US 2024 Presidential Election

[Cicada 5]

Scott Pelley says Bari Weiss told 60 Minutes to make ICE protestors look more violent

For months, we’ve heard from various people who worked at 60 Minutes that CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss has told them to change stories for political purposes (which CBS has always denied). Outside of a report on CECOT, which was held because Weiss felt it “was not ready,” we haven’t gotten many specifics. But with longtime correspondent and host Scott Pelley recently fired, there are few holds barring him in his latest interview with The New York Times. The long interview is a pretty fascinating look into the Weiss era of CBS News, with Pelley attempting to remain somewhat cordial despite saying the recent firings and changes are “like your spouse being murdered.”


Specifically, Pelley finally details the bias and falsehoods that he said Weiss had tried to inject into his story. The story in question was one with a pretty quick turnaround during ICE’s occupation of Minneapolis this past winter, which included the deaths of Renée Good and Alex Pretti. “I felt it was very important to identify that the protesters themselves were being very aggressive and that they were half of these confrontations, and so I instructed my producers to find images in which we see the protesters acting aggressively,” says Pelley. “We found a picture of a protester chest-bumping an officer. We found a picture of an officer being hit in the head with a snowball. We culled together a lot of video of protesters screaming in the faces of officers because … it seemed to me important to tell the audience about the entire context. I thought we’d done a really good job with this.”



Weiss disagreed. “[A]bout four hours after our deadline, Bari Weiss sends an email to my boss, Tanya Simon. Two of the things in the email include, can we make the protesters look more violent? Now, I’m paraphrasing. I don’t have the quote, but that’s what was communicated to me. And the other thing, Renee Good’s car. You need to describe her as driving toward the officer,” says Pelley. As he points out, the videos of Good’s death do not show her driving toward the officer, but that’s how the president framed it online and how Weiss wanted it framed on 60 Minutes.

Pelley ultimately refused to make the (inaccurate) changes and said no one ever followed up with him. “It occurred to me that maybe Bari Weiss didn’t see the broadcast and didn’t realize that those changes hadn’t been made,” he says, which, well, you just have to laugh. Still, Pelley says her meddling nearly prevented the entire episode from airing. “That episode came within 19 minutes of not making it to air,” he says. “It was the night of the Grammys. 60 Minutes was the lead-in to the Grammys, and we almost didn’t have a broadcast.”




Still, Pelley seems a little hesitant to attribute Weiss’ intentions to malice, calling her a “lovely person” and saying what she built with The Free Press “very successful.” “But television’s not her thing,” he says later. “This is like somebody walking up to me and saying, ‘There’s a 747, there are 400 people on it, we need you to fly it to Paris.’ I’m going to decline because I don’t have a clue. And it would have been so much better if Bari Weiss had been offered this job and said, ‘Oh, that’s not for me, I don’t know how to do that.'”

 

[Phoenixmgs]

See, this is exactly what I mean. You clearly do not understand what I'm saying, because you keep on substituting what I say with a strawman that says something completely different.

I have not once said that ICE detainers are unconstitutional in themselves.

What I said is that the courts have repeatedly ruled that they are insufficient basis to hold someone past their legally mandated release date, for reasons that the case law I cited to you detailed.

I've not only explained this to you and provided the legal basis to you several times, but I've also clarified repeatedly that I wasn't claiming unconstitutionality, only for your to respond by insisting "that doesn't mean it's unconstitutional"...the very claim I just got through telling you a dozen times over that I wasn't even making!

And when you asked for case law supporting the claim that they aren't sufficient legal basis, I provided you with literally a dozen cases supplying it, only for you to ignore them until just now where you just dismiss them out of hand as "not counting" because you've unilaterally decided that the Supreme Court will eventually say that those courts got it wrong.

You clearly don't care about what I'm actually arguing, given that you insist on substituting what I've said for a strawman of your own creation, and - despite asking for it - you clearly don't give a damn about what the courts said, instead insisting that - since it does not support your argument - they're wrong but it doesn't matter because you tell yourself the Supreme Court will eventually overturn them and make the law agree with you eventually.

So again, I'm done.

I LITERALLY SAID THIS IN WHAT YOU ARE QUOTING, YOU DON'T READ WHAT I SAY...

I'm understanding everything you have said, you're not understanding me. The fact that ICE detainers TODAY are honored across the country and prisoners are held because of them literally proves they are not unconstitutional. Yes, I understand it's not the ICE detainer that matters itself, it's the holding of the prisoner due to them is the crux of the argument. Yes, courts have ruled that holding prisoners on just the ICE detainer is unconstitutional but that doesn't make it unconstitutional. A court ruled you could remove Donald Trump from the presidential ballot because the 14th amendment but that was obviously overturned because it was a BS ruling. Whether ICE detainers can hold prisoners or not will have to be heard by the Supreme Court. Then, regardless of if the Supreme Court rules that it is indeed unconstitutional, the law will be changed in a manner to make it constitutional because that is how DHS/ICE/CBP is designed to operate by law.

Yeah... you are saying something that Asita agrees with

Why are you yeling when they agree with you?

The only thing I disagree with is the unconstitutionality of it because that will have to go to SCOTUS to actually deemed that unconstitutional. The fact people today are being held due to ICE detainers means it's not unconstitutional.

 

[Cicada 5]

Top Pentagon Official Admits Boat Strike May Have Killed Victims of Human Trafficking

The U.S. military has conducted more than 60 attacks, resulting in over 200 extrajudicial killings in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. In almost all the strikes, between one and four people lost their lives. In only one strike did the death toll of a single boat reach double digits: the first attack on September 2, 2025.

Since then, experts, lawmakers, and even military officials behind the scenes have been asking a simple but haunting question: Why was that boat packed with 11 people?

“Why would 11 people be on board a boat carrying drugs?” said a government source who attended a classified briefing where the large crew on the first boat attacked was discussed. “It’s a high risk for the cartels. That always stood out.”

One top military officer provided a plausible explanation, behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, The Intercept has learned. His admission raises even more questions about a strike that a high-ranking Pentagon official called a criminal attack on civilians and resulted in a firestorm in Congress last year.

In the briefing, the high-ranking officer on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff stated that some of the people killed by the U.S. military may have been the victims of human trafficking.

 

[Chimpzy]

Top Pentagon Official Admits Boat Strike May Have Killed Victims of Human Trafficking

So instead of drug traffickers, they basically killed illegal immigrants? That's ok then, those are also criminals destroying the US.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Top Pentagon Official Admits Boat Strike May Have Killed Victims of Human Trafficking

Now, now. We are the GOOD GUYS, and GOOD GUYS only kill BAD GUYS, so anyone blown up by a US bomb is automatically a BAD GUY and deserved to die.

 

[Chimpzy]

Police investigate '8647' written in grass on US national mall

"Eighty-six" is a slang term for "get rid of". Some US officials claim the numbers are meant to encourage violence against Trump, the 47th president.

www.bbc.com

Ok, how did they do that without getting caught?

 

[Hades]

Police investigate '8647' written in grass on US national mall

"Eighty-six" is a slang term for "get rid of". Some US officials claim the numbers are meant to encourage violence against Trump, the 47th president.

www.bbc.com

Ok, how did they do that without getting caught?

Trump probably fired guards for being too competent or too black.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Police investigate '8647' written in grass on US national mall

"Eighty-six" is a slang term for "get rid of". Some US officials claim the numbers are meant to encourage violence against Trump, the 47th president.

www.bbc.com

Ok, how did they do that without getting caught?

Remember, "8647" is a direct threat against Trump's life, but "8646" is just a fun way to say you don't like Biden.

 

[Cicada 5]

50,000 People Watching Livestream of Workers Preparing to Strip Trump’s Name from Kennedy Center

The Kennedy Center board (which Trump hand-picked to run the Center after purging its previous heads, one of several ways he violated written rules and norms in order to get his name glued to this thing) filed a last-minute appeal to block the removal, which was ordered last month by district judge Christopher Cooper. (Who wrote, in a 94-page opinion, that naming rights for the Center rest solely with Congress.) But The Guardian reports that the move has now been blocked.



And so the people watch, both in-person and online, as the scaffolding goes up, the sounds of hammer-on-metal serving as a sort of perverse anti-ASMR. When last we checked, the viewcount was up to 58,000; god knows how high it’ll get once the first hammer hits the first letter. It might only be a symbolic gesture, but sometimes symbolism can feel pretty goddamned good.

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[FakeSympathy]

Yep, I'm sure it will last this time......for about a week. Two weeks, tops.

In case it actually does last, I hope the orange man knows it wasn't because of him

 

[BrawlMan]

A Law Designed to Protect the Identity of Crime Victims Is Instead Being Used to Hide Police Identities

All police have to do is claim that THEY are "victims," in order to keep their identities hidden after a fatal incident.

www.jezebel.com

 

[Satinavian]

Yep, I'm sure it will last this time......for about a week. Two weeks, tops.

In case it actually does last, I hope the orange man knows it wasn't because of him

I am more optimistic about it than at the last half dozen attempts at least. Both sides confirmed it, there is a date for signing and even after Iran publicly stated what they think is in there, Trump did not call them liars immediately. Also supposedly there was a bargain that Iran does not retaliate for the last Israeli strikes on Beirut and gets its blockade lifted earlier. That would hint that both sides want it to work ( well, Israel doesn't but there are limits on what they can do to torpedo it).

 

[Trunkage]

I LITERALLY SAID THIS IN WHAT YOU ARE QUOTING, YOU DON'T READ WHAT I SAY...



The only thing I disagree with is the unconstitutionality of it because that will have to go to SCOTUS to actually deemed that unconstitutional. The fact people today are being held due to ICE detainers means it's not unconstitutional.

I'll remember this the next time you claim something is unconstituational like vaccine mandates

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[Silvanus]

2025: DOGE cuts USAID funding for containment and monitoring of New World Screwworm in central America.

2026: New World Screwworm reappears in the US from Mexico. Apart from an outbreak in the 1970s, it has been near-eradicated in the US since the 1960s, until now.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I'll remember this the next time you claim something is unconstituational like vaccine mandates

The Supreme Court ruled on vaccine mandates and deemed them unconstitutional... It was pretty easy to tell it was unconstitutional because Biden had to backdoor it through OSHA.

U.S. Supreme Court Blocks OSHA Vaccine Mandate - NFIB

www.nfib.com

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[tstorm823]

2025: DOGE cuts USAID funding for containment and monitoring of New World Screwworm in central America.

2026: New World Screwworm reappears in the US from Mexico. Apart from an outbreak in the 1970s, it has been near-eradicated in the US since the 1960s, until now.

You will have to forgive me for my lack of sources, I don't have the time at the moment to hunt things down, I'm just on my phone in a momentary pause at work.

The screwworms started pushing north years ago, before DOGE existed. The funding and staffing directed towards this issue was increased, not cut. One of the primary drivers of screwworms expansion has seemingly been cattle smuggling across borders.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

​

Trump accomplished his one objective: To replace something that had Obama's name on it with something that has his name on it. All else is inconsequential.