Breaking
Successful Beat
Tag

Slider

Browsing
Business

Fact-checking Trump’s interview with NBC News’ ‘Meet the Press’

President Donald Trump sat for an interview with “Meet the Press” moderator Kristen Welker on Friday, discussing topics including the war with Iran, gas prices and the “anti-weaponization” fund.

Throughout the interview, which aired Sunday, Trump made a series of false, misleading or exaggerated comments.

NBC News reporters dug into some of the president’s remarks. Here are the facts behind the claims.

Trump defended his first-term decision to terminate the Iran nuclear deal President Barack Obama had negotiated and his second-term decision to initially strike Iran in June 2025.

“They were very close to having a nuclear weapon. I terminated the deal. Then I sent the B-2 bombers in about nine, 10 months ago. And they obliterated, totally obliterated, the site. And I saved it,” Trump said. “We had a choice. We could let them have a nuclear weapon, or we could go along and have some beautiful days. But they would have, you know, it’s a judgment. They would’ve used a nuclear weapon.”

Later in the interview, Trump reiterated: “If I didn’t go in there with the B-2 bombers, they would right now have a nuclear weapon, and it could be that half of the world would be eradicated already.”

Trump’s statements are not in line with what then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told lawmakers in March 2025, months before the initial U.S. strikes on Iran. At the time, Gabbard testified that U.S. spy agencies had assessed that Iran had not decided whether to build nuclear weapons, but that the country had stockpiles of enriched uranium beyond what is required for civilian purposes. NBC News reported in June 2025 that the U.S. assessment of Iran’s nuclear program had not changed since March. Additionally, while Trump claimed that the U.S. “totally obliterated” an Iranian nuclear site in the strikes, the reality is more nuanced. NBC News reported in July 2025 that one nuclear enrichment site was mostly destroyed, but two others were not as badly damaged.

Currently, Iran likely retains nearly 1,000 pounds of uranium enriched to 60%, a short step from weapons grade, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Even if Iran had enough uranium enriched to weapons grade, it would need months or possibly more than a year to build a nuclear warhead that could fit on the tip of a missile, according to experts and former officials.

Before Trump withdrew the United States from the 2015 nuclear deal in his first term, Iran had no stockpiles of uranium enriched beyond a low level and was subject to regular United Nations inspections.

Welker noted that Trump had promised he would negotiate a better deal, asking him if he wished he would have done so in his first term. Trump responded that it was better to negotiate now, saying “Israel wouldn’t have been ready” during his first stint in the Oval Office.

Trump also said during the interview that major arms of the Iranian military were “gone” as a result of the current war.

“Their navy is gone. Their air force is gone. Their anti-aircraft is gone,” Trump said.

He said at another point in the interview: “In three months, I’ve demolished the navy, the air force, anti-aircraft. They have no radar. They have nothing.”

This is exaggerated. NBC News has reported that half of the country’s unconventional navy remains intact after weeks of bombing. The unconventional navy includes small “fast boats” typically used by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, Tehran’s hard-line military force. Those forces are key to Iran’s ability to influence international shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, and because of the nature of that navy, it has been harder for the U.S. to identify and target those forces.

The Pentagon has said the U.S. military has destroyed about 90% of Iran’s conventional navy and more than 95% of Iran’s naval mines, though. Defense officials have also said more than 80% of Iran’s “missile facilities” are gone, suggesting locations where Iran constructs missiles and other weaponry could be targeted should operations resume.

Trump was also pressed by Welker on his campaign pledge not to start any new wars.

“I didn’t guarantee no war. Why would I have built the strongest military in the world?” Trump said. “I built our military.”

But Trump repeatedly promised as a candidate that he would not start new wars if elected.

Trump said while campaigning in Pennsylvania in 2024: “I will not send you to fight and die in stupid foreign wars that never end. I will not send our sons and daughters to go fight for a war in a country that you’ve never heard of. We’re not going to do it. We’re going to bring our troops home, and we’re going to focus on America First.”

And in his November 2024 victory speech, Trump said: “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.”

Asked about rising gas prices that have resulted from the war, Trump said they would go down once a deal is reached.

“If we sign an agreement, it’ll go down now. Otherwise, they’ll go down after we’re finished,” Trump said.

But oil executives have said it will take time to restore oil production in the Middle East and bring down gas prices, even if the Strait of Hormuz is reopened immediately.

Exxon Senior Vice President Neil Chapman said at a Bernstein Research conference late last month that it is “going to take time to rebalance the global markets” once the strait reopens due to dwindling inventories.

“You can estimate four to six weeks before we get into a normal supply chain,” he said. “And it all depends on whether the strait opens — at what time it opens. And then the question for the world and every country and every commercial organization is how quickly do you rebuild those inventories?”

Meanwhile, Sultan Al Jaber, chief executive of the United Arab Emirates state oil group ADNOC, recently said: “Even if this conflict ends tomorrow, it will take at least four months to get back to 80% of pre-conflict flows and full flows will not return before the first or even second quarter of 2027.”

Trump defended the Justice Department’s proposed $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, saying that allies who “have been hurt so badly by radical left lunatics” deserve payment. While the Justice Department told a court that the fund is “not going forward,” there’s nothing to stop the Trump administration from giving payouts to Trump allies in the future, even without the fund.

Asked by Welker whether anyone who attacked police officers on Jan. 6 should receive funds, Trump said he “wouldn’t be inclined to say so, but I have to see it.”

When Welker again brought up the roughly 170 Jan. 6 rioters who pleaded guilty to assaulting police officers, Trump said: “They pled guilty because they were frightened. They went down. They were ushered into a building. Many of them were arrested without even going into the building.”

This needs context, as some of the most violent rioters from that day never entered the building. The Biden Justice Department’s sprawling Jan. 6 probe mostly focused on individuals who either entered the Capitol itself or engaged in some sort of aggravating conduct outside the Capitol, such as assaulting police officers.

For example, one of the longest sentences went to David Dempsey, who was ordered to serve 20 years in prison. Prosecutors said he swung makeshift weapons and hurled objects at officers, sprayed them with chemicals, and stomped five times on an officer’s head — acts committed outside the Capitol building itself.

Trump also claimed the FBI brought people into the Capitol on Jan. 6.

“They had FBI agents ushering them into the building,” Trump said.

As Welker noted during the interview, there’s no evidence that any FBI special agents ushered anyone into the building, and no on-duty FBI special agents were on the grounds until after the riot broke out and some responded to assist with crowd control.

There were four FBI confidential human sources, or informants, who entered the Capitol building, but they weren’t directed to do so by the bureau, according to a report from the Justice Department’s inspector general. The report also found that the FBI tasked three informants to report on domestic terrorism suspects who were possibly attending events in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6. The FBI did not provide tasks for the other 23 informants in Washington that day.

Trump, who has for years made false claims of voter fraud, said the recent primary elections in California were “rigged.”

“The election was rigged. It was a dirty election. And it’s happening again right now in California,” Trump said. He added: “It’s four days and they aren’t even close to coming up with the — do you know why they’re doing that? Because they’re cheating on the election.”

Pressed for evidence, Trump said, “All I have to do is look. And I listen. I listen to people.”

There is no evidence of election fraud in California or problems with the state’s ballot counting.

Trump is pointing to the long vote count in California, which is the result of the state’s election rules and reliance on mail-in voting, long a target of ridicule for the president. More than 80% of California’s voters cast a ballot by mail in recent elections. Ballots that are postmarked by election day can be accepted up to a week afterward, when they must be validated, processed and tallied. States that vote largely in person often report results more quickly because that process can happen at the polls with the voter present.

Trump noted that Republicans’ margins in some races are “dropping fast” as the vote is counted. But that is not due to fraud as he claimed. Democratic voters have been more likely to embrace mail-in voting, particularly in the post-Covid era, so as those ballots are counted, Democratic candidates’ numbers tend to improve.

Keep Reading
By
Politics

Jill Biden says former president will live with stage 4 cancer ‘for the rest of his life,’ has slowed down

Former first lady Dr. Jill Biden gave an update on former President Joe Biden’s cancer on Saturday, saying that though the 83-year-old will live with cancer for the rest of his life, he maintains a busy schedule, but has slowed down.

Biden explained during a discussion with political commentator and “The View” co-host Ana Navarro for her new book “View From the East Wing: A Memoir,” that while her husband was still president and had a team of doctors, she mentioned that he was getting up seven times a night to go to the bathroom, and she assumed that someone would follow up on that.

But she said when they left the White House in 2025 and his problem persisted, she said she told him he had to go see a urologist and in his first appointment the doctor said, “There’s something there,” and the former president was given a CAT scan.

“I never imagined it would be prostate cancer,” she admitted. “I just never imagined it.”

MEDICAL EXPERT ‘ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED’ BY TIMING OF BIDEN’S PROSTATE CANCER DIAGNOSIS

While she said in some cases prostate cancer can be “cured, “the problem with Joe — it’s stage four, and it has metastasized to his bones. So that puts things on a whole different level. I mean, Joe will have to live with cancer for the rest of his life, which means he’s on special medicines.”

She said he also went through radiation, which involved going from where they live in Delaware to Philadelphia constantly for five weeks.

“You know, it takes a toll,” she said, adding that on Friday night her husband was in South Dakota for a Democratic Party event, on Saturday he was at a friend’s wedding, and Sunday he’ll be in Philadelphia.

BIDEN ‘A LITTLE OLDER AND A LITTLE SLOWER’ IN THE FINAL DAYS OF HIS PRESIDENCY: NEW YORK TIMES REPORT

“He keeps his schedule, but he’s slowed down,” she said. “I mean, stage four cancer is — and he’s 83 — so, I think the mix of everything and the medications that he’s taken has made life a little more difficult these days.”

BIDEN’S FIRST PUBLIC REMARKS SINCE CANCER DIAGNOSIS HONOR GOLD STAR FAMILIES

When asked how she’s been handling the situation, Biden said: “It’s hard to be a caretaker,” noting that the former president wouldn’t want her to phrase it that way, but explaining that she’s the one responsible for all the details.

“I have to make sure he gets the right medications,” she explained. “I’m the one talking to the doctors. I’m the one setting up the appointments. I’m the one to make sure that he eats well.”

Joe Biden announced his cancer diagnosis in May 2025.

Earlier this week, the former first lady told the “Today” show that her husband is “doing OK.”

“He’s out making speeches, and he’s traveling on Amtrak,” she added. “He was just at the Delaware Memorial Bridge for the veteran’s ceremony. So yeah, he’s doing a lot, but he has stage 4 cancer.”

JILL BIDEN REVEALS TO ‘THE VIEW’ IT WAS ‘HEARTBREAKING’ WHEN DEMS ABANDONED JOE AFTER 2024 DEBATE

Biden and Navarro also talked about some other issues she wrote about in her book, including when the former president made the decision to drop out of the 2024 race after his disastrous debate in June 2024.

She said he turned to her while they were at their home in Delaware and told her: “I have no choice.”

BIDEN URGED TO REVEAL DISEASE HISTORY AFTER CANCER DIAGNOSIS

Biden added that it was also “hurtful” to her when she saw Democrats, many of whom had been their friends for decades, publicly calling for Biden to drop out of the race.

But she said Biden reconciled with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who was believed to have been privately leading calls for him to leave the race, at the funeral for Tatiana Schlossberg, the daughter of Caroline Kennedy, in January.

The 75-year-old admitted that she still hasn’t spoken to Pelosi. 

She also said she believes there has been a “double standard” in the conversations around her husband’s age and mental acuity when compared to President Donald Trump, who will turn 80 on June 14.

For the next president after Trump leaves office, Biden said she’s looking for someone with integrity, trustworthiness, and empathy, but didn’t name any names.

“They’re the characteristics of the American people,” she said. “That’s who we are.”

<!–>

–>
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Top House Democrat says there’s ‘no way’ Platner didn’t know tattoo’s Nazi origins

A senior House Democrat is joining the growing chorus of critics questioning Senate candidate Graham Platner’s claim that he was unaware of his tattoo’s Nazi origins.

“There’s no way he didn’t know what the tattoo was,” Rep. Brad Schneider, D-Ill., said Friday in remarks reported by Punchbowl News. “Own it and move on.

“He’s not willing to do that,” Schneider, the chairman of House Democrats’ largest caucus, lamented.

Schneider’s comments make him one of the most high-profile Democrats to criticize the Maine Senate hopeful, who has also faced mounting scrutiny over sending sexually explicit messages to other women while newly married, a decades-long history of offensive social media posts and alleged abuse in previous romantic relationships.

DEMOCRAT CONGRESSMAN SLAMS GRAHAM PLATNER’S NAZI-LINKED TATTOO AS ‘DISQUALIFYING’

Platner, a far-left populist, is vying to unseat Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, in one of the most hotly contested races of November’s midterm elections. He is Maine Democrats’ presumptive nominee, though some party insiders have expressed doubts about the viability of his candidacy amid a string of scandals.

Schneider’s public criticism came after The New York Times reported Thursday that several of Platner’s ex-girlfriends said the Senate hopeful knew about his tattoo’s Nazi-linked design.

One of the women, Lyndsey Fifield, told the Times Platner taught her the words behind the black skull-and-crossbones tattoo, referring to it as “my Totenkopf.”

“He would joke about it being a Nazi tattoo,” Fifield said, adding that Platner said he chose the tattoo because of his belief that his unit shared similarities to the Nazi SS paramilitary forces.

Platner vigorously denied Fifield’s account during an interview with MS NOW’s Chris Hayes on Thursday. But he struggled to answer when pressed about how Fifield sent a text to friends saying he had a Nazi-linked tattoo in August 2025, when he first publicly disclosed it two months later during an October podcast episode of “Pod Save America.” 

“How does she know it’s a Nazi tattoo in August of last year, and you don’t know it’s a Nazi tattoo in August of last year?” Hayes asked Platner.

“I can’t say why,” Platner said, adding that he was not a recipient of Fifield’s message. “I certainly didn’t know, and the text messages she’s sending to friends may have recognized it. They didn’t tell me that.”

Fifield also alleged that Platner assaulted her at one point during their relationship, an allegation Platner said was false. 

GRAHAM PLATNER ACCUSER HITS NYT FOR ALLEGEDLY SOFTENING ALLEGATIONS, SAYS COVERAGE WAS ‘GIFT’ TO DEMOCRAT

Platner has since had the tattoo covered up after it became a campaign issue in late 2025. He wore it for nearly two decades after he said he got it during a night of drinking with his fellow Marines while stationed in Croatia in 2007.

Amid Democrats’ divisions over Platner’s candidacy, Schneider indicated he would struggle to support him at the ballot box if he were a Maine voter.

“I’ll leave it to the people of Maine to elect who they want,” he said in remarks reported by Punchbowl News. “I’m grateful I don’t have to make that choice. I wouldn’t want to have to make that choice.”

Rep. Jake Auchincloss, D-Mass., and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., have also sharply criticized Platner’s statements related to his since-covered up tattoo.

“All I’m saying is when I was growing up, if someone had a clear Nazi tattoo on them, you probably could conclude that they’re a Nazi sympathizer,” Fetterman told CNN earlier this week. “Are you going to continue to defend that or dismiss that?”

Schneider’s New Democrat Coalition is the largest caucus among House Democrats, with more than 100 members.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Platner campaign before publication.

<!–>

–>
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Spencer Pratt’s runner-up edge over Democrat Raman down to 1%, few thousand ballots

Spencer Pratt’s independent bid to make the Los Angeles mayoral runoff hangs in the balance nearly a week after Election Day.

With the jungle primary leaving incumbent Democrat Mayor Karen Bass already ruled to have advanced to a November runoff, Pratt’s margin over Democrat City Councilmember Nithya Raman has slimmed to just 1% with a few thousand ballots left to make up the difference.

Pratt led Raman by just 7,494 votes in the latest AP elections tally with 78% of the vote counted to date. Bass remained in first place with 235,180 votes (34.8%), while Pratt had 184,596 votes (27.3%) and Raman had 177,102 votes (26.2%).

Los Angeles County continues to count ballots postmarked on or before Election Day and received by Tuesday, June 9, drawing the attention of the Republican National Committee. The election results must only be counted within 30 days and certified by July 10.

CALIFORNIA’S SLUGGISH VOTE COUNTING RIPPED ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM: ‘EXTREMELY EMBARRASSING’

“The California primary ended on June 2, 2026; yet California is still counting ballots,” the RNC website tracker counting the seconds since polls closed reads.

“The state’s election system is a complete joke. The RNC is tracking every hour it takes California to finish the count.”

The latest ballot update gave Raman another boost, as she picked up 23,514 votes in the latest batch, more than double Pratt’s 10,336-vote gain. That cut Pratt’s lead by 13,178 votes in a single day and pushed the contest for second place into uncertain territory.

Pratt posted a meme to X decrying the ongoing ballot count in the race.

“Me trying to figure out how votes get counted in LA,” he wrote Saturday night.

Under California’s top-two primary system, if no candidate wins more than 50% of the votes, the two highest vote-getters advance to the general election. The AP reported that Bass advanced to the runoff after finishing first in the crowded mayoral primary, while Pratt and Raman continued battling for the remaining November spot.

Former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., pointed to California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom when discussing the delayed results.

“The question to the rest of the world is what happened to California elections? Well, I’ll tell you, it’s Gavin Newsom,” McCarthy told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.” “When Gavin Newsom was elected governor of California, you knew who was elected in a day to two days. Now it takes more than weeks, almost a month.”

“Why did we get here?” McCarthy continued. “Gavin changed a number of election laws in which you want to see is what did he do and why did he cause it?”

WATCH: LEFT-WING LA MAYOR FACES REALITY TV CHALLENGER’S BLUNT TAKEDOWNS IN HEATED MAYORAL DEBATE

The slow count has drawn heightened attention because later-counted ballots have steadily cut into Pratt’s lead.

Longtime Democrat strategist Michael Trujillo told The California Post on Saturday that the trend pointed to a likely runoff appearance for Raman, calling the late ballot counting “normal” for California and telling critics to “go back to where you came from.”

“I was always a little jealous of east coast elections getting so much attention in the media and on this app, yeah nevermind,” he wrote on X. “The stupidity from these out of state analysts and reporters and the bots and fake accounts it brings to what is really a very NORMAL process happening in Los Angeles and California is annoying.

“Go back to where you came from, thanks.”

SPENCER PRATT SEIZES ON HOMELESSNESS REMARKS BY KAREN BASS, BLASTS DEMOCRAT FOR FAILURES

Conservatives on X are decrying the probability of Pratt being shut out of the runoff.

“Spencer Pratt is likely going to be overtaken by far left Nithya Raman today,” Robby Starbuck wrote on X. “This graph shows the count on Election Day through last night. “Nithya did this by suddenly winning 1st in every new ballot drop.

“North Korean ‘elections’ have more self respect. Even they’d find it absurd for 3rd to suddenly jump to 1st place in every ballot drop DAYS after an election. It’s just ludicrous.”

That post also brought the attention of X owner Elon Musk.

“The reason ID is banned in California (and New York) elections is to enable large-scale fraud,” Musk claimed on X, replying to Starbuck’s post. “When you combine no ID and mail-in voting, fraud is de facto legalized.”

SCOTUS CONSERVATIVES SIGNAL READINESS TO CURB LATE-ARRIVING MAIL BALLOTS

Starbuck noted the historic run Raman’s count has made.

“ChatGPT can’t find a single example of a 3rd place candidate surging, days AFTER Election Day, to overtake 2nd place,” he wrote Sunday morning. “It couldn’t find 1 example in all of American history. That’s what’s happening with Nithya Raman & Spencer Pratt.

“Los Angeles has 3rd world country elections.”

Democrats merely point back to an overwhelming edge in registered Democrat voters versus Republicans, even if Pratt is running as an independent.

“IF SOMETHING CAN BE EXPLAINED BY A CONVOLUTED CONSPIRACY THEORY—OR SIMPLE MATH—THEN MATH ALWAYS WINS,” Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., wrote on X. “LA Registered Voters. Approximate number of Dems: 1,224,737 Approximate number of Republicans: 326,292.”

RNC RAILS AGAINST CALIFORNIA’S LATE MAIL-IN BALLOT COUNTING AMID NATIONAL LITIGATION: ‘IT IS ABSURD’

Americans “want to see election integrity,” McCarthy told host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday.

“They want to see transparency and they want to see timely reporting: We had that in California,” McCarthy, a former Republican House member in the deep-blue state, said. “We were very liberal in the rules about absentee ballots, but we had accountability.”

“We had cut off voter registration 30 days before the election. That helps the registrars to know who’s going to vote and the candidates,” he continued. “Now we have same day voter, and you don’t have to show ID. Gavin changed the rules where he mails ballots to everyone. So he took away the choice to Californians to vote in person or to vote absentee. Everybody gets mailed a ballot. But he didn’t clean up the rolls. So that raises doubt in people’s minds.”

McCarthy noted Raman’s Election Night disappointment was originally telling.

“When you look at the LA mayor’s race, the third place person gave it like a concession speech that night and cried, and she was getting the most votes in the last drop,” McCarthy said. “So if she didn’t even believe that she could move up, that puts in question to the whole election itself. And that’s why it brings doubt to people.”

President Donald Trump had weighed in, too, with the RNC pointing to the pending Watson v. RNC Supreme Court decision on late ballot counting due soon.

The Watson decision might come before the end of June.

“.@POTUS is right,” the RNC’s Election Integrity unit posted on X. “That’s why the RNC has boots on the ground and is fighting in the Supreme Court to stop ballots received after Election Day from being counted. MAKE ELECTIONS SECURE AGAIN!”

<!–>

–>
Keep Reading
By
Business

Scott Pelley alleges CBS leadership pushed for a more pro-Trump framing

Former “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley accused CBS News chief Bari Weiss of tilting coverage in favor of how President Donald Trump characterized events in Minnesota and described a newsroom in turmoil under her leadership during an emotional New York Times interview published Sunday.

In his first interview since being fired last week, Pelley alleged Weiss attempted to influence a politically sensitive “60 Minutes” report on immigration protests in Minneapolis and said her intervention amounted to editorial interference he had never before experienced at CBS News.

“There was a thumb on the scale for the president’s version of events that I felt was a level of political influence that I had never seen in 37 years at CBS News,” Pelley told The New York Times.

Pelley said the dispute centered on a “60 Minutes” segment about the confrontation between protesters and federal agents during immigration enforcement operations in Minnesota, including the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good.

According to Pelley’s account, Weiss sent notes on the segment after it had already been approved for broadcast. He said one request was to portray protesters as more violent and another involved the description of the circumstances around Good’s death.

“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,” Pelley said. “And the other thing, Renee Good’s car. You need to describe her as driving toward the officer.”

Pelley said he and his producer had already “gone out of our way” to include footage showing protesters behaving violently, including confrontations with law enforcement. He said they also reviewed video of the shooting involving Good and concluded it did not support the characterization Weiss wanted to include in the piece.

According to Pelley, no changes were made based on Weiss’ notes.

CBS News rejected Pelley’s account in a statement to The New York Times and NBC News, saying that Weiss made “four points in the course of editorial back-and-forth.”

“They had no political motivation and were proposed solely to make the piece as strong, fair, and accurate as possible,” the statement said. “As is frequently the case in any newsroom that operates with collaboration, not everything she raised made it into the final piece.”

Pelley’s allegations were part of his broader criticism of CBS News leadership following the sale of Paramount, CBS’ parent company, to Skydance Media and the appointment of Weiss as the network’s editor-in-chief.

Pelley was fired Tuesday after a heated meeting with newly hired “60 Minutes” executive producer Nick Bilton, whom he said lacked experience in television news.

Pelley told the Times that tension had been mounting for weeks following mass firings and leadership changes at “60 Minutes,” including the dismissal of executive producer Tanya Simon.

Pelley said he confronted Bilton during a staff meeting where the new boss had introduced himself to employees and read from prepared remarks. Prior to the meeting, Bilton sent an email to staff that Pelley described as “insulting” and introduced plans for a new crop of “60 Minutes” correspondents.

“And when I saw that, I thought, ‘They’re going to fire all of us, eventually,’” Pelley said. “So that’s why I use these admittedly, for a journalist, hyperbolic terms.”

Pelley described growing concerns at CBS News after Paramount agreed to settle Trump’s lawsuit against the network in July 2025, a decision announced just weeks before federal regulators approved the company’s acquisition by David Ellison’s Skydance Media. Pelley called the settlement a “bribe” intended to help secure approval of the deal, an allegation that Paramount has denied.

The former CBS News journalist alleged that Simon’s firing may have been linked to tensions involving Anderson Cooper’s departure from “60 Minutes” at the end of his contract. Cooper, whose contract was not renewed, ended his final appearance by saying he hoped “60 Minutes” would remain true to itself.

Simon was “blindsided” by her termination, according to Pelley, who tearfully described her as having grown up with CBS News since her father, Bob Simon, worked at the network.

“My understanding from people directly involved in that interaction is that Bari Weiss was quite livid that Anderson Cooper was allowed to say those things and that she, Bari, was not consulted beforehand, which in our normal course of business would not have been done anyway,” Pelley said. “I believe that was part of the reason Tanya was let go.”

A spokesperson from CBS News did not immediately respond to NBC News’ request for comment on Pelley’s description of Simon’s termination and his assertion that Weiss should be removed from her position at CBS News.

Pelley, who spent 37 years at CBS News as a White House correspondent, “CBS Evening News” anchor and “60 Minutes” correspondent, described the network’s leadership as lacking experience. He believes the network can recover but warned trust inside the newsroom as eroded.

“They don’t know what they’re doing,” Pelley said. “And there’s a subtle political bias that I’ve never seen at ‘60 Minutes’ before, or at CBS News before. So that is my hope: a return to sanity. We can save this. It’s possible to land this plane. But right now, CBS News is on fire.”

Keep Reading
By
Business

Stocks sink as worries about an interest rate hike rattle tech investors

Major stock indexes fell sharply Friday after a strong jobs report set the stage for the Federal Reserve to hike rates, rattling shares of companies that are involved in sky-high artificial intelligence investments.

The threat of higher interest rates often sends stocks lower because borrowing money, especially the large sums that AI firms are borrowing, becomes more expensive.

The Nasdaq 100, which tracks the largest nonfinancial tech stocks traded on the Nasdaq stock exchange, plunged 4.7%, its worst day since April 2025, capping its worst week since March 2025.

Leading that index lower were shares of AI-linked Marvell, Arm, Micron, SanDisk, Intel, AMD and Qualcomm, which all declined more than 10%.

The S&P 500 fell 2.6% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 694 points. U.S. government bond yields, which influence interest rates paid by consumers, rose to about their highest levels since the end of May. Friday was the S&P 500’s worst single-day drop since October.

Still, major indexes remain near record highs. The S&P 500 is still holding on to gains of about 8% for the year, while the Nasdaq is still up almost 10% year-to-date.

Friday’s rout came a week before SpaceX shares are set to begin trading on the Nasdaq, which will test Wall Street’s appetite for big AI plays. Elon Musk’s company, which has AI and social media businesses alongside its core space operation, is set to raise a record $75 billion in new money at a valuation of more than $1.7 trillion.

That offering will be the first of three trillion-dollar IPOs expected this year. AI firms Anthropic and OpenAI are expected to go public later this year, seeking tens of billions of dollars in cash to continue their expansive investments.

Experts have raised many questions about the underlying fundamentals of these companies, fearing that they could unsettle the market and retirement accounts alike.

Selling accelerated in late afternoon after the Financial Times reported that Facebook and Instagram owner Meta Platforms was “considering raising tens of billions of dollars in a stock offering” to bolster its AI offerings. Meta shares declined more than 6%. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Friday’s pain hit several major tech firms. Broadcom, which triggered selling in tech stocks earlier in the week after a lackluster earnings report, fell 7%, bringing its total loss this week to more than 13%.

Nvidia, the largest publicly traded company in the world, slid about 6%. Oracle shares lost 10% of their value and IBM dropped 7%, as of midday trading.

Shares of construction equipment companies that help build AI data centers fell, too. Shares of Caterpillar, a large Dow index component, dropped almost 4%.

Investors are rattled at the likelihood that the Federal Reserve could hike rates before the end of the year. Currently, the futures market is projecting a rate hike by December with a 60% chance that rates rise by October’s Fed meeting.

“We now expect the Fed to reverse 2025’s three ‘insurance’ rate cuts at sequential meetings, beginning in December,” BNP Paribas chief U.S. economist James Egelhof said after the jobs report was issued.

Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council at the White House, said earlier Friday that markets are “terribly wrong” to judge that the strong jobs report means higher interest rates.

Hassett added, in an interview on Bloomberg Television, that the ongoing energy shock from the war with Iran is not likely to cause widespread inflation.

He said that his advice to the Federal Reserve and newly installed Chairman Kevin Warsh would be to “watch the numbers, because what you’re going to see is that with a big supply-side boom, you could have high growth without having runaway inflation.”

Keep Reading
By
Business

Lesley Stahl, Bill Whitaker and Jon Wertheim say they’ll stay at ‘60 Minutes’

“60 Minutes” correspondents Lesley Stahl, Bill Whitaker and Jon Wertheim said Friday that they planned to stay on at the newsmagazine, capping days of turmoil for the show.

“We have had a hard time deciding whether to stay,” the three wrote in a memo to their colleagues at the program, before adding: “We don’t want to see ‘60 Minutes’ die.”

They wrote that they were still “deeply upset by the firings” of executive producer Tanya Simon and high-ranking producer Draggan Mihailovich, whom they called “strong leaders who everyone respected.” Their colleague Scott Pelley was fired earlier this week after he challenged the newsmagazine’s new executive producer over the recent firings.

The longtime correspondents said that “as far as we can tell,” those leaders were fired because “they fought for our ‘60 Minutes’ values and stood up to protect our independence and integrity.”

“Newsrooms are not supposed to be run like dictatorships,” they added in the memo, obtained by NBC News. “Collaboration and argument are the way we have always worked at 60.”

Stahl, 84, has spent most of her career at CBS News and joined “60 Minutes” in 1991. Whitaker, 74, spent three decades as a CBS reporter before joining the newsmagazine in 2014. Wertheim, 55, joined three years later.

The trio’s statement is the latest beat in the turmoil engulfing “60 Minutes,” America’s top-rated and most prestigious newsmagazine, which just ended its 58th season.

The upheaval started last week, when several key senior staff members were let go. Tensions between “60 Minutes” staffers and management reached a fever pitch during a Monday meeting to introduce executive producer Nick Bilton, where Pelley openly challenged leadership and accused CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss of “murdering” the storied newsmagazine that debuted in 1968.

“She does not love this place,” Pelley told Bilton at the meeting, according to a recording. “She was brought in to kill it, and she’s been doing exactly that.”

The next day, Pelley was fired after a nearly 40-year run at CBS News. In a statement, Pelley expressed “gratitude for the men and women of CBS News who encouraged and enriched my work, very often at the risk of their own lives. I pray for a day when those people and their ideals are honored again —a day when sanity, competence, and courage return.”

In a Wednesday call with network employees, Weiss tried to temper fears and explain the decision to fire Pelley, saying newsroom leaders could not “find a way back” with the veteran journalist.

“I hope I speak, I know I speak for myself, and I hope I speak for everyone here when I say that I’m only interested in working in a newsroom that is built on trust and mutual respect. We cannot do our work without it,” Weiss told CBS News employees Wednesday.

Shortly afterward, Pelley released his own statement disputing Weiss’ characterization of the Tuesday meeting, saying that at no point did anyone “suggest that there could be steps taken by either side that would lead to a resolution.”

As previously reported by NBC News, the turmoil within “60 Minutes” has left staffers grappling with questions about the program’s future.

On Thursday night, Bilton attempted to assuage those fears in an emailed memo to the staff, writing that the storied show “will never be instructed by the ownership” of the network on its reporting. In the memo obtained by NBC News, Bilton wrote that he had spoken with Stahl, Wertheim and Whitaker and stressed that they were “core to this show’s success.”

“We talked about what makes 60 Minutes exceptional, about the traditions and legacy of the past, about how you do the work that produces such momentous pieces. We also talked about change: About new audiences, new platforms, and new ways of storytelling that these new audiences need,” Bilton wrote about his conversations with the three. “We’ll speak more about that in the weeks to come.”

Amid the upheaval, however, the three “60 Minutes” correspondents said they “feared that our returning might be construed as an endorsement of the existing power structure.”

“That is simply, categorically not the case,” the trio said in the memo. “We have been grieving because this whole mess has wounded and damaged the broadcast.”

They added that they “want to stay and fight,” while also working to build trust with Bilton.

“We heard all the right things in yesterday’s ‘independence’ memo,” they said. “It went a long way, and now we need to see these commitments to our process and procedures put into action. If we can continue doing the work that made this show what it is — committing acts of independent, fearless journalism and storytelling — we’re here for it.”

“If not, we leave,” they said.

Keep Reading
By
Politics

GOP senators torch scandal-plagued Platner while Dems stay silent on candidacy

As scrutiny of Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner mounts ahead of Tuesday’s primary, Republican senators are openly denouncing his candidacy while many Democrats are declining to weigh in.

The reluctance by many Senate Democrats to publicly defend Platner comes as the Maine candidate faces mounting scrutiny days before Tuesday’s primary, with new allegations and controversies emerging.

“I think it is really sad when you have someone who’s a self-described communist, who put a Nazi tattoo on himself, to see so many Senate Democrats supporting him,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital. “That should be beyond the pale.”

When Fox News Digital asked Democratic senators whether they still supported Platner, some were reluctant to weigh in, while others said the decision belongs to Maine voters.

When asked if he would continue to back Platner, Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., responded, “Who told you I was supporting him?” When asked if he does support him, he replied, “I don’t vote in that state.”

SEE IT: DEM SENATORS DODGE ON BACKING PLATNER AS MAINE CANDIDATE’S SCANDAL CLOUDS FINAL DAYS BEFORE PRIMARY

“The people of Maine are going to have to make up their minds,” Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, said.

Other Democrats refused to comment on the situation altogether, claiming to not have given the Maine election much thought. 

“I’m gonna take a look at the race,” Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said. “I hadn’t paid any attention. We’ve been busy on other fronts so, but I will look at it now.”

“I don’t know,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said when asked his thoughts on the race in Maine. “I have a few other things on my mind.”

PLATNER CONTROVERSIES FUEL SPECULATION ABOUT LITTLE-KNOWN MAINE BALLOT REPLACEMENT PROVISION

These responses come after a string of allegations and revelations about Platner were made public, and continue to emerge: sexting scandals while married, openly mocking a wounded American soldier in a Taliban attack and crude sexual Reddit posts. Most recently, allegations have also come forward of disturbing behaviors in his past relationships.

A recent report from the New York Times features explosive excerpts from Platner’s ex-girlfriends, who alleged that he hates women, detailed fantasies about both rape and killing, and was aware that his chest tattoo resembled the Totenkopf, a symbol used by Nazi death camp guards, despite having previously denied knowing about the association.

‘HE HATED WOMEN’: EXPLOSIVE ABUSE, NEW NAZI TATTOO ALLEGATIONS FROM EXES ROCK PLATNER’S CAMPAIGN

Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., shared his hope that Maine voters will take action at the voting booths on Tuesday to not allow Platner to be elected as Maine’s Senate Democrat nominee.

“I think it’s going to be interesting to see if the voters of Maine are able to see through the lies that Graham Platner is planting,” Hagerty said. “He’s trying to excuse himself for behavior that is totally unconscionable.”

“You got to really feel sorry for the true Democrats in this country,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., said. “They have no representation. Now they’re taking these people who absolutely have no business representing anybody.”

Despite the plethora of scandals and allegations coming out nearly daily on Platner, he still remains the frontrunner in Tuesday’s Democratic primary. 

Many Democrats, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., continue backing Platner as Democrats view Maine’s Republican-held Senate seat as one of their top pickup opportunities in the midterms.

If elected, Platner and the incumbent Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, will face off in November’s midterms.

“I can’t imagine that Mainers want to be represented by somebody like that,” Hagerty said. “When they have an option to continue working with Susan Collins, who is working her heart out to represent Maine every day.

“This Platner guy can’t beat Susan Collins, number one,” Tuberville said. “But to even have him in the race is embarrassing — to me — for Maine and for our country.”

<!–>

–>
Keep Reading
By
Politics

Bondi’s replacement saddled with Epstein baggage as he awaits grueling confirmation battle

Former Attorney General Pam Bondi revealed that Todd Blanche, who at the time was second in command at the Justice Department, was put in charge of the release of the millions of documents from the Epstein files during her closed-door hearing before Congress late last month. 

“As the head of a large department with broad responsibilities, I did not lead every aspect of this effort nor conduct that document review myself,” Bondi said during the hearing. “I delegated that oversight over this process to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.” 

The House Oversight Committee released its transcript from Bondi’s May 29 hearing just a day after President Donald Trump announced he intended to nominate Blanche as his permanent attorney general nominee, potentially complicating Blanche’s confirmation as senators on both sides of the political aisle have heavily criticized the files’ rollout.

Blanche has been serving as Acting Attorney General since April 2, when Trump announced Bondi’s dismissal.

LAPSED EPSTEIN DEADLINE UNDERSCORES CHALLENGE OF REVIEWING TROVES OF FILES IN 30 DAYS

The release of the transcript, which placed responsibility for the Epstein files rollout squarely on Blanche’s shoulders, comes just days after Blanche announced during a hearing that the Justice Department will be eliminating its controversial Anti-Weaponization Fund, which was created to compensate alleged victims of politicized prosecution and labeled a “slush fund” for Trump and his supporters by critics. The Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files and the Anti-Weaponization Fund, both overseen by Blanche, has drawn concern from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers.

Bondi’s testimony revealed that Blanche had been her point man on the Epstein files and was tasked with briefing her on the release of the Epstein files.

The former attorney general found herself in hot water last July following a joint release by the Justice Department and FBI finding that there was no evidence that convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who is alleged to have hundreds of underage victims, had kept a client list.

BONDI SAYS EPSTEIN CLIENT LIST ‘SITTING ON MY DESK RIGHT NOW’, AND IS REVIEWING JFK, MLK FILES

The joint statement, which Bondi said during May’s hearing was penned by Blanche and not her, comes after months of the Trump administration teasing the release of the Epstein files. In February 2025, Fox News’ John Roberts asked Bondi about the release of Epstein’s “client list,” which Bondi responded by saying that it was “sitting on her desk.” Bondi and the White House clarified after the fact that she was referring to the files as a whole and not Epstein’s “client list.”

Members of Congress asked Bondi why Blanche interviewed Epstein’s co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell, who was in prison, weeks after the joint memo release. Bondi replied by saying Blanche “was leading the Epstein matter and the release of everything from the beginning.”

Once Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November 2025, Bondi stated Blanche oversaw the release of millions of documents, which entailed overseeing the redaction process, including its protocols and guidelines, determining which documents were privileged and making corrections to redactions.

DOJ’S EPSTEIN DISCLOSURE DRAWS FIRE FOR WEBSITE GLITCHES, MISSING DOCUMENTS, REDACTIONS

“He was in charge of the process and the entire release of the Epstein files,” Bondi said.

But the Justice Department faced scrutiny over failures to redact all identifiable information from some of Epstein’s victims, allegations that some redactions were heavy-handed and that some documents were completely missing, prompting a bipartisan group of senators to send a letter in March requesting that the Government Accountability Office lead an investigation into the Justice Department’s redaction process.

“Not only has DOJ withheld files, but those records that were disclosed are largely information that was already public,” the letter stated. “Even those records are so heavily redacted that there are serious questions as to whether the Department is properly applying the limited exceptions for redaction that are permitted under the Act. Moreover, several records appear to have been removed, without explanation, from the files the Department did release.”

SENATE REPUBLICAN DEMANDS STATE, FEDERAL COURTS ‘IMMEDIATELY UNSEAL ALL’ EPSTEIN DOCS

However, Bondi said during the hearing that she was not blaming Blanche and that the error rate for the redaction was 1%, which was what Blanche had told her.

“He managed this investigation — and it was a Herculean task — with very little error,” Bondi said during the hearing. “And Todd did an excellent job, in my opinion, and is doing an excellent job as our Attorney General.”

Following her closed-door testimony, Bondi pushed back on allegations from Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., that she is pushing the blame of the Epstein Files rollouts on Blanche.

“NOT TRUE,” Bondi posted on X. “I praised Acting AG Blanche’s management of this Herculean task. I said his ethics are beyond reproach and that he is an incredible Attorney General.”

A White House spokesperson said that Blanche was doing an “excellent job” and will continue to perform well.

“Todd Blanche is an American patriot who fearlessly fought on behalf of President Trump against the Democrats’ illegal and unprecedented lawfare campaign,” said Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman. “The President’s entire team at the Department of Justice is doing a great job advocating for sanity, law and order, and policies that keep Americans safe.”

Blanche’s nomination is also expected to face scrutiny from Democrats who have questioned whether the former Trump defense attorney can serve as an independent attorney general. Last month, Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., launched a Senate Judiciary Committee inquiry based on allegations that Blanche disregarded ethics guidance advising him to recuse himself from matters at the Justice Department involving Trump, who he previously served as a personal lawyer to.

Fox News Digital reached out to Senate Judiciary Committee leadership and the Justice Department for comment.

<!–>

–>
Keep Reading
By