Trump Calls On Fox News To Fire Two Top Personalities
President Donald Trump expressed his frustration with two Fox News hosts in a Truth Social post directed at the network’s executives, reacting, in part, to a recent interview on “Fox News Sunday” featuring Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Jake Auchincloss.
Trump accused anchor Shannon Bream of failing to correct Democrats when they spread “propaganda and lies” on her program. Additionally, he criticized Jessica Tarlov, a liberal panelist on both “The Five” and the Sunday show, calling for her to be removed from the air, labeling her as “a real loser.”
“Tell Shannon Bream of FoxNews that it’s not the Save Act, it’s the Save America Act, a big difference! Also, when she insists on having lightweight Democrat Congressmen, such as Jake Auchincloss, on her not very hard hitting show, she should correct them when they spew out Democrat propaganda and lies. She never does! I always close deals, unlike the Dems, and did great with China in every way, also, unlike the Dems!” Trump said.
“For Fox executives only, take Jessica Tarlov off the air. She is, from her voice, to her lies, and everything else about her, one of the worst ‘personalities’ on television, a real loser! People cannot stand watching her. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump continued.
Auchincloss told Bream on “Fox News Sunday” that the war in Iran has been a “failure” and has given Iran leverage through its control of the Strait of Hormuz, neither of which is true.
Trump has previously criticized Fox News, especially after the network’s early projection that former President Joe Biden would win Arizona in the 2020 election. In March, he expressed his disapproval of Tarlov, who often criticizes him on air, during an appearance on “The Five.” He stated that the show would be better off without her, the Daily Caller reported.
“I watch Jessica, and I’m not a fan,” Trump said. “And she uses fake numbers. She’ll give, ‘Well, he’s only polling 42%.’ That’s not right. Polling very high, actually.” He went on to blast “bad journalists” who write “fake stories,” adding, “I’m sure I’d like her. I’m sure she’s a lovely person.”
Trump fired a verbal salvo at CNN earlier this week after the little-watched cable network published a statement from Iran that the commander-in-chief labeled a “fraud.” As it has done throughout the U.S. conflict with the Islamic Republic, CNN readily published a statement from Tehran claiming that Iran was victorious and “forced” Trump to accept a 10-point cease-fire agreement.
“Iran says it has achieved a great victory and forced the United States to accept its 10-point plan, according to a statement from Iran’s Supreme National Security Council” that was reported “by Iranian state media,” CNN’s report began.
The network also claimed that, as part of the plan, the U.S. “has in principle agreed” to lift all sanctions against Iran and withdraw all US forces from all bases in the region.
The report also said the Trump administration has agreed to “accept Iran’s nuclear enrichment and recognize its control over the Strait of Hormuz, while “controlled passage through the waterway” would be conducted in coordination with Iran’s military.
The report from the Iranian regime was clearly propaganda, which led to questions as to why CNN would treat it as legitimate, especially considering that Trump’s primary objective was to destroy Iran’s nuclear enrichment capabilities and deny the regime nuclear weapons.
Trump took to his Truth Social platform to write, in part:
The alleged Statement put out by CNN World News is a FRAUD, as CNN well knows. The false Statement was linked to a Fake News site (from Nigeria) and, of course, immediately picked up by CNN, and blared out as a “legitimate” headline. The Official Statement by Iran was just released, and posted on TRUTH. … Authorities are looking to determine whether or not a crime was committed on the issuance of the Fake CNN World Statement, or was it a sick rogue player?
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
