely voters showed Cotton at 44 percent while his Democratic challenger, Hallie Shoffner, was at 47.4 percent. A Libertarian in the race may be hurting Cotton. He holds nearly 3 percent of the voters. Only 5.65 percent remain undecided.

The problem is that Trump is now in a very public feud with Cotton over daylight saving time. Over the weekend Trump raged that people should call Cotton's personal cell phone to lobby him into passing the Sunshine Protection Act of 2026.

Republicans did their own polling in September showing Cotton with a larger lead over Shoffner than the Talk Business numbers. However, enthusiasm may help the Second Congressional District, where Democrats think they may have a chance.

The Fox numbers also show that while Democrats appear to be ahead in several races, it's within the margin of error. States like Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, Ohio and Texas are close enough that Election Day turnout will likely decide whether Democrats can win in those states or not.

MAGA piles on Karoline Leavitt as she ditches family for Fox News stint

Former White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s move to Fox News drew mockery Monday from critics who pointed to her continued presence inside President Donald Trump’s political and media orbit just two months after she left the administration to spend time with her family.

Fox News has confirmed that Leavitt, who is 29 years old, will be joining the network as an on-air contributor with her start date being Nov. 1, and she will appear on both its news and opinion programs. Suzanne Scott, CEO of Fox News Media, stated that Leavitt's experience gained during her time in the White House and on the campaign trail gives her a “distinct understanding of today’s political landscape.”

Amy Siskind took notice of the announcement, writing on X that "Karoline Leavitt is going to work at Fox News" and stating that "the cycle of MAGA life and reinforcement loop continues".

Siskind, author of The List: A Week-by-Week Reckoning of Trump’s First Year, has long been a critic of Trump and a political activist.

It also brought back doubts regarding Leavitt's reason for leaving the White House in August. Back then, she had stated that, after the birth of her daughter, she did not think it was possible to give her two young children the things they needed while at the same time spending the time and energy required of a press secretary.

President Trump also announced that Leavitt was resigning so as to spend more time with her children and family, adding that she would still remain one of his top external advisers.

A self-styled "MAGA patriot" on X referred to those statements following the announcement on Monday and claimed that Leavitt had abandoned the reason she had given for her departure.

“Sorry folks, no more integrity left here, someone sold out,” the user wrote, adding, “pray for her children and her family.”

Progressive commentator Jamie Bonkiewicz also hammered Leavitt on the same point, writing on X, "I guess Karoline Leavitt had enough of being a stay-at-home mom and taking care of her grandpa husband."

Greg Gutfeld had already made a joke about exactly this situation the day after Leavitt announced that she was leaving the White House.

“There is a concern that she will join Fox, which would then leave us with three women,” Gutfeld said on The Five in August, when referring to the Fox personalities Dana Perino and Kayleigh McEnany, who had both been White House press secretaries. Co-host Emily Compagno later made the joke that Gutfeld was trying to get her off the show “to make room for Karoline.”

Leavitt has stayed closely linked with Trump ever since she left office. She went back to MAGA Inc., the superPAC that supported Trump and where she had previously worked, and has continued appearing often on Fox.

She said that she intends to bring to her new position at Fox the "unique perspective and candor" gained during her time in the Trump administration.

Top CNN anchor hides 'subtle dig' against Trump in live broadcast

Amid his ongoing feud with CNN and other outlets, one of the network's top anchors snuck in a "subtle dig" at President Donald Trump during a recent live broadcast, per The Daily Beast.

Kaitlan Collins is a prominent host and former chief White House correspondent for CNN and has gained significant attention in recent years for Trump's particular animosity towards her. During a 2023 town hall event, in response to Collins grilling him about the classified documents he hoarded at Mar-a-Lago, Trump lashed out and called her a "nasty person."

As The Daily Beast noted in its report from Saturday, "Trump’s attacks on Collins have become even more frequent" since the start of his second term, calling her part of "Fake News CNN" in a social media post from December, and lambasting her as "always Stupid and Nasty."

Trump's anger has become even more notable amid his ongoing attempts to ban CNN, MS NOW and Politico from entering the White House. The president himself has repeatedly said that the ban is due to negative coverage from each outlet, while his legal team has attempted to argue in court that there is no legal requirement to allow outlets into the White House and that the targeted outlets have failed to meet certain supposed professional standards. The ban has been struck down multiple times in court, but reporters for the three outlets have continued to be denied White House access nonetheless.

As The Daily Beast highlighted, Collins appeared to take aim at Trump in a subtle manner during a recent broadcast, by way of a prominently placed mug on the anchor's desk of her program, The Source, reading: "America Needs Nasty Women."

"After the ban was overturned by one of Trump’s own judicial appointees on First Amendment grounds, the president then kicked CNN off Air Force One and bluntly antagonized Collins, singling her out for criticism and telling her she 'shouldn’t be here,'" The Daily Beast detailed further. "Time published a lengthy interview with Trump this week in which he lashed out at Collins while ranting about how the media only covers negative stories."

“So at a certain point, you say, ‘What’s the purpose of, like, this crazy Kaitlan Collins?’ She’s a very average person. She’s the most unhappy young person I’ve ever seen,“ Trump said during the interview. "If I did something spectacular by any standard, and they would write about it, they will only write badly."

Trump reveals who he wanted to replace Karoline Leavitt — but lost out on

President Donald Trump spoke with reporters on the South Lawn of the White House Thursday ahead of one of his trips to campaign in a red state. Among the comments he made was high praise for Fox News' Peter Doocy.

A reporter asked, "What are you looking for in a new press secretary?"

"We have a lot of people that want that job. I would say many of them are right here," Trump replied. "Would you like that job? Maybe a guy like Peter. But he's making too much money. He's gone. I lost him as soon as he negotiated his last contract."

Trump praised Doocy at one point, saying that he respects the Fox correspondent and that he has “always been very nice to me."

A dust-up in March 2026 stands out as one of the moments that drew anger from the president when Doocy asked Trump if Russia was helping Iran target U.S. forces. It has now been revealed that Russia has been helping Iran in its war with the U.S.

At the time, however, Trump called it a “stupid question,” though he repeated that he respected Doocy.

Trump also mocked Doocy at the White House Correspondents' Dinner for being "tongue-tied."

“They call me [the most transparent president in history]. You know who calls me that? Karoline. That’s about it. Would anybody else call me that? I think Peter would call me that. Am I the most transparent? [Former President Joe] Biden never used to answer your questions. He’d ask Biden 20 questions; he’d never get an answer. Who’s the most transparent president, Peter?”

Doocy didn't answer, so Trump commented, “Look at him, it’s the first time he’s tongue-tied. I cannot believe it. Oh, he’s not going to be happy tomorrow.”

Former press secretary Karoline Leavitt left the White House after returning from maternity leave. She said she would like to spend more time with her young children.

For months, CNN pundit Scott Jennings has been campaigning for the gig, and it has been reported by Politico's "Playbook" that Trump was asking allies whether they thought Jennings would be a good fit. Since that report, however, the president hasn't pulled the trigger on a hire.

When asked about it more specifically, Trump said he had a "mountain" of people to consider. MAGA world doesn't want Jennings, the New York Post reported.

Trump flips as he deprives himself of something he craves 'really badly'

Donald Trump's plan to punish the press has backfired, according to The New Republic's Daily Blast podcast, as a recent tantrum from the president showed how he has deprived himself of something he "really badly" craves.

On the Monday edition of The Daily Blast, host Greg Sargent welcomed commentator Paul Waldman to discuss Trump's ongoing press ban, which remains a source of scandal for the administration. Last week, MS NOW, CNN and Politico were barred from entering the White House after Trump accused them of knowingly spreading “fake news” about him. Despite various court orders mandating that the outlets be allowed back, the administration continued to try to block them.

During his conversation with Waldman, Sargent highlighted a “funny and revealing” moment that exposed how the ban has backfired against Trump.

“As you mentioned, news organizations banded together. They did this by agreeing to suspend the pool coverage,” Sargent detailed. “And as a result, participating networks didn’t end up covering Xi Jinping’s arrival at the White House.”

“Yeah, you’d have to think so, because this was really the worst outcome possible for him,” Waldman responded. “I mean, he lives to be on television… and you can just imagine how infuriated he must have been when this state visit from Xi Jinping — that he had been so looking forward to, and he was going to show off his helipad that he must have made sure was going to be finished in time for Xi to get here, and they rolled out a literal red carpet, and all this was going to make for great TV.

He continued: “Trump loves to put on a show. And then it wasn’t broadcast, and all these news organizations did reports on it with, you know — TV news did reports on it with still photos, because they didn’t have audio and video, because the pools weren’t there. And that must have just killed him.”

Sargent noted further that Trump did, in fact, lash out against the agencies for what he saw as their lacking coverage of the “magnificent” visit from Xi, accusing them of refusing to cover the event because they did not want “credit to be given to Trump.”

Waldman argued that this was a “reflection of his genuine sentiment,” given how much Trump craves media attention.

“He wants their attention,” he added. “But he also wants to be in this kind of conflict with them. That’s been the story since he was a young real estate developer in New York, trying to get onto the gossip pages of the New York tabloids. And this sort of push and pull, back and forth, is something that, when you’re the president, it has to be done with some subtlety. And Trump doesn’t have a lot of subtlety. And so he just went too far this time. And the news organizations said, you know, we’re not going to do it.”

'Remarkable' pool report reveals Trump’s praise of 'friendly' China press

A new pool report on Thursday revealed that President Donald Trump gushed about the Chinese Communist Party media. Meanwhile, Chinese officials were concerned about the lack of press coverage for the events.

China is infamous for its government control over the media. The CCP treats control of information as essential to maintaining political power, so it generally doesn't allow the independent press to freely investigate or challenge the party, organize dissent or publish reporting the government sees as threatening to social stability or its legitimacy.

But on Thursday, even they were concerned about the way Trump had lost his press pool.

White House correspondent Alayna Treene, reporting on the battle to restore the media, called the report "remarkable."

"U.S. and Chinese photographers were separated from the pool and brought in for two sprays with the president, according to two of the photographers who were present. During the second spray, Trump made a joke about how the Chinese had the friendliest press corps," the pool report also said.

Treene said, "I mean, that is an incredible statement in this pool note from this print reporter. Her name is Carrie Pickett with The Washington Times. And you talked about this, Dana [Bash]. But I mean, the irony of this is pretty amazing, particularly, you know, as you mentioned, the Chinese Communist Party reporters are the state media."

She explained that the U.S. wasn't the only one who was hoping for broad coverage.

"Typically there would be wall-to-wall coverage of every single event and every single speech that the president and the Chinese president and the Chinese leader are giving. But we were also told, according to a source, that Chinese officials had told people at the White House that they were concerned about the level of coverage as well," Treene said.

Bash busted out with laughter.

"And so I think it's really important to note the timing of this and how people at the White House aren't very happy about it coinciding," Treene finished.

Bash apologized for her outburst, "I'm sorry, I just — that — I was, sort of, laughing out of — I don't even know what ... you just said — that it was even the Chinese were concerned about the American media not being in there. I mean, if that doesn't tell you everything you need to know, I don't know what does."

Bash then ran a supercut of all the times that Trump bashed communism.

The 5-year expiration date hidden in Trump’s scheme to control the media

“The Freedom of the Press is one of the great Bulwarks of Liberty, and can never be restrained...” — Founder George Mason, 1776

A CNN insider told Variety magazine yesterday that the mood inside CNN right now is “like a funeral.” Nepo-baby David Ellison, bankrolled by his father who’s one of the richest men in the world and a major Trump suck-up and donor (and is in the Epstein Files), is on the verge of taking over the company that owns the news network.

The day-before-yesterday, California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a group of Democratic state attorneys general rolled over and agreed to stop trying to block the $111 billion takover of Warner Bros. Discovery, now to be almost 50% funded by rightwing dictatorships in the Middle East who’ve given billions in gifts, loans, and investments to Trump and his family.

California Governor and presidential hopeful Gavin Newsom hailed the agreement, saying it would both protect California jobs and preserve CNN’s “editorial independence.”

If you believe that, I’ve got a bridge for you in Brooklyn.

As The Lever reported yesterday, the fine print tells the entire story:

Going forward, CNN and CBS will be overseen by an “editorial independence board” composed of people hand-picked by the Ellisons and their agents. When Rupert Murdoch took over The Wall Street Journal from the Bancroft family back in 2007, he ran the same scam, as CBS News then reported:

“As part of the deal package that cemented Rupert Murdoch's longstanding effort to acquire Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co., the two sides agreed to create an editorial board that would act as a buffer between the media mogul and the newspaper…”

That worked out real well, right?

There are also squishy promises for movies and jobs that are not backed up with any meaningful enforcement mechanism, and all of Ellison’s commitments can be set aside via a force majeure clause that lets Paramount off the hook in the event of “strikes, labor disruptions, [or] economic recessions.” So, all Trump has to do is extend the Iran war another few months to crash our economy and the oligarchs are free to do what they want!

And if that doesn’t happen, there’s still the sunset clause that ends all their commitments in five years. Lee Hepner of the American Economic Liberties Project called it “a countdown to a cliff.”

These are the same billionaires who handed Trump a check for $16 million to “settle” a frivolous lawsuit against 60 Minutes, then cancelled Stephen Colbert’s show days after he referenced that as a “big fat bribe,” then reportedly offered the Trump White House up to $20 million in free “public service announcements” and installed a Trump-humping “ombudsman” at CBS News to police “bias” at the network.

And the FCC, run by Trump’s favorite brown-noser Brendan Carr, has blessed Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar taking a 49.5 percent equity state in the new entity that will control two of the three most important news networks in America.

Don’t expect any future analysis of Saudi involvement in 9/11, critical exploration of what Trump gave up in exchange for a $400 million 747 jet, or the billions that have gone to Kushner and the Trump boys, Uday and Qusay.

Because of momentous decisions made by presidents Reagan and Clinton, freedom of the press in America is now as much an economic issue as a political one. As I laid out in The Hidden History of Monopolies (with a foreword by Ralph Nader), when Reagan came into office 90 percent of the American media landscape was scattered among over 50 companies; now a mere five conglomerates dominate that 90 percent of the media Americans consume.

Reagan stopped enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Act (and others) in 1983, leading to the “M&A Mania” of mergers and acquisitions that characterized the late 1980s and 1990s. As a result, there’s not a single major industry in America that’s not dominated by a handful of companies that generally behave like cartels, and the average American family pays an annual “monopoly tax” — in additional costs for pretty much everything — of around $5,000, according to economist Thomas Philippon.

Cell phone service that costs $15 a month in France or $12 a month in Australia bills out at an average of $61.85 per month in the United States. High-speed broadband that’s a bit over $31 a month in France or $36 in Germany (for higher speeds and better reliability than almost anywhere in the United States) averages nearly $70 per month in the US.

Similar metrics are found with pharmaceuticals, airfares, and medical costs, among dozens of other product and service categories.

But it’s most deadly to democracy when it comes to the media.

Since Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 — which eliminated most of the rules about how many outlets one family or company could own — oligarchic monopoly of the media has spread its cancerous tentacles into politics, as well, destroying the ability of government to make policy that allows free people to make their own decisions about their own lives.

As Teddy Roosevelt, the great trust buster, said:

“There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task...”

And as Adam Smith wrote, in Wealth of Nations,

“...the monopoly which our manufacturers have obtained...like an overgrown standing army, they have become formidable to the government, and upon many occasions intimidate the legislature.”

And this is no small project by billionaires who explicitly distrust democracy and want complete control over America and her people. I’ve seen how this works up-close and personal when a Republican billionaire came after a media business I helped start.

In 2003, Louise and I had sold our last business and were retired in Vermont; that Thanksgiving, we drove to Michigan to visit my family for the holidays and all the way there I kept tuning across the radio dial looking for an intelligent conversation to occupy my mind while driving. In city after city, all I could find was Sean Hannity.

The outcome of that trip was my writing the initial business plan for Air America Radio and starting the radio show I’m still hosting 23 years later as a “proof of concept.” We were leasing stations from Clear Channel and reached over 90 percent of America; many credited Obama’s 2008 victory to our being on the air.

So, of course, billionaire Mitt Romney — with an eye to running for president in 2012 — had his company Bain Capital buy up all of the Clear Channel radio stations and, one at a time, take us off the air until we didn’t have enough of a signal to make money selling advertising. The network died in 2010 (and Romney lost).

The people who own the media pipes, in other words, get to decide what flows through them.

Remember when Uber was offering rides for half the price of taxis, until they’d put so many of the taxi companies out of business? Or Walmart offering goods at little to no margin just to drive local competitors out of business? Monopolists and wannabe monopolists understand exactly how this works.

While Rupert Murdoch reportedly lost an average of $80 to $90 million a year for about five years before Fox News turned a profit, he never viewed that as a loss: it was an investment. Economists Stefano DellaVigna and Ethan Kaplan later did the math and found that Fox News succeeded in shifting 3 to 8 percent of its audience toward the Republican Party, which in Florida alone in the 2000 election was worth more than 10,000 votes for George W. Bush in a state he carried by fewer than 600.

Had there been no Fox “News,” in other words, there would have been no war in Iraq or Afghanistan, and thousands of Americans and millions of Iraqis and Afghans would still be alive. And there would have been no Bush tax cuts, so our national debt would be nowhere near so bad. And Al Gore would have done something about the environment.

This is critical stuff: no democracy can survive the assault of what Jefferson referred to as “an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents” when only one family or political perspective dominates the media.

Franklin D. Roosevelt — the Bernie Sanders of his day — saw all of this coming. On April 29, 1938, in his Message to Congress on the Concentration of Economic Power, he told the country what fascism actually is:

“The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism—ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.”

FDR understood that when a monopolized industry gets big enough, its main rival then becomes the government itself because only the government has enough remaining power to break it up. Adam Smith made the same point in Wealth of Nations in 1776, writing that the East India Company and its allies had, “like an overgrown standing army,” become “formidable to the government” and could “intimidate the legislature.”

The simple reality is that in every country that’s slid from democracy into strongman rule over the past half-century, the first step was capture of the media by friends of the regime.

— Four days after Vladimir Putin was inaugurated in May, 2000, ICE-like masked agents raided the offices of Media-Most, the company that owned Russia’s largest independent national TV network (NTV). They threw its owner, Vladimir Gusinsky, in prison on fraud charges and confiscated his stake in Gazprom, then took over the network with the deal finalized in April of 2001. That same year Boris Berezovsky was forced to sell his share of the ORT network to Roman Abramovich, a fellow oligarch but one who’d pledged his total loyalty to Putin. Within a few years, every national channel in Russia was in the hands of the state or a Putin-friendly billionaire, and still are.

— Viktor Orbán’s people were slightly more sophisticated in 2018, having his oligarch buddies buy up media properties after he sued dissenters into bankruptcy by claiming libel. By the following year, the media monitor Mérték estimated that 77.8 percent of Hungary’s news media was directly or indirectly controlled by Orbán’s party, which is why when Péter Magyar successfully ran against Orbán he had to visit virtually every city and town in the country to get around the media blackout on his candidacy.

— In Egypt, el-Sisi was less elegant in his approach to the media. He had his version of the FBI — the General Intelligence Service — use a front company called Eagle Capital to buy up virtually every TV network, radio station, and newspaper in the country. Reporters Without Borders found that a dozen once-powerful media owners were pushed to sell to intelligence-linked companies, while the handful of businessmen who backed Sisi got to keep theirs. The spy agency’s media group now owns the ON, CBC, Al-Hayah, and DMC networks, and those Egyptian journalists who dared criticize the regime all went to prison.

— Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines used regulatory power the same way Trump lickspittle Brendan Carr’s FCC does. The country’s largest newspaper, the Philippine Daily Inquirer, was forced to sell to a billionaire Duterte ally under threat of imprisonment for breaking “media rules.” Duterte’s rightwing buddies in Congress then refused to renew the broadcast franchise of ABS-CBN, the nation’s biggest network, which had made the mistake of exposing the extrajudicial killings of his so-called drug war. Eleven thousand people lost their jobs, and Nobel laureate Maria Ressa’s little opposition newspaper The Rappler was ordered shut.

Almost without exception, this is the process autocrats use to destroy democracies, as documented brilliantly by people like Timothy Snyder and Ruth Ben-Ghiat.

First the strongman’s friends acquire the newsrooms, then the coverage softens, then the elections start experiencing “anomalies,” and by the time most people notice, there’s nobody left on the air to expose the oligarchs and fascists.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1786:

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”

So, here we are. Bonta and Newsom have caved, and only the attorneys general of New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Minnesota tried to hold out. You may want to call your own state attorney general and ask where they were on this case; you should be able to easily find their number with a quick internet search.

WSJ: 'Republicans are now in political danger' thanks to Trump

President Donald Trump's agricultural policies are leaving one of his staunchest groups of supporters, farmers, in the lurch. As they increasingly turn against him because the Iran war, tariffs and mass deportations, a conservative newspaper — The Wall Street Journal — warns that he is leaving Republicans overall "in danger."

"While Mr. Trump can claim all he wants that foreigners pay his tariffs, Deere & Co. said on an earnings call last month that it expects 'direct tariff expense of approximately $1.1 billion for the fiscal year,'" the editorial board wrote on Wednesday. "That figure doesn’t include the refunds the company is getting for the tariffs that the Supreme Court held illegal, but it’s a show of the burden. Mr. Trump’s border taxes filter through supply chains to all kinds of parts and equipment, making it harder for farmers when they buy tractors, combines, harvesters and planters."

They added, "Likewise, Mr. Trump can say over and over that the U.S. doesn’t need anything from Canada, but the Farm Belt knows it depends on potash fertilizer from America’s northern neighbor. Mr. Trump’s latest 50 percent tariffs on Canada specifically didn’t apply to potash, which ought to be telling. Some Canadians, however, have debated using their potash as leverage against the U.S. if trade tensions escalate."

Overall they concluded that, as a result of how Trump's policies are hurting farmers, "Republicans are now in political danger in Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska, states that 'oughta be fat guy layups for us,' as Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy put it last week."

They added, "If the administration wants farming in the U.S. to be easier, then stop the policies that make it harder."

Speaking with AlterNet in September, Dr. Karl Widerquist, a Georgetown University in Qatar professor, explained how Trump's policies are hurting farmers.

"The supply chains go back and forth across the border — you've gotta know what's going back and forth across the border," Widerquist told AlterNet. "You've gotta really be an expert in very specific industries. Some goods might pass the border three and four times. You'd take oil from Canada and put it in a combine in the United States to make wheat, and you send it up to Canada for processing, send it back to the United States to sell it as food, not to mention adding a bunch of packaging who knows where. You have a really complex supply chain. So tariffs aren't as simple as these. Used to be it was our industries and their industries, put a tariff on their industries, that's gonna help our industries, at least in that sector."

“Y'all know the Farm Bill is socialism; y'all know that, right?” Michael Steele said on MS NOW at the time. “I mean, when you start talking about socialism, it's socialism for you. It's not socialism when I'm accessing the system and I'm getting that SNAP check, and I'm getting that welfare check, and I'm getting that free lunch program, and I'm getting those things that, because I cannot afford it, are part of a safety net. And I wish we would just fundamentally get off our lazy behinds and start understanding how this government uses all of those tools to provide for its citizens.”

Tuberville torn apart for claim Alabama voters can 'deal' with high costs

All a CNN panel could do was laugh at Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) with his latest claim about voters in his state.

Speaking to the candidate for Alabama governor on Tuesday, CNN's Manu Raju asked what people in Alabama think about the affordability crisis, specifically the impact of high fuel costs.

"Obviously, gas prices are high. They've been high before," said Tuberville. "People deal with that. They know it's going to go up and down. What's — what's affecting us right now in Alabama — this is harvest season for farmers. And diesel is high. But you know, our people in Alabama know that, you know, they voted for President Trump. They know he — they gave him the opportunity to go back and and, uh—"

Raju cut him off, asking, "They're willing to pay higher prices, you think?"

"Yeah, they're — yeah, sure they are," claimed Tuberville.

"David, are they willing to pay higher prices in Alabama?" Raju asked David Chalian.

Chalian and others on the panel laughed. "I don't know any — have you ever met anyone who was like, 'Oh, sure! Happy to pay higher prices at the pump!' I've never met that. That doesn't mean that there aren't people who don't agree that Iran shouldn't have a nuclear weapon. There are lots of people who agree with that, but I have not heard anyone say, 'I want to pay more at the gas pump.'"

Chalian said that it seemed "a little discordant here."

The panel also discussed the disconnect with Trump's political team, who don't appear to see that Republicans are now running away from the president and want nothing to do with him in the election. Trump has claimed he will spend the entire month of October campaigning for Republicans.

Even his most solid fans, like Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.), recently scrubbed his campaign website of any mention of Trump and his connections to the president.

Rep. Maria Salazar (R-Fla.) last week released campaign commercial taking Trump to task for going too far with his deportation efforts by removing law-abiding immigrants who have nothing to do with drug cartels or violent crimes

Rachel Maddow has theory about Trump’s latest outburst

President Donald Trump's latest outburst was reportedly inspired by anger at one particular news network, and one of its top anchors has a theory about why he decided to go after three outlets instead of just the one.

The White House this week enacted Trump's demand to ban MS NOW, CNN and Politico from the White House, with the president accusing the networks of "constantly" reporting "fake news" about him. The move was widely condemned as a blatant attack on the First Amendment, prompting a lawsuit from the targeted networks and a boycott by the entire White House press pool.

Despite also banning CNN and Politico, subsequent reports revealed that Trump's outburst was inspired by a montage of only MS NOW anchors saying negative things about him, which was shown to him by close aide Natalie Harp. In a Wednesday interview with Pod Save America co-host Jon Lovett, Rachel Maddow, the veteran correspondent and top anchor at MS NOW, said that the press ban lined up with a theory she has developed for why the president has not targeted her network more often, despite how often they report stories that are critical of him.

"I have always had this theory that Trump doesn't come after MS NOW more than he does other news organizations — even though I think of all the mainstream media organizations, we're probably the most critical of him," Maddow explained. "I've always thought that he maybe doesn't come after us in a more concerted way because he's talked himself into the idea that that will help us, right? That that will elevate us, and so he shouldn't pay us attention because we're always going to be, you know, who we are and that it'll only help us, and therefore hurt him to give us too much attention."

She continued: "So he decides to sort of diffuse the attention on us by bringing in these other news organizations. But in so doing, he ends up taking this swipe that just seems sort of weird and inchoate and also very clarifying to the news business that this is the kind of thing that we ought to all stand up against together."

Elsewhere in the interview, Lovett pressed Maddow about what her immediate reaction was upon hearing about Trump's ban on MS NOW and other networks. As she explained, after it became clear that it was a real thing and not just a threat, the ban made it clear to her how desperate Trump has become.

"Oh, he's playing the hits," Maddow said. "Like. this is him doing the YMCA two-fisted dance. This is him doing a thing that he knows he can get the kind of reaction that he wants from the people who love him the most or the people who share his authoritarian, you know, dreams with him. And he's just hoping to return to safer ground. He wants the kind of attention that he wants, and he's getting attention for all sorts of stuff that he doesn't want. For having this record-low approval rating, and for the economy being in the toilet, and the Iran war, and the impending midterms, and all of his, like, falling asleep in public, and like, it's all bad news about him right now. So he wants to go back to playing the hits, getting the kind of attention that he wants on the terms that he wants it, and I think that's why he did it."

Right-wing network called out for endangering Trump motorcade

The streaming channel Real America Voice on Tuesday shared video of the presidential motorcade, a move former White House Press Association president Weijia Jiang explained is big no-no.

"NYPD is going ALL OUT to protect President Trump as he travels through NYC tonight, on his way back to DC. THANK YOU, NYPD," cheered conservative Nick Sortor, sharing video from the parade of vehicles carrying the president. "And thank you [Real America Voice] for showing us RAW footage of how difficult it is to keep President Trump safe."

Sortor doesn't work directly for Real America Voice as a White House correspondent, but is a frequent guest and contributor or featured personality.

As CBS' Jiang explained, the members of the White House Correspondents' Association "are advised not to air any video of taillights because it is a potential risk to the security of the motorcade."

Reporters in the pool drive with the president in the parade of cars that follows him.

Monday, Jiang explained to a far-right commentator that the streaming channel may have the ability to film things going on with the president, but it doesn't have the ability to "POOL" coverage. When they get video, they're using it for themselves, not as part of a pool. The pool means that various outlets work together to share video because "in spaces like the Oval [Office] there’s not enough room for every outlet, which is what makes the pool necessary to ensure everyone (including RAV) has the footage."

Several conservatives have claimed that the pool isn't necessary because anyone with a cell phone camera could do the job. Newsmax inadvertently revealed what that looks like when it attempted to cover a Trump photo-opp at the White House on Monday. That video had no audio attached.

As CNN explained, "The pool has evolved over time, adding different types of media organizations to accommodate shifts in how Americans consume news. But the mission has largely remained the same: to bear witness in person to the president’s words and actions, ask questions when possible and share that information and imagery with colleagues at other outlets, and by extension the public."

When Trump returned to office in 2025, his press office enacted changes to how the press pool would work. Wire services that once had permanent slots in the pool, including Reuters and the Associated Press, were no longer given daily access but were allowed to continue on a rotating basis.

A wire service isn't like a single newspaper or single site. It supplies reporting to other news organizations like local newspapers, magazines, digital outlets and local television stations.

Karoline Leavitt torn apart after podcast claim sparks brutal pile-on

Former White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt spoke out for the first time since leaving the White House last month to spend more time with her family. Few, however, are buying her story.

Leavitt appeared on the "Hang Out with Sean Hannity" podcast, claiming that the press briefing room is largely "performative," though she admitted it comes from both sides.

She claimed that reporters have to get their soundbite "on the evening news."

"There's been times reporters have even said to me, ‘I'm sorry I had to ask that today. My bosses really wanted me to ask that, they know it's an unfair question,’" she said.

"The reporters are controlled by their bosses … They're not in control of their own livelihood," she told Sean Hannity. "They are dictated by the editors and the execs at some of these companies."

Leavitt said that the reporters are being controlled by those on the far-left who run their networks.

"We're seeing some changes at some networks, but most of them are controlled by far-left liberals who live in New York or D.C., and they dictate what's asked and what's written," Leavitt claimed. "We are not asking for like positive puff pieces every day, just fairness, truth, accuracy, just telling a story or writing about factual information."

Folks weren't buying it, though.

The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson labeled it a "mountain of horse——."

Long-time reporter and columnist Brian Karem agreed. "Horse——. This woman was a 'pep' secretary and has NO credibility. She lied with impunity — this sounds like she is talking about herself."

Attorney and former mayor Will Cox said, "Gimme a break.

Emmy Award-winning reporter Phil Gianficaro commented, "I’ll take 'things that never happened' for $200, Ken."

"Out of all the things that didn’t happen, this didn’t happen the most," said one man.

Politico columnist Jonathan Martin also disagreed that it ever happened by mocking one of Trump's frequently used embellishments for his stories: "When she said it was 'a big guy with tears in his eyes' who called Trump 'sir?' She really sold you out," he said tagging reporter Josh Dawsey.

Kari Baxter Donovan, a Trump supporter, claimed, "I believe her. I know some of them. There are some good people in that mix."

"Nonsense. They basically kiss ass to get coverage and rarely asked or followed up on tough questions," said a man who calls himself a "Christian" and "Husband."



DOJ fumes at 'Trumpalooza' media coverage in 'exceptionally weak' filing

President Donald Trump escalated his war against the mainstream media with a White House ban against CNN, MS NOW and Politico, resulting in a major civil lawsuit from those media outlets. The Trump-era U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Politico's Kyle Cheney reports, defended the ban in a Tuesday night, September 22 filing. But attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr. is attacking the Trump DOJ's arguments as "exceptionally weak."

Cheney, in a Wednesday morning thread on X, explains, "NEW: DOJ is justifying President Trump's ban on media orgs by citing stories about sensitive topics like depleted U.S. munitions, the war in Iran, Trump's ballroom security features and ... bad 'vibes' at the GOP midterm convention."

Cheney and colleague Josh Gerstein, in Politico, report, "In a court filing Tuesday night, the Justice Department defended Trump's decision to ban Politico, CNN and MS NOW from the White House, describing it as a move rooted in the outlets' publication of sensitive information … The filing, a response to an emergency lawsuit brought by the three news organizations demanding immediate restoration of their West Wing access, cited several stories by each outlet, including accounts about the state of the war with Iran, depleted U.S. munition stockpiles and details of a leak probe related to unflattering stories about FBI Director Kash Patel. The filing criticizes Politico for publishing a handout that the Secret Service provided to Senate Republicans to justify the construction of the president's new White House ballroom."

The Politico reporters continue, "The Justice Department brief also attached letters the administration purportedly sent to each outlet earlier Tuesday, citing those stories as the basis for Trump's decision to revoke their White House access, giving them until Friday to contest it. However, the letters — which are unsigned and do not appear on official letterhead — do not claim that any of the cited stories contained classified information. In addition, some of the examples don't appear to have any national security nexus at all. The letter addressed to Politico complains about a report that described bad 'vibes' at the recent GOP midterm convention in Texas."

But according to attorney Boutrous, who is representing the three media outlets in their lawsuit, the Trump DOJ's arguments don't pass the smell test.

Boutrous told Politico, "This is an exceptionally weak response. We look forward to the hearing."

The hearing that Boutrous referenced is set for 3:30 p.m. eastern time on Wednesday, with U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, presiding.

"Kelly presided over a similar legal fight in 2018 triggered by the Trump White House's revocation of CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta's credentials following a dispute about his actions at a press conference," Cheney and Gerstein note. "The judge issued a quick ruling in Acosta's favor, ordering the White House to return his hard pass."

GOP lawmaker says Trump's media bans are against Republican values

A Republican lawmaker, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, is accusing President Donald Trump of betraying Republican values by banning media outlets — including CNN, MS NOW and Politico — because they frequently criticize the president.

"I say this as an old school Republican, I find it so unnecessary," Bacon told CNN anchor Erin Burnett. "We want a free media. It's competitive media. You guys compete with each other and the truth comes out. Even if one media source is not on target, the other ones will cover it."

He added, "And it's good for democracy. And I find that picking a fight with the media is beneath what the White House should be doing and we're better than that. And all these petty fights — it's the media, it's Canada, it's Greenland, it's Canada, or Denmark, it's President Macron and his wife — it's just so unnecessary. I think most of us prefer the president focusing on what we need."

Bacon concluded, "We want to be victorious in Iran and get past this. And we need to also stand up better to Russia and President Xi. I think that's what most Americans want, not petty fights."

Burnett then compared Trump's creation of a news channel entirely devoted to himself, TrumpTV, to North Korea's similar propaganda station that is entirely focused on promoting North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Bacon replied by saying he is encouraged that other media outlets have stood up for CNN, MS NOW and Politico.

"We have a First Amendment that we should protect," Bacon told Burnett. "I know there's a debate whether this is a violation of the First Amendment or not, but when you restrict some media over other media in the White House, the courts have ruled in the past that that's not right. I think they will do so here as well."

He then said, "But in the end, I think this will backfire on the President and even most Republicans."

This is not the first time that Bacon has opposed Trump over behavior that the Nebraskan characterized as petty or beneath the presidency. Earlier in September, he similarly criticized the president for renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America.

"Some of the things he’s done, it smells like chaos, it smells destructive,” Bacon said, describing the renaming as “silly” and adding that “most people think it’s dumb.”

Even when Bacon has agreed with a Trump policy goal, he has often been critical of how the president has pursued it. For example, in August said that he supports Trump's war against Iran but is highly critical of how he has sold it to the public.

“The case was there, but the president tried to go it alone, and that it was going to be a quick fight. ‘We're gonna make a deal tomorrow. We're going to make a deal next week. A deal is imminent,’ [Trump said]. I think these things have undermined this effort,” Bacon said at the time.

“But if we stop this now, Iran wins and Iran could still produce a nuclear weapon," Bacon continued. "Maybe not as soon as it could have, but with China’s or Russia’s help or north Korea’s help, they can rebuild this capability and they will still be the leading exporter of terrorists. I think the president has to keep this blockade on. He's got to prevail in this fight. Because if he doesn't, we're going to have a worse threat on our hands down the road. But he's sort of put us in a spot where he's backed into a corner with this being an unpopular war. And I just – it goes back from the beginning: He had to this had to be a bipartisan effort, not a one man band. But that's what it became.”

https://youtu.be/3A4RdFkpiJw

'Like a fool': One moment sealed 'humiliating' fate of Trump’s new venture

President Donald Trump's scheme to launch a new livestreaming "TV" channel is already getting tarred as a "humiliating" failure," and according to a new analysis from The i Paper, there was one moment that sealed its fate and made him look "like a fool."

On Monday, the same day that Trump's new press ban spiraled into a full-blown scandal, the White House launched an official app and "Trump TV" channel, intended as a "24/7" livestream showcasing the president's "biggest moments all in one place" and his official events. This came after the White House pool launched a boycott of presidential events in solidarity with MS NOW, CNN and Politico.

The launch of the new offering was far from smooth, however, with reactions online trashing the venture as akin to totalitarian "state-run TV" and viewership numbers emerging as dismal. In a Tuesday piece for The i Paper, columnist and reporter James Ball argued that one moment in particular sealed the channel's fate as a "humiliating failure."

"At first, it just seems like the kind of glitch that happens occasionally with live broadcasts," Ball detailed. "A crowd is assembled on the White House lawn, a gaggle of press photographers is ready, and they begin to applaud politely as Donald Trump walks out to unveil a new helipad. The problem, however, is you can barely hear their applause. Instead, the sound is overwhelmed by what appears to be noise from a helicopter. Usually, this kind of glitch lasts for just a few seconds before a professional switches the audio to the right feed."

He continued: "But on the official White House feed — the day it launched its 24/7 'Trump TV' online channel — the terrible, howling audio just continues. The audio is still howling 30 seconds into the clip when Trump shakes hands with dignitaries. As he addresses the assembled crowd with a few remarks 46 seconds in, all we can hear is the occasional word here and there against the relentless hum."

The incident was widely remarked upon online, with observers noting that the helipad event went live with botched audio due to the lack of press pool equipment in light of the ongoing boycott. Amid Trump's collapsing approval ratings, Ball noted that the new helipad might have been one of his few recent "wins," but now, it is "lost to multimedia history," as his team's woeful audio mishap made him look "like a fool."

Ball also argued that these flubs might potentially undercut the "alarming" totalitarian undertones of the Trump TV project.

"On paper, Trump TV should be alarming," he explained. Presidents, like all politicians, need to be covered by journalists independent of the state and of the White House political operation. If the White House controls the audio and video feeds of presidential events, they can cut out embarrassing gaffes, avoid awkward questions, and censor moments they don’t wish to be covered... And yet, even when he should look powerful and dangerous, even if only malevolent, he instead reminds us what a diminished figure he has become. He simply seems to lack the popularity and the operation to get even this done. Donald Trump is trying to run half the world — but he can’t even get a mic check right."

Legal blow for Trump as ruling by GOP judges 'bodes poorly' for media ban

President Donald Trump — who has vowed and so far successfully managed to ban critical news outlets like MS NOW, CNN and Politico from the White House — suffered a major legal blow in that anti-free press crusade.

"A federal appeals court ruling Tuesday on demonstrators’ access to the steps of the Capitol could bode poorly for President Donald Trump’s attempt to ban three media organizations from the White House," Politico's Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein wrote on Tuesday. "The majority opinion, written by Trump appointee Neomi Rao, concluded that the East Steps of the Capitol are a 'nonpublic forum' — just like most areas of the White House grounds, including the press facilities."

Cheney and Gerstein added, "While the government may impose restrictions on access to those nonpublic areas, the limits must be 'viewpoint neutral,' apply 'objective, workable standards' and not permit officials to exercise 'unbridled discretion over a forum’s use,' the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel concluded."

They continued, "'A regulation that grants the government arbitrary control over who may speak invites the suppression of disfavored viewpoints and undermines the First Amendment’s core protections,' wrote Rao, who was joined in the majority by Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee."

Trump, meanwhile, posted on Truth Social on Monday that he has imposed the bans explicitly because he dislikes how those outlets cover him.

"Fake News people and publications that only write negatively, and who violate our National Security by writing false and defamatory stories with unknown ‘sources,’ shouldn’t be allowed access to the most important Office anywhere in the World," Trump posted on his own social media platform.

In addition to trying to ban outlets that say things he does not like, Trump also recently launched his own 24/7 news network, Trump TV, which he describes as a live-streaming YouTube channel that includes "the Trump Administration's biggest moments all in one place."

Writing for The i Paper on Sunday, columnist James Ball argued that Trump is also trying to stimulate his own base in addition to stifling media critics.

"It is typical of Trump, when things aren’t going his way, to lash out," Ball argued. "Sometimes, this is savvy: Trump’s followers have historically liked it when he gets into a fight with the mainstream media, and at the moment they are far less enthusiastic about Trump than once they were. On paper, this could be an effort to pick a fight that would cheer up the MAGA base."

MAGA radio host has total meltdown as Trump meeting 'drives allies mad'

President Donald spent Monday afternoon with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who has become a socialist villain to the MAGA right. At one point, it seemed as if Trump was fawning over the liberal mayor.

MAGA New York radio host Sid Rosenberg unleashed on Trump for meeting with the mayor, whom he referred to as a "Jew hater," particularly on Yom Kippur, the day of atonement.

While Rosenberg lashed out on Monday, he followed it up with another rant on Tuesday, for his WABC Radio NY’s "Sid & Friends in the Morning."

“So, this has gone on way too long, these two meetings at the White House were grotesque, and then yesterday, this nonsense at Gracie Mansion, where the president actually says this guy’s got potential to be a great mayor – who the hell is advising President Trump?” Rosenberg said.

Trump followed a meeting at the mayoral mansion with a joint press conference, glowingly praising the mayor for having "potential" and championing Mamdani as someone he hopes will succeed.

According to Mediaite, Rosenberg has frequently attacked Mamdani and calls Trump a friend. The anger reached a new level after Rosenberg said that he'd reached out to the White House's communications adviser, Margo Martin, demanding an explanation.

"I need to talk with the President. He’s got to explain to me what the hell is going on here,” he said. “Please explain this to me! I understand he still loves New York, so what? So what?! I love New York too. So he still loves New York. That means you’re going to buddy up and be nice and smile and compliment a guy that has not done one thing right for this city? Not one thing!”

Co-host Noam Laden proposed that the two men may simply like each other.

"I don’t know, but they clearly love each other. I mean, there’s a bromance —" said Laden before Rosenberg cut him off.

"That’s the only logical explanation at this point: that President Trump likes him, and I don’t know how my president, my friend, the guy that I love, likes this guy,” Rosenberg continued.

“This guy is a cancer. He’s a terrorist, he’s a jihadist, he hates everybody,” the host raged about Mamdani. “He hates everybody — Italians, Jews, the Irish, the Germans — as I’ve said time and again, if you’re not Muslim, he has no use for you. None. What do you mean President Trump likes him? What do you mean? What is it he likes about him? Everything President Trump does, this guy criticizes and doesn’t just say, I don’t like it, he kills President Trump. He’s evil. His administration is evil. He’s a fascist. He doesn’t come across as somebody who just disagrees with the president. He’s vicious.”

He didn't stop there.

“Of all days, President Trump, your daughter is Jewish," Rosenberg continued. "Your beloved son-in-law Jared Kushner is Jewish. The grandchildren that you love, and you’re a great grandfather, great! They’re Jewish, and they’re going to meet with this piece of garbage on Yom Kippur? And buddy up to this guy on Yom Kippur? I mean, please help me here.”

Far-right Trump ally Laura Loomer similarly blasted the president for meeting with Mamdani.

Meanwhile, the left felt the same way about Mamdani cozying up to Trump.

"HORSESHOE!!! Look at him kissing his a——. Gross," wrote Democrat Rita Powell.

According to Politico's Playbook, the joint press conference with Trump and Mamdani was not originally planned, a source said. Mamdani reportedly asked Trump on the spot if he would join him. Mamdani then called on the three news outlets that Trump banned from the White House on Friday.

"Six weeks before an election Republicans portray as a referendum on socialism and communism, Donald Trump started the week praising a socialist and will end it feting a communist. That dissonance is driving White House allies and Republican strategists mad," wrote Playbook co-author Adam on X.

Fox News analyst says Trump's press ban is doomed to blow up in court

A prominent conservative attorney and Fox News legal analyst warned President Donald Trump that his aggressive new press ban carries a "considerable risk," per Mediaite, as it is highly likely to be shot down by the Supreme Court.

Last week, Trump abruptly announced on Truth Social that he was banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico from the White House, accusing them of intentionally spreading "fake news" about him. In the immediate aftermath, numerous other news outlets condemned the decision and offered support for the three targeted outlets. On Monday, the entire White House press pool announced that it would not be covering presidential events in response to the ban, amounting to a boycott of the White House by the major news networks, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox.

The three targeted outlets also launched a lawsuit against the Trump administration, accusing it of flagrant First Amendment violations. MS NOW legal analyst Andrew Weissmann said that this would not be a "close case," calling it a "slam dunk" and a plain example of unconstitutional conduct.

Over on the typically Trump-friendly Fox News, meanwhile, prominent conservative legal analyst Jonathan Turley offered a similar take on the case, warning that if the president did not reverse course, his ban would almost certainly end up getting struck down by the Supreme Court. This is due to the significant legal precedent created by the 1977 case of Sherill v. Knight,

"One of the most influential cases is called Sherrill, from 1977 in the D.C. Circuit," Turley detailed. "And they emphasized you cannot engage in viewpoint discrimination, that once you allow media in, you can’t deny that access arbitrarily. The White House seems to be ready to challenge Sherrill, which would require them to go all the way to the Supreme Court. That’s a considerable risk."

He continued: "This is a president that gained a lot of ground for his successor presidents, in cases like Trump v. Slaughter was a huge win for presidential power. He could be giving back some territory with this one. These courts have emphasized, even the ones that favored the White House, that it can’t be done arbitrarily. You can’t engage in viewpoint discrimination. Here, that seems to be the case in spades. You have the president saying, 'I don’t like this coverage.'"

Legal scholar James Sample also argued during a Monday MS NOW appearance that Trump was making the networks' argument easy, given the how explicitly he has stated that he imposed the new ban because of negative press coverage, and all the times over the years he has attacked the free press on simliar grounds.

Trump torched for 'shredding the constitution' with TV announcement

Reactions lit up President Donald Trump on Monday to the White House's newly announced "Trump TV" initiative, as his ban on several news networks exploded into a major scandal, with one observer accusing the administration of "literally shredding the Constitution."

Trump last week announced on Truth Social that he was banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico from the White House, dubiously claiming that they were intentionally spreading lies about him and his presidency. In response, the entire White House pool launched a boycott of presidential coverage, while the targeted networks filed a lawsuit accusing the administration of blatant First Amendment violations.

Amid all of that chaos on Monday, the White House announced the launch of "Trump TV," described as a "24/7" livestreaming YouTube channel broadcasting "the Trump Administration's biggest moments all in one place." While not a traditional news outlet by any stretch, the timing of the announcement alongside Trump's assault on TV news outlets sparked numerous withering reactions across social media, accusing him of "communist" style state-run programming and "literally shredding the Constitution."

Aquilino Gonell, a former staff sergeant for the U.S. Capitol Police during the January 6 attacks, tore into Trump over the announcement, implying he was a hypocrite for doing so while also attacking Democrats as "communist."

"It will be official state-run media. But look over there…the communist," Gonell posted to X. "Literally shredding the Constitution."

"So, state-run media," the official Lincoln Project account posted. "Donald Trump is the communist."

"Otherwise known as state-run media," Stephanie Grisham, a former White House press secretary during Trump's first term, posted. "You know who else does this? Russia, China, and Iran to name a few..."

Various reactions also took aim at the official White House app that launched at the same time, through which the Trump TV stream can be viewed, in addition to other offerings. Daniel Dale, a leading columnist and fact-checker for CNN, took particular aim at several of the "accomplishments" touted in the app.

"Just checked out this White House app," Dale wrote. "Under 'accomplishments,' it lists… 1) Gas prices from seven months ago, before the Iran war (they’re now more than $1.50 per gallon higher — $4.48, per AAA). 2) The inflation rate from seven months ago, before the Iran war (the most recent rate, for August, was a full percentage point higher, 3.4 percent). 3) GDP growth from three quarters ago (the most recent available quarter, Q2 2026, was nearly three points lower, 1.5 percent). In summary, it may possibly be helpful to consume news from news outlets."

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Trump-backed governor in the hot seat after vowing support for free press

After pledging to protect press freedoms throughout his nearly two years in office, Republican South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden found himself standing in front of reporters Friday with President Donald Trump as the president defended a decision to ban three news organizations from the White House.

Rhoden was in the Oval Office for an unrelated reason: to talk about Trump administration efforts to save money on prescription drugs in the federal-state Medicaid health insurance program for people with low incomes.

Earlier that day, Trump announced on social media that he was banning CNN, Politico and MS Now from the White House. Reporters asked Trump about that decision when Trump, Rhoden and several other officials — who were standing behind Trump as he sat at his desk — finished speaking about the prescription drug program.

Trump responded by alleging that the news organizations report “fake news,” and he expanded at length on those allegations. The three news organizations have since sued to regain their access.

South Dakota Searchlight asked Rhoden’s office Monday for the governor’s reaction to Trump’s actions and comments. Rhoden’s office sent a written statement that said “the president can make his own decisions.”

“I’ve built a strong relationship with all of you by being open and responsive, and you’ve lived up to my trust,” Rhoden said in the statement, referencing journalists in South Dakota. “You’ve shown me a tremendous deal of respect, and I am grateful for the role you play in helping us serve the people of South Dakota.”

Searchlight then asked if Rhoden was implying his office would not be open and responsive to journalists who haven’t “lived up” to the governor’s trust.

Rhoden’s spokesperson, Josie Harms, responded.

“That implication is inaccurate,” Harms wrote. “Openness and responsiveness will continue to remain pillars of the Rhoden administration — the governor is simply acknowledging his respect and gratefulness for your reciprocation of that commitment.”

The governor’s initial statement also said it was “ironic” that the president “was being criticized for being against free speech while Trump was actively taking questions from dozens of media.”

Searchlight asked if the governor recognized that three news organizations were losing their access to ask questions of Trump. Harms replied, “As the governor said, ‘The president can make his own decisions.’”

Rhoden’s past comments on open government

Since becoming governor in January 2025, Rhoden has repeatedly emphasized government transparency and has made improving relations with the press one of his stated goals.

In a 2025 column he sent to media outlets titled “Protecting Our Free Press,” Rhoden wrote that “tough, investigative reporting can lead to much-needed policy reforms.”

“I’m committed to making my administration the most transparent in our state’s history,” he wrote.

During the annual NewsMedia Day at the state Capitol earlier this year, Rhoden responded to questions from reporters about open government.

“We’ll always do our best to respond to your questions, and you might not always like the answers you get, but you’ll always get a response of some kind,” Rhoden said.

Rhoden’s opponent in the Nov. 3 election is Democratic nominee Dan Ahlers, a former legislator from Dell Rapids. Ahlers said Trump’s strategy since becoming president the first time has been to criticize and belittle reporters when he doesn’t like their reporting.

“I don’t hold a grudge against the press,” Ahlers said. “I don’t not communicate with the press when something doesn’t go my way.”

Trump suggests his face on Rushmore amid healthcare talk

Rhoden’s Friday appearance at the White House was for Trump’s announcement that all 50 states will join a program providing “Most Favored Nation” pricing to some drugs in Medicaid, with a goal of bringing the price of selected drugs down to prices paid in some other countries.

Rhoden’s office issued a press release Friday saying South Dakota has so far identified three drugs that would benefit from the program, saving the state approximately $750,000 a year. This year’s budget for Medicaid in South Dakota is about $2 billion, and the state’s share is about $715 million.

After Rhoden’s comments on the prescription drug program during the Oval Office event, Trump turned to him and made a comment about Mount Rushmore National Memorial that sparked laughter in the room.

“I’m being very nice to him,” Trump said of Rhoden, “because maybe he’ll get my face on that beautiful wall.”

Rhoden jokingly replied, “You want it on Crazy Horse?” He was referencing the other massive mountain carving in South Dakota’s Black Hills. The Crazy Horse Memorial, which has been in progress for decades, honors a late Lakota war leader.

Press has a 'slam dunk' case against Trump — but he still holds the cards

A top legal expert told MS NOW that "precious little" legal recourse exists to punish President Donald Trump's officials for going along with his new press ban and his many other illegal actions.

Trump last week announced out of nowhere on Truth Social that he was banning MS NOW, CNN and Politico from the White House, rehashing his longstanding complaints about "fake news" and accusing the networks of intentionally lying about him. The fallout from this ban was swift and damning, with numerous other news outlets condemning the decision and offering support for the three targeted outlets. On Monday, the entirety of the White House press pool announced that it would not be covering presidential events in solidarity, amounting to a boycott of the White House by the major news networks, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox.

Additionally, the three targeted networks filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, calling the ban a blatant violation of the First Amendment. During a Monday afternoon appearance on MS NOW, legal analyst and former FBI general counsel Andrew Weissmann told host Nicole Wallace that the networks were almost guaranteed to win the suit, stressing that the result is so likely that he was breaking his personal rule against making predictions.

"You're going to win. It's that simple," Weissmann said. "This is not a close case ... This is a due process violation. It is a First Amendment violation. You know, Nicole, you know me well enough that I usually don't engage in predictions or I say words like, 'it seems' or 'there's a fair likelihood,' et cetera. This is a slam dunk. And the president has to know it."

Later in the conversation, Weissmann lamented that there was "precious little" to be done legally to hold Trump officials to account for enabling this ban and the president's other unlawful actions.

"Precious little, and it's almost by design," Weissmann said. "So on the one hand, you could say that there's potential federal liability, but remember, the president has the pardon power. And so you can be sure that when he leaves office, there is going to be a flurry of pardons. He's already talked about that. And he obviously has issued already more pardons than any president that we've ever seen in connection with January 6th and others. The one thing that holds lawyers to account is that lawyers can be sanctioned and they can be disbarred."

He added later: "This is a long way of saying that for people who are really upset and shocked by this, for this kind of blatant, unconstitutional activity, it is a reason to vote. And I'm not saying Democratic or Republican. I'm just saying, vote for somebody who believes in the rule of law."

"Which is only the Democratic Party as we meet here today," Wallace added in response.

@2026 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.