Thousands protested in Los Angeles against President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard, resulting in clashes with law enforcement that involved tear gas, rubber bullets, and the burning of self-driving cars. A 9News correspondent was injured by a rubber bullet during the unrest. Following the escalation, the LAPD declared an unlawful assembly, ordering people to leave downtown Los Angeles. Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass criticized the deployment as a breach of state sovereignty and a provocation, while the White House defended the action.
Read More
British news photographer Nick Stern, based in Los Angeles, requires emergency surgery after being injured during a protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Paramount. Stern sustained a significant leg wound, believed to be caused by a non-lethal round fired by law enforcement during the demonstration, which involved approximately 350-400 protesters and a large police response. The Sheriff’s department stated the protest turned violent, prompting the use of tear gas and other munitions in crowd control. Stern’s injury, initially feared to be from a live round due to the severity of the wound, is now confirmed to be from a non-lethal projectile.
Read More
On May 12, 2025, newly elected Pope Leo XIV, the first American pontiff, held his inaugural press conference at the Vatican’s Paul VI Hall. Addressing thousands of journalists, he urged the release of imprisoned journalists persecuted for reporting the truth, while also imploring reporters to avoid using their platform to incite hatred. The Pope stressed the importance of responsible communication, emphasizing the need for peace-building dialogue and the rejection of a “war of words and images.” He concluded by calling on journalists to prioritize communication that fosters peace and amplifies the voices of the marginalized.
Read More
The White House’s decision to eliminate a regular reporting slot for independent newswires represents a concerning move towards controlling information flow. This action directly impacts access for smaller news organizations, raising serious questions about transparency and the administration’s commitment to a free press. The elimination of this slot isn’t simply a matter of rearranging press access; it’s a calculated step to limit diverse perspectives and potentially silence critical voices.
The stated rationale for this change is often vague, lacking transparency itself. Claims of expanding access to “non-traditional” media by favoring print outlets seem contradictory and arbitrary, particularly given the broader context of suppressed independent voices.… Continue reading
Senator Bernie Sanders criticized President Trump’s thin-skinned response to a critical “60 Minutes” broadcast, highlighting Trump’s repeated calls for CBS to lose its license. Sanders mocked Trump’s demand, emphasizing the president’s inability to accept criticism despite readily dishing it out through lawsuits against various media outlets. This reaction, Sanders argued, demonstrates an intolerance for dissent unbefitting a political leader. Trump’s actions underscore his pattern of attacking critical media outlets, labeling any negative coverage as “fake news.”
Read More
In response to Sunday’s “60 Minutes” broadcast featuring segments on Ukraine and Greenland, President Trump launched a scathing attack on the program, demanding the FCC impose significant penalties for what he deemed unlawful and defamatory coverage. This follows Trump’s ongoing $20 billion lawsuit against the network, which alleges biased editing of a Kamala Harris interview, a claim CBS denies. The FCC has already initiated an investigation into this matter, alongside several other probes into various news organizations. Despite the legal battles, “60 Minutes” continues its critical coverage of the Trump administration.
Read More
The White House must now allow the Associated Press full access, a judge has ruled, solidifying the principle of equal access for journalists within the government’s purview. This ruling correctly emphasizes that if the government chooses to open its doors to some members of the press, it cannot selectively shut those doors to others based on their perceived viewpoints. This is a fundamental aspect of the First Amendment’s protection of free speech and the press, ensuring an even playing field for disseminating information to the public.
However, the practical implications of this ruling are far from straightforward. The question arises: what are the exact requirements for inclusion in the White House press corps?… Continue reading
Senator Markwayne Mullin, in a since-clarified X video, joked about the historical shooting of a Congressman by a reporter, suggesting violence could deter “fake news.” He later claimed his comments were a joke, despite the video’s apparent seriousness. This incident follows a 2023 near-physical altercation with a union president during a Senate hearing, highlighting Mullin’s history of confrontational behavior. The historical context referenced involves a reporter acquitted of murder on self-defense grounds.
Read More
Radio Free Europe’s assertion that the Washington administration shut down its Russian broadcast despite a court order is deeply unsettling. The very idea that a government would disregard a legal injunction to silence a news outlet raises serious questions about the rule of law and freedom of the press. This action smacks of authoritarianism, a blatant disregard for due process, and a chilling suppression of information.
The implications of this action extend far beyond the immediate impact on Radio Free Europe’s broadcasting capabilities in Russia. It suggests a pattern of behavior where the government feels emboldened to ignore legal constraints when it suits its agenda.… Continue reading
The suggestion that an Atlantic editor might publicly release the full text messages of Hegseth’s purported war plans is a fascinating development, fraught with potential consequences. The core issue hinges on the starkly contrasting statements from the White House and Hegseth himself. The White House insists no classified information was shared, a claim seemingly contradicted by Hegseth’s denial of even participating in the relevant group chat. This discrepancy creates a significant opportunity for the editor.
If the White House’s assertion of no classified information holds true, then releasing the texts would appear to present minimal legal risk. The act itself would become a powerful demonstration of transparency, forcing a direct confrontation with the administration’s narrative.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood