Tag: media

CBS News Pulls ’60 Minutes’ Episode After Contributor Appears in Epstein Files

It was always presumed that the fallout from the unsealing of the Jeffrey Epstein files would hit some pretty big names.

Those presumptions turned out to be rather accurate.

Now, apart from just former first couples, CBS News’ flagship program, “60 Minutes,” has become the latest entity to be unceremoniously caught up in the Epstein scandal.

Epstein was a wealthy but disgraced sex offender who had powerful friends and allegedly ran an underage sex trafficking ring to help satiate those friends.

He died in 2019 before any definitive answers could be pulled out of him.

In lieu of those answers, however, public attention recently turned to the troves of sealed government documents related to Epstein.

That hot-button issue eventually boiled over into the Congressional “Epstein Files Transparency Act,” which mandated that the Department of Justice release all the files in a searchable and downloadable format.

The unsealing of these documents has connected some major figures to Epstein — beyond just suspicion and hearsay — such as billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates, former President Bill Clinton, and countless others.

(Much to the chagrin of his loudest critics, President Donald Trump’s association with Epstein isn’t nearly as sordid as some of the other big names mentioned.)

And now these documents have connected a new CBS News contributor to the salacious situation — over 1,700 times.

Keep reading

Looking to Blame Anyone But Israel for Youth’s Anti-Israel Turn

Younger Americans are turning against Israel. “On both the left and the right, young Americans are growing more skeptical of offering unconditional US support to Israel,” Politico (9/29/25) reported. Brookings (8/6/25) ran the headline “Support for Israel Continues to Deteriorate, Especially Among Democrats and Young People.” According to the Forward (11/21/25), “Younger Jews are more than twice as likely to identify as anti-Zionist than the overall population.”

Pro-Israel media are looking for blame. It’s often easy to paint youth opinion that is out of sync with official state policy as emotionally driven social justice warriorism, the result of hearts not yet hardened by life’s cold realities. The Zionist media narrative is looking for the culprits who have apparently miseducated our youth, turning them not just into Israel critics, but Jew haters.

At the Atlantic (12/15/25), Yair Rosenberg wrote a piece headlined “The More I’m Around Young People, the More Panicked I Am,’” with the subhead, “Anti-Jewish prejudice isn’t a partisan divide—it’s a generational one.” To his credit, Rosenberg starts off reporting on very real instances of antisemitism, but then watch carefully what he does in the middle:

Young people also tend to be more critical of Israel than their elders, leading a minority to excuse or even perpetuate anti-Jewish acts in America in the name of Palestine. These critics are likely to consume anti-Israel content on their social-media apps of choice. The platforms then funnel some of those users toward antisemitic material—a sort of algorithmic escalator that ends up radicalizing a percentage of them.

In the first sentence, the only evidence Rosenberg cites is a link to his own article (Atlantic, 5/22/25) about how “Elias Rodriguez allegedly shot and killed two people as they were exiting an event at the Capital Jewish Museum,” with the headline “A Dangerous Disguise for Antisemitism.” Rosenberg said the “assailant used the Palestinian struggle as a pretext to harm Jews.”

But as I have previously written (FAIR.org, 5/29/25), much of the media framed this attack as antisemitic without any factual basis. While there was plenty of evidence that the act was political, with Rodiguez’s manifesto denouncing Israel as a “genocidal apartheid state,” there wasn’t any evidence that the attacker held antisemitic views, or targeted the event because of the faith of the victims. If someone obsessed with Saudi Arabia’s aggression in Yemen killed two Muslim workers at the Saudi embassy, that would certainly be anti-Saudi political violence, but not necessarily anti-Muslim terror.

Keep reading

The View TURNS on Bill Gates as Epstein Files Close In on Tech Billionaire

Something unexpected has happened on cable TV, and it’s a sign that disaster is coming for tech billionaire Bill Gates.

In the latest tranche of the Epstein Files, emails drafted by Jeffrey Epstein suggest that Gates contracted an STD from sleeping with “Russian girls” and had planned to secretly medicate his then-wife, Melinda.

Bill has denied the allegations, but Melinda interestingly did not. Instead, she expressed “unbelievable sadness” reflecting on their marriage and Gates’ association with Epstein.

When asked about this during an interview with 9 News Australia, Bill Gates said he doesn’t know what Epstein was thinking with the email, suggesting Epstein may have been trying to “attack” him in some way.

The reporter challenged Gates on why this accusation against him wasn’t true when other Epstein file revelations were accurate.

Gates sidestepped the question and asserted his own version of events.

“It’s factually true that I was only at dinners. I never went to the island. I never met any women,” he replied.

Keep reading

UH-OH: Whoopi Goldberg and Other Members of ‘The View’ Are Mentioned in the Epstein Files

The ladies of The View have been harping on the Epstein Files for months. Like all other members of their party, they thought that this was an effective way to attack Trump.

But would it surprise you to find out that these same idiots are actually mentioned in the Epstein Files themselves?

Kudos to Nicholas Fondacaro of NewsBusters for digging up this incredibly funny information.

As Fondacaro reports at NewsBusters, someone named Whoopi Goldberg even reached out to Epstein for help with a flight:

Whoopi Goldberg Requested Epstein Jet Fly Her to Monaco Charity Event

A NewsBusters investigation of the Epstein Files discovered that cast members of ABC’s The View were mentioned nearly four dozen times. Despite the files being a major topic of discussion on the show, as they tried to tie President Trump to criminal activity, none of the cast members addressed their names appearing in the same files. One cast member was seemingly interested in borrowing one of Epstein’s infamous private jets.

A search of the cast members’ names on the Department of Justice website returned nearly four dozen (46) references.

Moderator Whoopi Goldberg led the way with 21 references, co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin clocked in with 20, Joy Behar had three, and Ana Navarro had two. Fortunately for co-hosts Sunny Hostin and Sara Haines, they weren’t mentioned at all (as of the release of the latest batch of files).

The search for references did take into account Goldberg going by just her first name, Farah Griffin’s maiden name, and Hostin’s maiden name (Cummings) and real first name (Asunción; with and without the accent mark)…

The e-mail was requesting possible use of one of Epstein’s private jets to help Goldberg attend a White Feather Foundation charity event in Monaco.

“Whoopi Goldberg needs a plane to get to Monaco. John Lennon’s Charity is paying for it. They don’t want to charter so they are looking for private owners,” the e-mail began.

How funny is this?

Keep reading

Inside Strum: How a Subscription Platform Funds Ukraine’s Neo-Nazi Azov Brigade

One of the most persistent myths in Western political thought is the idea that the United States and its European allies are principled opponents of fascism and totalitarianism. This doctrine, which many Washington elites believe at an almost religious level, has served as the basis for the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine. Numerous politicians from both sides of the proverbial aisle have accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of being a Nazi or a fascist. However, when the United States allows Neo-Nazi-linked Ukrainian organizations like the Azov Brigade to receive support, this undermines their narrative.

Now, after American and European taxpayers have already paid billions for Ukraine’s war, the Azov Brigade is attempting to extract more money from Westerners via a subscription service called “Strum.” But before discussing Strum, it is important to examine what the Azov Brigade is and why it requires additional funding in the first place.

The Azov Brigade (formerly known as the Azov Battalion and Azov Regiment) has been mired in controversy since its founding. The organization was founded in 2014 by Andrey Biletskyi, a political activist with ties to Neo-Nazi movements. The Azov Brigade began as an amalgamation of radical movements including the Patriot of Ukraine gang which “espoused xenophobic and neo-Nazi ideas, and was engaged in violent attacks against migrants, foreign students in Kharkiv and those opposing its views.” Following the Maidan Revolution, oligarchs and elements of the Ukrainian government backed the organization which was then incorporated into the National Guard of Ukraine. In 2016, the UN alleged that the Azov regiment violated international law due to its documented mass looting of civilian homes, its targeting of civilian areas, and its treatment of prisoners. During the Siege of Mariupol, the group was heavily involved in the fighting on the Ukrainian side though it eventually surrendered to Russia. In 2023, the Azov Regiment was reorganized into the Azov Brigade.

With resources dwindling and rampant foreign military aid corruption, Azov has increasingly relied on donations from individuals and companies. According to reporting from Svidomi, which included interviews with founders and project managers, a new project, Strum, has become the “driving force” behind the Brigade. The platform operates as a subscription service like Netflix or Spotify, but with some substantial differences and additional features.

Keep reading

CNN Admits the Vast Majority of Americans, Including Democrats and Black Americans Support Voter ID Laws

CNN analysts were forced to admit that, even according to their own polling, the issue of voter ID laws is not controversial and is supported by well over 75 percent of Americans.

“Photo ID to vote, and the American people are with NickiMinaj. Because what are we talking about here. Take a look here, favor voter ID to vote. Look, I’ve got all this polling here going back since 2018 you’ll notice on all of it, its all north of 75 percent,” CNN’s Harry Enten said. “Seventy-six percent, 76 percent, 76 percent, 81 percent, and then 83 percent in the last year of Americans agree with Nicki Minaj, they favor photo ID to be able to vote.”

“What about by party, what’s the party breakdown?” the CNN host asked.

“Yeah. Normally, you might expect, hey, there’d be a big divide by party, with Republicans really for it and Democrats really against it. But not really here. I mean, just take a look here, favor voter ID to vote, you got 95 percent of Republicans, pretty much all of them, but even 71 percent of Democrats favor photo ID to vote,” Enten continued.

“So again, Nicki Minaj posting that on X. And what you see is that the American people, actually, it’s not really all that controversial. The American people are with Nicki Minaj, whether they are Republicans or even if they are Democrats. We’re talking about 7 in 10 Democrats agreeing with Nicki Minaj that you, in fact, should show a voter photo ID to vote.”

Keep reading

The Digital Media Oligarchy: Who Owns Online News? 

When Ben Bagdikian, an esteemed journalist and early FAIR contributor, published his groundbreaking book The Media Monopoly in 1983, he painted a troubling picture of US media consolidation, reporting that 50 corporations controlled the media business. With each reprint, that number dwindled (FAIR.org, 6/1/87). When FAIR replicated his analysis in 2011 (Extra!, 10/11), it stood at 20.

Now, over 40 years after the initial release of The Monopoly Media, the media landscape has transformed drastically. Even Bagdikian’s later editions, written at the dawn of the internet, could not fully anticipate how profoundly digital technology would reconfigure the media oligarchy.

“News” is increasingly synonymous with online news. Over half the US public (56%) say that they “often” get news through their digital devices—compared to less than 1 in 3 (32%) who often get news from TV, 1 in 9 from radio and only 1 in 14 from print publications like newspapers or magazines (Pew, 9/25/25).

Which raises the question: Who owns the leading online news sites—and, by extension, largely shapes the ideas and information that reach millions of Americans?

Each month, Press Gazette, a London-based magazine for the journalism industry, ranks the top 50 news websites in the US in order of monthly visits, based on data from the marketing firm Similarweb. FAIR tallied Press Gazette’s results over a 12-month span, from December 2024 to November 2025, to get a figure for total US visits to major news sites over that period: 45.6 billion.

More than half of those visits, nearly 25.5 billion, went to news sites controlled by just seven families or corporate entities.

Keep reading

DNI Tulsi Gabbard Responds to “Blatantly False and Slanderous” Congressional and Media Accusations Regarding Integrity of Elections

After Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was photographed in Fulton County during the execution of a search warrant for 2020 election evidence, several members of Congress began to call into question DNI Gabbard’s authority to be involved.

Senator Mark Warner, vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, “sharply criticized” the presence of the DNI in Fulton County.  According to NBC News:

Warner said there were only two explanations for national intelligence director’s trip: either Gabbard believed the case had a link to foreign intelligence, and she failed to abide by her legal obligation to inform congressional committees about it, or she was tarnishing the nonpartisan reputation of the intelligence agencies with a “domestic political stunt designed to legitimize conspiracy theories that undermine our democracy.”

“Either scenario,” Warner added, “represents a serious breach of trust and a dereliction of duty to the solemn office which she holds.”

According to The Democracy Docket, David Becker, the founder of the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), told reporters last week:

“The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has no domestic responsibilities.  There is no reason for the director of national intelligence to be in any kind of voting site. She has neither the authority nor the competence to assess anything in that voting site. And so it’s incredibly troubling to see something like that.”

CEIR received over $65 million in “Zuckerbucks” during the 2020 election.  Becker is also the co-founder of the Electronic Registration and Information Center, a non-profit that has been tasked with maintaining voter rolls for more than a dozen states.

Keep reading

Media Silent On KBJ Attending Anti-ICE Grammys After Inventing ‘Scandals’ About Her Colleagues

America’s propaganda media have always applied two very different standards when judging the “ethics and conduct” of U.S. Supreme Court justices. While expending countless resources inventing nothingburger “scandals” of wrongdoing about the court’s originalists, these so-called “defenders of democracy” regularly go out of their way to glamorize the body’s leftist members — no matter how untoward or inappropriate their behavior may seem.

That’s the dynamic that was at play on Sunday evening, when Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson attended this year’s anti-ICE Grammy Awards. The Biden appointee made an appearance at the event following the nomination for “best audio book, narration and storytelling recording” for her 2024 memoir, according to USA Today.

While Jackson hobnobbed with Hollywood’s biggest snobs and received a favorable shoutout from host Trevor Noah, many of the night’s (overrated) winners used their acceptance speeches to give us their unwanted thoughts on something they know little to nothing about — immigration enforcement. From expletive-laden comments (“f-ck ICE”) to embarrassing “land acknowledgements,” the leftist-led attacks on lawful efforts to deport illegal aliens (including rapists and other violent criminals) were everything one would expect.

And yet, despite this overwhelming display of uber left-wing partisanship, as of Monday morning, there are no legacy media outlets or major Democrats expressing outrage about Jackson’s Grammy attendance. The same righteous “truth tellers” who were supposedly so concerned about non-scandals like Justice Sam Alito’s wife flying an Appeal to Heaven flag or Justice Clarence Thomas having a rich friend now have nothing to say when Jackson attends an overtly partisan event whose attendees expressed extreme hostility to federal law enforcement.

There are no leftist calls to impeach Jackson. Nor are there any demands for her to recuse herself from immigration-related cases involving the Trump administration — several of which are before the court this term.

The left’s outrage machine is dead silent.

Keep reading

Dem Senator Got Fact-Checked Live Over His Lies About ICE. The Reaction Says It All.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) went on Fox News to spew some lies about ICE. He can get embarrassed, fact-checked, and have his script shredded because he hails from a D-plus-6700 state—the man is a senator for life there. Notice his reaction when Fox News Sunday host Shannon Bream fact-checked him live. Murphy said that ICE wasn’t going after criminal aliens anymore. Bream then corrected him, adding that almost 70 percent of their arrests have illegals who have a criminal record.   

Yet, he carried on talking about how federal agents are murdering American citizens and disappearing people. Chris, I know your side has no grasp of history, but that’s not what’s happening. This isn’t la ‘Guerra Sucia’ in Argentina, which apparently is the narrative the Left is trying to disseminate. It’s working, but only within their insane circles. It’s not a total meltdown, but the commitment to the fake narrative speaks volumes. 

Also, Chris, I know your side was asleep for most of 2024, but we voted for this: all illegals must go. It was never just the criminal ones; that was the class we were going to start with first. It would’ve been safer if your side honored ICE detention facilities, where federal agents picked up these creeps apprehended by local law enforcement. Instead, you forced ICE and CBP to go on a manhunt, mass sweeps through cities where every illegal alien is not subject to deportation.  

Keep reading