program

While the smoke has begun to clear at “60 Minutes” after three correspondents were fired, CBS News leadership now faces the challenge of finding journalists who can fill their shoes just three months before a new season starts.

The venerable news magazine was plunged into crisis last week as longtime correspondent Scott Pelley confronted management about the May 28 firings of his colleagues Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega along with the program’s executive producer Tanya Simon and her second-in-command Draggan Mihailovich.

Pelley, who also accused CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss of “murdering” the program, was terminated June 2 after a 37-year career at the network. He later gave an interview to The New York Times, accusing Weiss of “putting her thumb on the scale” for the Trump administration when guiding the editorial direction of stories.

(CBS News denied Pelley’s accusations. But Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison, who has given Weiss a free hand in disrupting the CBS News hierarchy, found the turbulent situation concerning enough to personally reach out to veteran “60 Minutes” correspondent Lesley Stahl, according to The New York Times. He assured Stahl the program would not be subject to political interference, a message she passed along to the staff.)

Lesley Stahl in the 2022 film “Marcel the Shell With Shoes On.”

(A24)

The recent personnel bloodbath followed the already announced departure of Anderson Cooper, and leaves CBS News with four correspondent roles to fill and a far less experienced executive producer — former tech journalist Nick Bilton in place to keep the program on track.

Remaining staffers were encouraged that Maria Gavrilovic, a 19-year veteran of CBS News who worked closely with Pelley, was promoted to senior producer under Bilton. They are also relieved that correspondents Stahl, Jon Wertheim and Bill Whitaker chose to remain with the program rather than leave in solidarity with Pelley.

Norah O’Donnell’s interview with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman in 2021.

But “60 Minutes” is under pressure to get a new team in place as newcomers will have little time to learn the program’s formula that gives it the comforting consistency its viewers seek. The 13-minute pieces on “60 Minutes” are filmed, written and voice-tracked in a distinctive narrative style that takes time to master, according to people who have gone through the process.

Weiss has told people internally that “60 Minutes” is the most important platform within the news division and if a major story comes from outside its corps of correspondents, it will find a place on the program.

Here are the leading contenders for full-time roles based on interviews with several sources at CBS News who were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. A CBS News representative declined comment.

Holly Williams: Williams has been a foreign correspondent working out of Istanbul since 2012. The Australian journalist has reported extensively from war zones in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Gaza and Ukraine. When covering Syria’s civil war from inside the country, she and her team gained access to a prison where alleged ISIS terrorists were being held.

Williams has contributed reports to “60 Minutes” over the years. Before joining CBS, she was a Beijing-based correspondent for Sky News.

CBS News foreign correspondent Holly Williams,

(Michele Crowe / CBS News)

Tony Dokoupil: The anchor of “CBS Evening News” is expected to be added as a contributor to “60 Minutes,” a role also given to his predecessors at the newscast including Dan Rather, Katie Couric, Scott Pelley and Norah O’Donnell.

Dokoupil has done longer interviews and segments for “CBS Sunday Morning” over his 11 years at the network. The additional exposure to a Sunday night audience of more than 9 million who tune into “60 Minutes” could also help boost his nightly newscast. The program has struggled in the ratings since he took over in January when, during his inaugural week, he awkwardly saluted Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the close of one episode.

“CBS Evening News” anchor Tony Dokoupil and the network’s chief national correspondent Matt Gutman.

(CBS News)

Matt Gutman: The network’s national correspondent was Weiss’ first significant on-air talent hire when he joined from ABC News in December. Gutman has been a frequent presence on big stories and breaking coverage for “CBS Evening News” since he arrived.

Mariana van Zeller at the Ultimate Disney Fan Event at the Anaheim Convention Center in September 2022.

(Image Group LA / Walt Disney Co.)

Mariana van Zeller: The multilingual journalist is best known for her documentary series “Trafficked,” which airs on the National Geographic Channel. Van Zeller, 50, has won dozens of awards for the program that has taken her around the world to report on black market activities and human trafficking.

Norah O’Donnell: Currently a contributor to “60 Minutes” who already appears on the program’s trademark open, O’Donnell’s role is expected to expand. After CBS settled a $16-million lawsuit filed by President Trump against the program for what he claimed was deceptive editing of an interview, O’Donnell helped the program by stepping up to interview the president twice, subjecting him to tough questions. Her recent joint interview with three U.S. cardinals about Pope Leo XIV and his church’s opposition to the Iran war and Trump’s aggressive immigration crackdown became a major story in April.

Major Garrett: The network’s chief Washington correspondent recently appeared on “60 Minutes” to interview Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The assignment caused internal tension as Stahl was pursuing a sit-down with the leader. But Weiss handled the booking and gave Netanyahu the option to select Garrett.

While the decision faced some criticism, the program regularly agreed to former President Obama’s preference for now-retired “60 Minutes” correspondent Steve Kroft to interview him even though other journalists on the team wanted a chance.

SACRAMENTO — Disability rights advocates on Monday gathered outside the state Capitol to push back on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed cuts to in-home supportive services.

“These aren’t just numbers in a budget; these are real people,” said Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez (R-Indio). “These are children, seniors, veterans and individuals with disabilities whose independence and quality of life depend on these services every single day.”

The In-Home Supportive Services program helps disabled and elderly people remain in their houses by providing in-home care. It pays assistants to help with tasks such as showering, cooking or attending doctor appointments. Newsom’s revised budget proposal, which was unveiled last month, would cut $367.7 million from the program and shift some of that financial burden onto counties.

Gonzalez explained that the issue hits close to home for his family. He said his son has cerebral palsy and a seizure disorder, and relies on assistance to live with dignity.

“Families should not have to wonder every budget season whether the support they rely on will be taken away,” Gonzalez said. “These services should not be treated as bargaining chips in budget negotiations.”

Assemblymember Laurie Davies (R-Laguna Niguel) questioned why a successful state like California would need to enact such cuts.

“It’s hard to go a day without hearing the governor or the administration brag about how we are the fourth-largest economy in the world and yet we can’t fully fund [this program for] the most vulnerable?” Davies said.

The governor has previously explained that difficult decisions must be made as the state could soon face an economic downturn. The budget proposal relies on a tax windfall, largely attributed to the stock market success of artificial intelligence companies, to erase California’s deficit — but some analysts have warned that the AI bubble could burst.

H.D. Palmer, deputy director for external affairs for the California Department of Finance, on Monday said some of the proposed cuts are a byproduct of the federal government’s changes in funding and eligibility for health and human services programs.

The so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill” signed by President Trump last year shifted federal funding away from safety-net programs, he said.

Palmer stressed that state budget negotiations are ongoing.

“Until we land on an agreement, speculation regarding the resolution of any specific differences between the Governor’s budget plan or the Legislature’s respective budget proposals would be premature,” he stated by email.

Monday’s event drew some bipartisan support. Brody Fernandez, communications director for Assemblymember Esmeralda Z. Soria (D-Fresno), said the legislator had been fighting for In-Home Supportive Services funding since she was elected.

Fernandez said his daughter has special needs and her mother had to give up her career to become a full-time caregiver. “This is personal for us and for many of the incredible individuals standing behind me,” he said.

Graham Knaus, chief executive of the California State Assn. of Counties, told The Times that he appreciated efforts to raise awareness about the burden these changes would place on counties.

“We applaud the Senate and Assembly for recognizing counties’ concerns and rejecting this proposal,” he said. “We ask them to hold the line in final negotiations.”

Elizabette Guecamburu, a bookkeeper who has a rare neuromuscular disorder, spoke at Monday’s rally and implored the governor to remember the teachings of their shared alma mater Santa Clara University, a Jesuit-led private school.

“I want him to remember where he came from,” she said, adding that students were taught to value compassion and community. “Don’t forget your Jesuit roots.”

WASHINGTON — Republicans are warning the White House that a critical surveillance authority is likely to lapse this week amid bipartisan backlash over President Trump’s pick to lead the nation’s intelligence community.

Sen. Tom Cotton, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sounded the alarm over the weekend after a failed procedural vote to extend the program.

The senators in a letter urged Secretary of State Marco Rubio to prepare “for a potential significant gap in foreign intelligence collection” if the authority expires. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, set to lapse June 12, allows agencies including the CIA, National Security Agency and FBI to collect communications from foreign targets overseas without a warrant.

Efforts to secure a long-term extension of the program already faced hurdles because of bipartisan concerns that the program can incidentally collect Americans’ communications. Privacy advocates and some lawmakers have been pushing to create a new warrant requirement before those communications can be searched.

Senate leaders from both parties appeared to be nearing agreement on a long-term extension. But the effort collapsed after Trump selected federal housing finance regulator Bill Pulte to serve as acting director of national intelligence.

“I know how important this tool is. Why the president would throw this live hand grenade of Bill Pulte in 10 days before this is due to expire, I’m not sure,” Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Pulte pick upends bipartisan deal

Early Friday morning, after senators spent the night debating separate immigration legislation, seven Republicans joined nearly all Democrats in blocking a long-term extension of the surveillance authority.

Democrats and several Republicans registered their opposition to Trump’s selection of Pulte, arguing the federal housing finance regulator lacks the experience needed to oversee the nation’s 18 intelligence agencies.

“The naming of Pulte to that position, although the timing arguably wasn’t the best, I still don’t think it ought to derail something that’s this important,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said.

Thune has expressed concern over Pulte’s pick, saying the nation’s top intelligence post should not be “weaponized” and that the job should be filled by “professionals.” Cotton, who rarely strays from supporting Trump and a leading advocate for the surveillance authority, declined to endorse Pulte, saying only that he had “no observations on the matter.”

“He’s not qualified for the long-term position,” Republican Sen. James Lankford, another member of the Intelligence Committee, told “Fox News Sunday.” “That’s been clear on this. He has no national security background.

Both Republican and Democratic senators skeptical of Pulte pointed to his record at the Federal Housing Finance Agency. In the role, he’s been linked with criminal referrals over allegations of mortgage fraud by public officials Trump sought to punish, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat; Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.; and Lisa Cook, a board member of the Federal Reserve.

Republicans will need to garner some Democratic support to pass any extension of the surveillance authority in the Senate. But a breakthrough appears difficult so long as Pulte remains in the position, which Trump said last week would only be temporary.

“I don’t see any path to convincing enough Democrats,” Warner said on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked if renewal was possible with Pulte in the position.

The current reauthorization debate is hardly the first time that lawmakers have grappled with the fate of the surveillance program, particularly after a flurry of revelations about government misuse of the vast trove of intelligence it collects.

The topic in recent years has scrambled predictable partisan alliances, with Democratic critics of the Trump administration uniting with skeptics of government power on the right in voicing concerns about Section 702’s renewal.

In 2024, for instance, those divisions nearly caused the program to lapse. The Senate barely missed its midnight deadline that year before approving by a 60-34 margin legislation to reauthorize Section 702 that was subsequently signed by then-President Joe Biden.

A spokesperson at the Justice Department did not immediately return messages seeking comment Monday about the national security concerns that would be created if the program lapses. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence referred inquiries to the White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“America faces real threats from foreign adversaries, terrorists, cyber actors, and hostile intelligence services,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on social media Sunday. “Section 702 remains one of our nation’s most effective tools for identifying and disrupting those threats before they reach our shores.”

Cotton and Grassley said they believed Democratic leaders would not support another short-term extension of the surveillance authority and urged Rubio to prepare contingency plans. They said Trump should consider an executive order to prevent a disruption in intelligence collection.

Cotton and Warner had said they were close on a bipartisan deal on a long-term extension and could still move quickly should a change occur before Friday. Still, the bill would likely need to go through the House — and the two chambers so far have disagreed on a separate issue regarding central banking digital currency.

“If we go dark next week, right before the World Cup FIFA games, and the 250th anniversary, that would be the most grossly irresponsible thing I’ve seen Congress do in my 22 years in office,” Texas Republican Rep. Michael McCaul said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Cappelletti, Jalonick and Tucker write for the Associated Press.

Both SAG-AFTRA and the Writers Guild East are condemning the recent firings at CBS’ “60 Minutes.”

Under the news network’s editor-in-chief Bari Weiss, on-air correspondents Scott Pelley, Cecilia Vega, Sharyn Alfonsi and the program’s executive producer, Tanya Simon, have all been ousted from the legacy newsmagazine. The two unions, which represent journalists, said the recent actions appear to compromise editorial independence.

WGA East president Tom Fontana wrote in a letter to members on Thursday that the changes at CBS News “are more than mere ideological interference with the news. They display a profound contempt for the journalism profession.”

He added, “it is clear that CBS brass is engaged in a near-constant level of editorial interference that would have previously been unthinkable.”

Tom Fontana joined WGA and SAG-AFTRA members on the picket line in the strike over contract negotiation at Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery offices on Aug. 15, 2023, in in New York City.

(Lev Radin / VIEWpress via Getty Images)

SAG-AFTRA similarly said in a statement Thursday that these “decisions can only be seen as part of a broader strategy to gut the crucial independent journalism that is so important to our democratic system.”

A spokesperson for CBS News said in a statement, “There is no political interference at CBS News, not from ownership, not from Bari Weiss. The only ‘interference’ is the normal back and forth between editor and correspondent that happens in every newsroom.”

Pelley, one of the program’s most high-profile correspondents, was fired on Tuesday after speaking out during a team meeting. He reportedly said Weiss “is murdering ‘60 Minutes.’ … She does not love this place. She was brought in to kill it, and she’s been doing exactly that.” He also questioned the newly hired executive producer, Nick Bilton, and his ability to run the show, citing his lack of TV news experience.

Pelley accused CBS News management of favoring the Trump administration by instructing him to put “falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story.”

“I’ve been told to include assertions that are unverified,” he said in a statement. “To date, in every case, I have ignored these instructions or refuse them.”

“60 Minutes” is now down four correspondents, following Anderson Cooper’s departure and the firings of Vega and Alfonsi. These are only the most recent controversial moves from Weiss, who’s set on remaking the institution long defined by tradition. She arrived at CBS News in October with no television experience, installed by Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison after he acquired her digital news outlet, the Free Press, with a mandate to change the network.

Since her hiring, there was a significant round of layoffs and CBS News Radio was shut down.

“I’m only interested in working in a newsroom that is built on trust and mutual respect,” Weiss said of Pelley’s firing during a meeting on Wednesday morning. “That foundation was broken on Monday, and despite our attempts to engage with Scott Pelley and to find a way back, unfortunately we weren’t able to do so, and so we had to part ways.”

The lack of reporters means “60 Minutes” will have to line up new talent quickly to fill the correspondent roles, as production of the 2026-27 season is already underway.

WGA’s Fontana added, “To our friends and colleagues at CBS News: We see you, and you are not alone. Thousands of your union brothers, sisters, and siblings have your backs.”

SAG-AFTRA also said the union is prepared to take “legal actions related to the company’s conduct over the last several weeks.”

Times staff writer Stephen Battaglio contributed to this report.

After a tumultuous week, CBS News took a major step in stopping the bleeding at “60 Minutes.”

In a memo sent Friday morning, the three remaining “60 Minutes” correspondents Bill Whitaker, Lesley Stahl and Jon Wertheim said they will continue with the program. The trio strongly considered leaving in solidarity with their ousted colleagues Scott Pelley, Sharyn Alfonsi , Cecilia Vega and executive producer Tanya Simon and her second-in-command Draggan Mihailovich.

Pelley — angry over the dismissal of his other co-workers — was fired Tuesday, a day after confronting the program’s new executive producer Nick Bilton at his first staff meeting. Pelley questioned the credentials of Bilton, a former New York Times journalist with no experience in television news. He also accused CBS News Bari Weiss — who oversaw the changes — of “murdering” the program.

The memo said the decision to stay should not be seen “as an endorsement of the existing power structure.”

“Here’s why we’re staying: We don’t want ’60 Minutes’ to die,” they wrote.

The dismissal of Pelley, considered the most respected journalist inside CBS News, sent shockwaves through the organization and led to speculation of an exodus by the remaining three correspondents.

In their memo, Whitaker, Stahl and Wertheim said they felt the same bewilderment and frustration that Pelley did over the firing of their colleagues.

“We want to express how sorry we are that these principled, fair and honest journalists were treated so shabbily, with such indecency,” they wrote. “Tanya deserves to be celebrated, not truly cast off. Draggan too. It was heartbreaking.”

With the program in full-blown crisis, Bilton spent the rest of the week attempting to calm the waters and retain the disgruntled correspondents. He issued a memo Thursday praising Whitaker, Stahl and Wertheim — calling them “the core of the show’s success” — and promising to uphold the editorial independence of the program.

“We will always pursue stories without fear or favor,” Bilton said.

In recent months, the iconic ticking stopwatch of the CBS News magazine “60 Minutes” began to sound like a time bomb.

The explosive detonated Tuesday as the prestigious program’s most high-profile correspondent, Scott Pelley, was fired after openly challenging the moves and motives of the news division’s leadership and questioning the credentials of new “60 Minutes” executive producer Nick Bilton.

Pelley accused CBS News Editor in Chief Bari Weiss of “murdering” the program and berated Bilton, a former New York Times journalist, for lacking TV news experience. His forced exit along with the departure of several other veterans is raising fears about the future of the most-watched TV news program that has managed to retain its vitality and importance in the face of major changes across the media landscape.

Weiss praised Pelley’s contribution to the network when she discussed his termination at the network’s morning editorial meeting Wednesday, but cited a loss of “trust and mutual respect” as the reason for moving on.

“We cannot do our work without it,” Weiss said. “That foundation was broken on Monday, and despite our attempts to engage with Scott Pelley and to find a way back, unfortunately we weren’t able to do so, and so we had to part ways.”

But industry veterans familiar with “60 Minutes” said the firings represented a notable shift in how the venerable program has been run by its predecessors.

Rome Hartman, a former longtime “60 Minutes” producer, said Wednesday in an interview that the termination of Pelley for forcefully expressing his views at a staff meeting is a fundamental misunderstanding of how the program has operated and thrived over 58 years. Spirited, and occasionally acrimonious, internal debate has always been a part of working at “60 Minutes.”

“Sharp words in defense of important ideas, whether they be in stories, or whether they be about the future of the broadcast, shouldn’t just be tolerated, they should be encouraged and inculcated, and they always have,” Hartman said.

The insularity of the “60 Minutes” operation — which has its own suite of offices across the street from the main headquarters of CBS News — has rankled the network’s executives in the past. But those dynamics were considered part of the price of having the most prestigious news program on television.

“Every single CBS News president in the history of CBS News has resented the independence of ’60 Minutes,’” Hartman said.”But the smart ones have come to understand that that independence is part of the secret sauce. I don’t know Bari Weiss, but she seems incredibly thin-skinned.”

The turmoil inside “60 Minutes” comes at an inopportune time for CBS. Weiss is now under the gun to replenish the program’s staff with three months to go before original episodes return to the prime-time schedule.

Pelley is the fourth correspondent to depart “60 Minutes” since Weiss took over as editor in chief. Last week, Weiss fired correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi — who accused Weiss of playing politics by holding a story on the government’s use of El Salvador prisons for undocumented migrants — and Cecilia Vega, who was also outspoken in her criticism of the changes at “60 Minutes,” saying she faced censorship. Anderson Cooper, the CNN anchor who spent nearly 20 years as a contributor to the program, chose not to sign a new contract.

Weiss also fired executive producer Tanya Simon, who has been with the program for 25 years, and her second in command. (Pelley said he was unable to get answers on the firings during his final meeting Tuesday with Weiss and CBS News President Tom Cibrowski.)

Bari Weiss hosts Senator Ted Cruz on her “Honesty” podcast on January 18, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

(Leigh Vogel / Getty Images for Uber, X and The Free Press)

And there could be more departures on the way, adding to the upheaval. Bill Whitaker, who joined the program in 2014 and was a Pelley ally, is said to be weighing whether to walk away from the two years left on his current contract. The program’s respected veteran , Lesley Stahl, is pondering her future as well amid the massive changes, according to people familiar with her thinking who were not authorized to speak publicly.

The call is out for new talent, according to one agent who said CBS News is talking to “dozens of people” for the openings.

But the company will also look within its ranks. Matt Guttman, hired away from ABC News by Weiss to become senior national correspondent, is one name being mentioned, along with Major Garrett, the network’s chief Washington correspondent. Both have emerged as favorites of Weiss.

Norah O’Donnell, already a contributor to the program, is also likely to have a larger presence.

While the “60 Minutes” patina has been tarnished by the recent events, there is no shortage of journalists who would be willing to step up and join the program. But whoever does sign on will be intensely scrutinized while the Nielsen numbers are closely watched.

Newcomers on the program are rare and would have an easier time gaining audience acceptance if they were joining a stable operation.

Although every long-running TV program can use an occasional refresh, a massive overhaul is destabilizing for “60 Minutes,” one of the last non-sports appointment programs for the traditional television audience that still provides broadcast networks with the bulk of their advertising revenue.

Notably, the program averaged 9.1 million viewers during the 2025-26 TV season according to Nielsen, up 9% over the previous year.

“Viewers liked the ’60 Minutes’ that they had,” said a former CBS News executive who worked on the program who was not authorized to speak publicly. “And if they don’t like it, they have many other places to go.”

One of Weiss’ mantras — echoed by Bilton — has been the need to pull “60 Minutes” into the digital future as traditional TV viewing declines. Insiders say she has yet to make clear how that will be achieved.

Under Weiss’ watch, clips and full segments of the program gained significant traction on platforms such as YouTube. The success on digital is an encouraging sign for the program’s ability to attract younger viewers who don’t watch traditional talent.

But veteran TV executives say that loyal “60 Minutes” viewers still expect to see seasoned correspondents delivering in-depth investigations and analysis. A diversion from that formula poses substantial risks.

“Its audience has certain expectations,” said Jim Murphy, a former executive producer for CNN and CBS News. “These guys built a literally nearly perfect program for the medium and for the audience. You’re not going to make it better just because somebody cooler does a story that’s, like, a little funkier. It just not going to work.”

Steve Capus, a veteran network producer who worked with Pelley at the “CBS Evening News,” said his former colleague was built for the meticulous work that goes into every “60 Minutes” segment.

“It’s hard to do week in and week out,” Capus said. “You have to be first-rate in your storytelling.”

What’s more, Weiss and Bilton will also have to fight the perception that their moves on the program have been guided by the desire of David Ellison, chief executive of CBS News parent Paramount, to please the Trump administration as he seeks regulatory approval of his deal to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.

Trump sued “60 Minutes” over the editing of an interview with his 2024 presidential opponent, former Vice President Kamala Harris. The suit was settled just ahead of the Federal Communications Commission clearing the way for the takeover of Paramount by David Ellison’s Skydance Media.

Ellison acquired Weiss’ digital startup, the Free Press, which established itself as a voice critical of so-called woke politics.

Pelley said in a statement Tuesday that there has been pressure to shape CBS News coverage to please the Trump White House, a claim that both Vega and Alfonsi have made.

“I’ve been told to include assertions that are unverified,” he said. “To date, in every case, I have ignored these instructions or refuse them.”

In a statement, a representative of “60 Minutes” said that the exchanges with Pelley regarding editorial content were not out of the ordinary.

“There is no political interference at CBS News, not from ownership, not from Bari Weiss,” the representative said. “The only ‘interference’ is the normal back and forth between editor and correspondent that happens in every newsroom.”

Scott Pelley, a signature on-air talent for “60 Minutes,” was ousted from CBS News a day after he blasted the division’s top management over the firing of the program’s executive producer and two correspondents.

“We have parted ways with Scott Pelley,” the newly installed executive producer Nick Bilton said in a message sent to staff Tuesday.

The network announced Pelley’s departure after a meeting with top CBS News management late Tuesday, where the veteran correspondent continued to ask for answers on why “60 Minutes” executive producer Tanya Simon and correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecila Vega were let go last week, according to people familiar with the discussions who were not authorized to speak publicly. Editor in Chief Bari Weiss would not address the matter at the meeting.

Pelley’s departure follows a contentious “60 Minutes” staff meeting on Monday where he accused Weiss of “murdering” the country’s most-watched news program.

Pelley also raised doubts over the credentials of Bilton, the former New York Times journalist and documentary filmmaker named last week to run the venerable newsmagazine, citing his lack of experience in TV news.

Bilton was named to replace Simon on Thursday, an unexpected move that also came with the firings of the correspondents. The moves were made by Weiss, who has targeted the prestigious program for changes since she arrived at the network in the fall.

Bilton attempted to defend Weiss, who was not at the meeting, and asserted that CBS News management was committed to guiding “60 Minutes” into the digital future.

“She is murdering ‘60 Minutes,’” Pelley said of Weiss at the meeting held at the program’s Manhattan headquarters. “She does not love this place. She was brought in to kill it, and she’s been doing exactly that.”

Pelley’s stunning remarks at the meeting were applauded by his colleagues. But veterans in the division — who were shocked by the confrontation— took it as a sign that he was ready to leave the program.

Pelley is the fourth correspondent to depart “60 Minutes” since Weiss joined CBS News. Anderson Cooper, who also anchors at CNN, chose not to sign a new deal, citing family reasons, although many insiders said he was not comfortable with the direction of CBS News. Alfonsi and Vega were severed last week.

Those vacancies mean “60 Minutes” will have to line up new talent quickly to fill the correspondent roles. Production on segments for the 2026-27 season is already underway.

Pelley, 68, started his career at CBS News in 1989. He covered the Gulf War for the network, traveling in Iraq and Kuwait. He later became chief White House correspondent during Bill Clinton’s turbulent second term.

Pelley became a correspondent for “60 Minutes II,” a midweek edition of the program that ran from 1999 to 2005. After the program was canceled, Pelley moved to the Sunday flagship edition.

The fate of “60 Minutes” — which saw a 9% audience increase and massive spikes in viewing across social media platforms this past season — has been an ongoing saga since President Trump sued the program over the editing of an interview with his 2024 opponent former Vice President Kamala Harris.

The suit was settled just ahead of the Federal Communications Commission clearing the way for the takeover of Paramount by David Ellison’s Skydance Media.

Ellison acquired Weiss’ digital start-up the Free Press, which established itself as a voice critical of so-called woke politics. She was given a mandate to move CBS News to the political center, which created a perception that her role is to placate the Trump White House as Paramount seeks regulatory approval to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.

June 2 (UPI) — Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the Senate on Tuesday morning that Iran must reopen the Strait of Hormuz and commit to future talks on its nuclear program before the United States will make concessions.

He testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before a scheduled afternoon meeting with a House panel on State Department spending. Both sessions were planned so that Rubio could defend the department’s nearly $36 million budget request for the 2027 fiscal year.

Rubio is also President Donald Trump‘s national security adviser.

The Washington Post reported that Rubio’s testimony with lawmakers has been mostly friendly. He served in the Senate for 14 years and in the House for 8, representing Florida.

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have expressed frustration with the cost and potential political fallout from the war with Iran.

“This war and the administration’s decision to blockade has now held the entire world economy, and the U.S. economy, hostage to the ability to negotiate an agreement with Iran,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn, The Post reported.

The Strait of Hormuz, which has been closed by Iran since late February, must reopen, Rubio stressed. The strait is a critical waterway for shipping of much of the world’s oil, gas and fertilizer. The closure has caused gas prices to rise, causing anxiety as Republicans fear losing House and Senate seats in November.

Rubio said Trump demands that Iran enter into negotiating “severe and long-term limitations” on its nuclear program, including disposing of enriched uranium, and those talks could take months.

But he said he’s optimistic that Iran is more willing to negotiate on nukes.

“They have agreed to negotiate aspects of their nuclear program that just a month ago, just a year ago, they were refusing to even mention,” The Guardian reported Rubio said. He warned that it’s “not a guarantee that ultimately it will lead to a deal that’s acceptable,” and Iran’s leadership instability has made the negotiations more difficult.

Rubio said Iran had intended to use its conventional weapons capabilities as a “shield” to protect its nuclear program, The Guardian reported.

“What they tried to do is, they were going to try to build a conventional shield and hide behind that conventional shield,” he said, explaining why Trump wanted to start the war.

He also admitted, after questioning by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that another sticking point for Trump was that Iran stop supporting terrorist proxy groups. He said Trump is not willing to ease sanctions just for opening the strait.

Rubio said that Iranian Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei is believed to be alive.

“I would imagine, given what’s happened to multiple leaders in that system, being very public is probably not something that’s recommended for them internally,” he said. “But that said, I think there are indications out there that he is increasingly engaging at some level, although all of his communications have been in writing and through intermediaries.”

Along with Iran, lawmakers were expected to ask Rubio about the president’s comments about Cuba and Taiwan.

Nick Bilton, the new executive producer of “60 Minutes,” received a hostile welcome Monday from the CBS News program’s most respected correspondent Scott Pelley as the staff is still reeling over last week’s firings.

In the first staff meeting since Bilton was named last week, Pelley accused CBS News Editor-in-chief Bari Weiss of “murdering” the country’s most-watched news program, which recently finished the TV season with a 9 percent ratings increase. Recordings of the meeting were circulated to journalists.

“She is murdering ‘60 Minutes,’” Pelley said. “She does not love this place. She was brought in to kill it, and she’s been doing exactly that.” Pelley also attacked the credentials of Bilton, a former New York Times tech reporter and documentary filmmaker who like Weiss has no previous experience running a TV news operation.

Bilton was named to replace Tanya Simon on Thursday, an unexpected move that also came with the firing of correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega. The moves were enacted by Weiss, who has targeted the prestigious program for changes since she arrived at the network last fall.

David Ellison, chief executive of CBS News parent Paramount, brought in Weiss — a skeptic of legacy media — with a mandate to move the division more to the political center. But many critics have seen the move as an attempt to placate the Trump administration while Ellison seeks regulatory approval for his deal to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery,

“60 Minutes,” has long been in Trump’s cross hairs. The president sued the program last year over the editing of an interview with his 2024 opponent former Vice President Kamala Harris. The suit was settled just ahead of the Federal Communications Commission clearing the way for Ellison’s Skydance Media takeover of Paramount.

One person close to “60 Minutes” said attendees at the meeting in the Manhattan West Side offices described it as something they had never witnessed in their careers. The confrontation — and the applause Pelley received from his colleagues during the meeting — also demonstrates how CBS News management may have underestimated the staff’s devotion to the program, now closing in on its sixth decade, that has long been considered the most powerful and respected platform in TV journalism.

A representative for CBS News declined comment on the meeting.

Pelley is held in especially high stature at the network due to his work over the years in dangerous war zones. When he was anchor at the “CBS Evening News,” he displayed photos of CBS News journalists who have died in the line of duty for the network going back to George Polk, who was killed during Greece’s civil war in 1948.

People close to CBS News management said both Bilton and Weiss reached out to Pelley last week to discuss the changes and their plans for the program’s future but he did not respond.

One CBS News veteran said the tense meeting “reads like Scott wants to be fired.”

Weiss has maintained she is committed to expanding the “60 Minutes” brand so it generates viewing and revenue outside of its Sunday night broadcast. But she has also clashed with producers and correspondents over the handling of stories such as Alfonsi’s report on the Trump administration’s use of harsh El Salvador prisons to hold undocumented Venezuelan migrants.

Alfonsi’s message to colleagues saying the segment was held for political reasons led to her dismissal from the program.

Vega posted a message last week claiming she had been facing pressure to insert political bias into her stories. “I very much fear what comes next for … the future of the legendary broadcast,” Vega said in a social media post on Thursday, referring to “60 Minutes.”

A CBS News representative said last week that Vega’s claims “are not based in reality.”

Bilton has tried to reassure veterans at the program that he remains committed to the program’s mandate to provide tough, investigative journalism. The words he’s used in several meetings are that next season will not be much different than the successful year the program just completed.

“He’s very much committed to continuing and extending the kind of journalism that ’60 Minutes’ has been known for.” said one person close to Bilton.

MIAMI — The Trump administration has extended protections shielding about 11,000 Lebanese from deportation, allowing them to stay and work in the United States for another six months.

The decision, announced Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security, marked a rare reprieve for people protected by temporary measures that have been harshly criticized by Republicans. The extension comes amid ongoing fighting in southern Lebanon between Israeli troops and Hezbollah fighters.

The decision was automatic, meaning that the administration missed the deadline by which it was supposed to decide on whether to extend the measure called Temporary Protected Status for Lebanese people living in the U.S. who are covered by the program. By statute, the status automatically extends for six months if the department misses the deadline.

It was an unusual outcome for an administration that has canceled the protections that had covered people from 13 countries, including Venezuela, Haiti, Nicaragua and Syria from deportation.

TPS was created by Congress in 1990 to prevent deportations to countries suffering from natural disasters or civil strife, giving people authorization to work in increments of up to 18 months. More than 1 million immigrants from 17 countries were protected by TPS at the beginning of the Trump administration, after the Biden administration greatly expanded its use.

The program has been at the center of a controversy.

Republicans and critics of TPS argue that the program and its protections deviate from their original temporary intent, taking on a quasi-permanent character when extended. Its defenders assert that it is a fundamental humanitarian program that prevents vulnerable individuals from being forced to return to dangerous conditions.

The DHS notice said that former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and current Secretary Markwayne Mullin, who has led the department for the last two months, “were unable to make an informed determination on Lebanon’s TPS designation.”

The extension allows existing beneficiaries to keep their protections through Nov. 27, “if they still meet the eligibility requirements for TPS,” according to the notice. The work permits that were already issued for Lebanese TPS holders will be valid until the same day.

This is the second time the Trump administration has automatically extended a TPS designation. The first happened nearly a year ago with South Sudan, but the protections were terminated in November 2025, after the six-month extension period.

There are dozens of lawsuits challenging the termination of TPS at federal courts in different states. The Supreme Court is set to make a decision on TPS that protected Haitians and Syrians during the summer, and the result is expected to have an impact on all the other cases.

Advocates welcomed the extension.

“Extending Temporary Protected Status means Lebanese nationals in the United States will not be forced back into dangerous conditions but allowed to stay and continue supporting their families and contributing to their local communities,” said Kelly Razzouk, vice president of policy and advocacy at the International Rescue Committee.

José Palma, national coordinator of the National TPS Alliance — an advocacy group that has fought in federal courts against the cancellation of TPS for several countries—welcomed the extension of protections for the Lebanese.

“But we need to find a permanent solution for all TPS beneficiaries,” he warned.

Salomon writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Rebecca Santana contributed to this report.

The venerable news magazine “60 Minutes” is undergoing a major overhaul under CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss.

Weiss announced Thursday the appointment of new executive producer to replace Tanya Simon, a 26-year veteran of the program who took over the top job last July. She will be replaced by Nick Bilton, a former New York Times technology columnist and documentary filmmaker.

Bilton will be the first executive producer in the 58-year history of “60 Minutes” to come from outside of the tightly knit organization. The program has only had four leaders in its history — Don Hewitt, Jeff Fager, Bill Owens and Simon — all of whom came up through the ranks of CBS News.

Weiss is said to have developed a solid relationship with Simon, whose late father Bob Simon was a highly respected correspondent for the program. But the connection apparently deteriorated after Weiss did not receive an advance notice on Anderson Cooper’s sign off from the program ending his nearly 20-year run as a correspondent.

Cooper, who is also a full-time anchor at CNN, turned down a new “60 Minutes” deal from Weiss. During his final appearance, he expressed fears about the editorial independence of the program.

Tanya Simon is the new executive producer of “60 Minutes.”

(Michele Crowe CBS News)

“Things can always evolve and change, and I think that’s awesome, and things should evolve and change, but I hope the core of what ’60 Minutes’ is always remains,” Anderson told viewers. “I think the independence of ’60 Minutes’ has been critical.”

Speculation over changes at “60 Minutes,” the most-watched news program on television for 52 consecutive years, have been swirling for months since Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison installed Weiss to oversee editorial content at CBS News.

The program has been in turmoil since Oct. 2024 when President Trump filed a $20 billion lawsuit against CBS over an interview conducted with then Vice President Kamala Harris that was settled to clear the regulatory path for Skydance Media’s acquisition of Paramount.

From a business standpoint, “60 Minutes” is a curious target. The program is one of the most profitable hours on the CBS prime time schedule while retaining its status as television’s most prestigious journalism operation. While the ratings for “60 Minutes” get a boost from a lead-in from high-rated NFL late afternoon games, it remains one of the few network shows that viewers make an appointment to watch.

Sharyn Alfonsi, the longtime “60 Minutes” correspondent who clashed with CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss over a story on Trump White House immigration policies, said Wednesday her contract is not being renewed.

“Over the weekend, my contract with CBS News expired, drawing to a close nearly twenty years with the network, including more than a decade at ’60 Minutes,’” Alfonsi, 54, said in a statement to The Times.

“Following an intense editorial dispute over our CECOT story, repeated attempts by my representation to establish a path forward were met with absolute silence from network executives,” she added. “The message could not be clearer: my time at 60 Minutes is apparently over.”

CBS News declined to comment on Alfonsi’s remarks. Her contract expired this past weekend but she remains employed at the division on an “at will” basis, which means she can be terminated at any time, according to people familiar with the discussions. Producers who worked with Alfonsi have been assigned to other correspondents.

Alfonsi made her comments as the “60 Minutes” staff anticipates significant changes in the coming days, which could include shifting the lineup of correspondents. Anderson Cooper has already announced his departure from the program after 20 seasons.

A scene from the “60 Minutes” report “Inside CECOT.”

(CBS News)

The segment at the center of Alfonsi’s likely exit, “Inside CECOT,” detailed the Trump administration’s treatment of hundreds of Venezuelan migrants who were deported to an El Salvador prison known for its harsh conditions.

“Inside CECOT” was scheduled to run Dec. 22 but was pulled the day before air by Weiss, who believed it needed more reporting, including a direct on-camera response from the administration, which did not participate.

Alfonsi protested the decision to hold the story, calling it politically motivated in an email she sent to colleagues that was shared publicly.

Alfonsi said at the time the story was ready for air after being vetted by the network’s attorneys and the standards and practices department.

“It is factually correct,” Alfonsi wrote. “In my view, pulling it now — after every rigorous internal check has been met is not an editorial decision, it is a political one.”

“Inside CECOT” eventually ran on Jan. 18 without any substantial changes to its tone or reporting. Weiss acknowledged internally that pulling the segment after it had already been promoted was a mistake.

The move created the first public relations fiasco under Weiss’ watch and tarnished the strong journalistic reputation of “60 Minutes.” The matter also added to the narrative that Weiss was installed at CBS News to placate the Trump administration as parent company Skydance Media sought government regulatory approval to buy Paramount and its current deal to merge with Warner Bros. Discovery.

The program has been in turmoil since October 2024 when President Trump filed a $20-billion lawsuit against CBS over an interview conducted with then-Vice President Kamala Harris that was settled to help clear the regulatory path for Skydance Media’s acquisition of Paramount last year.

Weiss joined CBS News in October with a mandate from Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison to pull the division to the political center. The founder of the conservative-friendly digital news site the Free Press, Weiss has wanted to make changes to “60 Minutes” but put them off until after the 2025-26 TV season ended this past weekend.

In her statement, Alfonsi predicted CBS News would try to make her exit an administrative decision not related to her work.

“In the coming days, network leadership may attempt to hide behind corporate euphemisms like ‘modernization’ and ‘restructuring’ to explain away my departure,” Alfonsi said. “Don’t be misled. This was not a routine corporate transition; it was a deliberate choice to penalize a journalist for refusing to sanitize factually accurate reporting, and it sends a chilling message to the entire newsroom.”

Insiders at CBS News are uncertain about the extent of the planned overhaul. Weiss has been advised to limit any disruption to “60 Minutes,” which is coming off a strong season of ratings performance.

Nielsen data showed the program averaged 9.1 million viewers in its Sunday time period, up 9% from the previous year. The program’s views across digital and social media platforms were also up substantially.

May 24 (Asia Today) — South Korea is preparing to publicly unveil a development roadmap for a nuclear-powered attack submarine program after the successful Pacific deployment of the domestically built Dosan Ahn Chang-ho submarine, according to military and defense officials.

The move signals Seoul’s effort to strengthen what officials describe as the strongest conventional strategic deterrence available to a non-nuclear weapons state in response to North Korea’s advancing nuclear and missile capabilities and growing maritime competition in the region.

Senior military officials said the Ministry of National Defense and the Defense Acquisition Program Administration have completed technical reviews for a South Korean nuclear-powered submarine program and are now coordinating with related ministries, including the Foreign Ministry, on a diplomatic and regulatory strategy.

The report follows the recent Pacific deployment of the 3,000-ton Dosan Ahn Chang-ho submarine, which sailed about 14,000 kilometers, or 8,700 miles, from Jinhae through Guam and Hawaii using only domestically developed lead-acid batteries, diesel engines and an air-independent propulsion system.

South Korean officials said the deployment significantly reduced the need for snorkeling operations, in which submarines surface or raise air intake masts to recharge batteries, and demonstrated the vessel’s long-duration underwater operational capability and hull durability.

Officials also said the submarine successfully demonstrated stable operation of its submarine-launched ballistic missile vertical launch system in rough Pacific conditions. The Dosan Ahn Chang-ho class is the world’s first diesel-electric submarine class equipped with vertical launch tubes for submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Defense experts said the mission simultaneously highlighted the operational limitations of conventional diesel submarines and the strategic advantages of nuclear propulsion.

While diesel-electric submarines must operate at relatively slow underwater speeds to maintain endurance, nuclear-powered submarines can remain submerged for much longer periods and travel underwater at speeds exceeding 40 kilometers per hour, allowing broader operational flexibility, officials said.

The foreign affairs and security publication The Diplomat reported Thursday that South Korea’s pursuit of a nuclear-powered submarine would become “a major test case of non-nuclear deterrence” for a country that does not possess nuclear weapons.

Chung Sung-chang, head of the Korea Nuclear Strategy Forum and a senior researcher at the Sejong Institute, said the submarine under discussion would be a non-nuclear attack submarine that would not carry nuclear weapons.

Chung said South Korea plans to retain the hull design and submarine-launched ballistic missile strike capability proven through the Dosan Ahn Chang-ho program while replacing the diesel propulsion system with a small nuclear reactor.

He said South Korea should first publicly present its nuclear submarine development roadmap before negotiating a bilateral nuclear submarine cooperation agreement with the United States and securing approval from the U.S. Congress.

Chung also said Seoul would need a separate agreement with Washington to secure low-enriched uranium fuel for naval reactors derived from downgraded highly enriched uranium.

Officials are reportedly studying the AUKUS security partnership among the United States, Britain and Australia, under which Australia received access to nuclear-powered submarine technology while remaining within the international nonproliferation framework.

South Korean officials said the success of the Dosan Ahn Chang-ho deployment demonstrated that the country’s technical preparations for a future nuclear-powered submarine program had reached a mature stage, shifting the focus toward diplomatic negotiations and international coordination.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260524010006872

May 23 (UPI) — The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Saturday added two more airports that travelers to the United States can be routed through for Ebola screening when entering the country.

The enhanced travel screening announced earlier this week by the CDC and the Department of Homeland Security is meant to screen people for the virus on entry to the country if they have been in the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan or Uganda.

The outbreak, which started in the DRC and has spread to neighboring South Sudan and Uganda, is estimated to have 750 suspected cases and 177 suspected deaths, the World Health Organization on Friday said, adding that the “real scale of the outbreak is likely far larger.”

The CDC first issued restrictions on Thursday for Americans returning to the United States to be screened at Washington Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., before continuing on to their final destinations.

The two additional airports will be Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, which started to accept travelers at 11:59 p.m. EDT on Friday, and George W. Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, which will start to accept travelers on Tuesday, May 26, at 11:59 p.m. EDT, the CDC said on Saturday.

“These travelers will have their air travel re-routed to arrive at select airports,” CDC officials said in the update.

The enhanced health screening includes being escorted to a designated screening area; completing a questionnaire about their travel history and symptoms; having their temperatures checked using non-contact thermometers; and observation by CDC staff for signs of illness.

“Travelers with fever or other symptoms that could be Ebola will receive additional evaluation by a CDC public health officer,” the agency said.

“If the assessment shows that a traveler may be sick with Ebola, the traveler will be transferred to a hospital for further medical evaluation,” it said.

The WHO on Friday raised the national risk assessment during the outbreak in the DRC to “very high,” but officials said that global risk for infection with the Bundibugyo strain of the Ebola virus, for which there is no approved vaccine.

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreysus during a meeting on Friday thanked the efforts of neighboring nations in Africa who have assisted during the outbreak, as well as the various regional and global health agencies that also have done so.

Although the United States last year pulled out of the WHO, the U.S. State Department said on Saturday that it has activated a dedicated Ebola Response Task Force that is led by “senior experts with direct experience managing prior Ebola outbreaks” in 2014 and 2018.

The department also has deployed a Disaster Assistance Response Team and provided $32 million in assistance to U.S. partners in the region, it said in a press release.

[kicker]

Netflix subscribers will wake up to a video livestream of “The Breakfast Club” starting next month, marking the platform’s first daily live podcast.

The deal is part of the streaming platform’s ongoing focus on live programming, and the latest video podcast offering through its partnership with iHeartRadio, the company said on Thursday. The nearly three-hour show will include a live video feed exclusive to Netflix and will air every weekday morning.

“Taking this show live every day to a global audience on Netflix is a powerful example of how we’re expanding the reach of our biggest brands while giving audiences entirely new ways to experience them,” Bob Pittman, iHeartMedia’s chairman and chief executive, said in a statement. “Whether it’s morning in NYC or the afternoon in London, the conversation is live and reaching the world in real time.”

“The Breakfast Club” will air simultaneously on Netflix, the iHeartRadio app and it will continue to be syndicated by Premiere Networks on more than 100 broadcast radio stations nationwide. Netflix’s video feed is meant to provide more behind-the-scenes content, as radio formats will still need to include commercial breaks. Instead of pausing the program, Netflix watchers will get an uninterrupted stream, where those traditional breaks will be filled with exclusive segments and extended discussions.

“The media landscape will always evolve, but one thing consistently cuts through: live programming,” Charlamagne tha God said in a statement. “That’s a big reason ‘The Breakfast Club’ has sustained its reign for so long. We’re building something powerful — real‑time conversation, real community, on a global scale. The future belongs to those who can see what’s possible — and trust me, the vision for ‘The Breakfast Club’ and Netflix is crystal clear.”

The radio program first got its start in 2010 on WWPR-FM in New York. Over the years, it has become one of the most popular morning shows, rooted in Hip-Hop and R&B culture and known for its lively interviews and entertaining commentary from hosts Charlamagne Tha God, DJ Envy and Jess Hilarious. The show has welcomed guests like former President Barack Obama, and artists like Kendrick Lamar and Cardi B. In 2020, the talk show was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame.

Netflix has heavily invested in its live programming in the worlds of sports, comedy and podcasting in recent years. In the past month, the Los Gatos-based company livestreamed “The Roast of Kevin Hart” and its latest fight between MMA fighters Ronda Rousey and Gina Carano. This weekend, the F1 Canadian Grand Prix is also set to air on Netflix. These tentpole events are in addition to some of the weekly live programming Netflix offers, including “The Bill Simmons Podcast,” which airs every Sunday.

At Jimmy Kimmel’s annual monologue to advertisers at Disney’s recent upfront presentation, the ABC late-night host offered sympathy to his ousted CBS cohort Stephen Colbert.

“First, it’s bad enough to lose your job,” Kimmel said. “Imagine getting replaced by the owner of the Weather Channel.”

Byron Allen, the media mogul whose holdings do include the Weather Channel, laughed when the gag was repeated to him during a recent phone conversation. “I like Jimmy Kimmel a lot,” he said.

Allen, never lacking in self-confidence, can afford to roll with the jokes. Episodes of his 20-year-old syndicated program “Comics Unleashed,” a half-hour show featuring mostly lesser-known stand-ups sharing routines and stories, are replacing “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” on CBS in the 11:35 p.m. time period starting Friday.

While it’s a triumph for Allen, 65, it’s also a sign of how the traditional late-night talk show — one of television’s most culturally influential formats — may no longer be sustainable in the era of streaming TV.

CBS said last year it canceled Colbert because it lost $40 million a year as the late-night viewing habit among audiences has eroded in the streaming era. Many in the TV industry are skeptical of the claim, believing Skydance Media wanted to silence the relentless Trump-bashing host in order to clear the government regulatory path for its acquisition of network parent Paramount. (The FCC’s approval of the deal came days after the cancellation was announced.)

Cedric the Entertainer, left, with Byron Allen on the set of “Comics Unleashed.”

(Allen Media Group)

But no one who has worked in late-night television in recent years can dispute how financial challenges are clouding the format’s future. Polished after-hours programs with a live audience, large teams of writers and producers and high-priced hosts are fighting off obsolescence as traditional TV audiences get smaller and ad revenues shrink. While CBS is the first to act, other networks have thought about getting out of the business altogether.

Since 2022, “The Late Show” lost 20% of its audience in the advertiser-coveted 18-to-49 age group, according to Nielsen data. Ad spending on all late-night television shows hit $209 million in 2025, down from $519.7 million in 2017, according to data from Guideline.

“Nothing is forever, especially in television,” said former network executive Ted Harbert, who oversaw the launches of “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” and “Late Night with Seth Meyers” at NBC. “Digital tech is killing late night.”

The hosts of the programs and their funniest bits are arguably seen by more people than ever before thanks to clips replayed on social media platforms. But the revenue generated by digital viewing doesn’t approach what the networks get for audiences watching live on TV.

Over the last 10 years, late-night shows flocked to YouTube as a way to be a part of the national conversation and bring attention to the shows. Harbert believes the notion that the clips alone — which may feature a funny bit or a snapshot of a conversation with a guest — would help lure viewers to traditional TV was folly.

“The shows cannibalized themselves by making their show available in snack-size clips after the network airing,” he said. “And viewers obviously would rather watch a couple of five-minute clips than a whole show.”

Late-night shows were once among the most profitable programs on TV because of their ability to reach viewers in the 18-to-34 age group that attract premium prices for commercial time. But the same demographic was the first to gravitate to streaming platforms and abandon traditional TV which thrives on appointment viewing.

Daniel Kellison, a former producer for “Jimmy Kimmel Live” and “The Late Show with David Letterman,” noted that Kimmel — who has also been targeted by the Trump administration for his harsh barbs — has seen his TV ratings increase this year.

But the overall trend for the time period is still down. While Kellison believes Colbert’s cancellation is an effort by CBS to appease Trump, he agrees that the genre needs to evolve and adapt to the changing media landscape.

“There’s always going to be an audience for conversation around politics and life and these sort of shows will exist in different formats and I think it’s incumbent upon people to figure out how to present them,” he said.

CBS executives have said they want to develop a new network show in the late-night time period. But for the next year it will lease the slot to Allen. His company Allen Media Group pays CBS for the time, covers the cost of production and sells the advertising. He is also the host. The deal will erase whatever losses the network experienced in that TV block.

“Comics Unleashed” has been running in the 12:35 a.m. hour since CBS canceled “After Midnight” last year. When that show moves to the earlier time slot, it will be replaced by another Allen program, “Funny You Should Ask,” a comic quiz show hosted by John Kelley.

Allen said he has great respect for the late-night TV tradition. His mother was a tour guide at NBC in Burbank and he was able to hang out on the studio lot to watch Johnny Carson tape “Tonight.” Allen would get advice from Carson, whom he calls his hero and mentor, and eventually got a shot at doing stand-up on “Tonight” when he was 18 years old.

Allen even asked CBS to move the start date of “Comics Unleashed” to May 22 because it is the anniversary of Carson’s final show in 1992. But his sentimentality ends when it comes to the economics of programming in that time slot.

“We will be in profit,” Allen said of “Comics Unleashed,” which according to Nielsen has seen its audience grow in the 12:35 a.m. time slot by 26% since October.

Kimmel has accused CBS of dumping Colbert for “Comics Unleashed” because Allen’s show doesn’t partake in political humor that could alienate the White House as Skydance moves to close its next acquisition: Warner Bros. Discovery.

“I feel like CBS is turning 11:35 p.m. into a ‘least’ time slot,” Kimmel said at the Disney presentation. “Least as in least likely to offend the president with the rerun of ‘Comics Unleashed’ from 2007 featuring Paula Poundstone and Andy Dick.”

Poundstone and Dick are not among the 1,000 comedians who have appeared on “Comics Unleashed” over the years, many of whom went on to become stars. But not having the program dabble in political humor is a business decision.

The guests stick to storytelling and slice-of-life material that doesn’t date, which is why the episodes can attract an audience years after being taped. They don’t plug books, movies, concerts or any other elements that would be dated by future airings.

“Twenty years ago when we shot our first episode I said ‘we’re making it ‘I Love Lucy,’” Allen said. “I want these shows to be funny today and 20 years from today.”

Allen said his company will produce 130 new episodes of “Comics Unleashed” for the 2026-27 TV season.

But the reason the current set of late-night hosts leaned into politics so heavily in recent years is because it works.

When Colbert took over “The Late Show” from Letterman in 2015, the program’s ratings sputtered as the audience did not really know Colbert outside of the satirical figure he played on Comedy Central with his show “The Colbert Report.”

The night Trump scored his surprising win in the 2016 presidential race against Hillary Clinton, Kelly Kahl, then an executive vice president of CBS Entertainment, sent a text to Chris Licht, then executive producer of “The Late Show,” telling him it was “the best thing to happen to the show.”

Colbert found his voice on the program, which rose to No. 1 in the ratings and has been there ever since.

WASHINGTON, May 19 (UPI) — President Donald Trump‘s move to build a national missile defense system would leave millions of Americans vulnerable to nuclear attack despite the program’s exorbitant cost, the author of a new scientific report said at a press conference Tuesday outside the U.S. Capitol.

The report simulated a “best case scenario” in which the Golden Dome system shot down 80% of incoming missiles, said Ira Helfand, the report’s main author and a co-founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, an anti-nuclear weapons organization.

Under those circumstances, more than 300 warheads still would reach the United States, the report found, and that Russia would have a 95% chance of being able to destroy any one of 132 major population centers in which a combined 75 million Americans live.

“Let’s be clear what Golden Dome is: a vanity project of one person, Donald Trump,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., using Trump’s chosen moniker for the missile defense system. McGovern was one of two Massachusetts lawmakers who led the press event.

“We must suffer the Trump arch, the Trump ballroom, the Trump battleship and now Trump’s Golden Dome. Each are the egotistical fantasies of an aging man who needs psychiatric care,” McGovern said.

Soon after taking office in 2025, Trump directed the Defense Department to develop a homeland air and missile defense system. The order called for protecting the U.S. “against ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles and other next-generation aerial attacks from peer, near-peer and rogue adversaries.”

This initiative, later named Golden Dome for America, echoes earlier missile defense efforts, such as President Ronald Reagan‘s Strategic Defense Initiative, commonly known as Star Wars. It was never fully build or deployed.

“Building an effective and reliable shield against any realistic attack by nuclear-armed ICBMs is technologically infeasible for the foreseeable future,” said Laura Grego, a physicist who specializes in nuclear security at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

“But also attempting to build one would be hugely expensive — wasting time and resources — and accelerate the nuclear arms race.”

The report was released by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Physicians for Social Responsibility and Back from the Brink, all advocates for abolishing nuclear weapons.

The press conference came after a Congressional Budget Office report released last week found that a missile defense system designed to counter a small-scale nuclear attack would cost $1.2 trillion.

A more robust system in line with Trump’s aspirations of “ending the missile threat to the American homeland,” would come with a $3.6 trillion price tag, according to a 2025 estimate by the American Enterprise Institute, a right-of-center think tank. Trump initially offered a price tag of $175 billion for the project.

“The Golden Dome is fool’s gold,” said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass. “It’s a gold-plated boondoggle that will enrich defense contractors and ignite a new nuclear arms race.”

Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, told Medill News Service that he did not agree with the report’s conclusion that the Golden Dome would be too ineffective and costly to justify. On the contrary, Scott said, nuclear modernization efforts underway by U.S. rivals required a response.

“The weapons coming from China and Russia are faster and stronger,” Scott said. “And we have to be able to pick them up faster.”

Between 2014 and 2024, the estimated number of Chinese nuclear warheads doubled, from 250 to roughly 500, according to the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

China, however, has maintained a no-first-use policy since it first detonated a nuclear weapon in 1964, which commits Beijing to only employ its nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear attack by another country.

When asked about claims made by Helfand and others at the press conference that the Golden Dome would spur a new global nuclear arms race, Scott disagreed again.

“It’s a defensive system,” he said, “not an offensive system.”

The planned outlays for the Golden Dome come in tandem with other Trump administration priorities that have raised eyebrows on Capitol Hill, including a $1.5 trillion defense spending package for 2027, $400 million for a new White House ballroom that will sit atop a bunker and $29 billion so far for the war in Iran.

At the same time, in its proposed budget, the White House moved to cut non-defense discretionary spending by 10%. The spending category comprises public health, scientific research and scores of other domestic programs.

At Tuesday’s press conference, Markey said the United States doesn’t have trillions of dollars to waste on a system that “is not going to protect the American people,” and he decried funding cuts to social programs that “actually do provide security for families in their own homes.”

WASHINGTON — Thousands of people streamed onto the National Mall for a daylong prayer rally Sunday headlined by President Trump and billed as a “rededication of our country as One Nation under God.”

Against the backdrop of the Washington Monument, worship music blared from a stage that made clear the event’s Christian focus. Arched stained-glass windows, set underneath grand columns resembling a federal building, depicted the nation’s founders alongside a white cross.

The nation’s tradition of separating church and state, however, was not on display. Most speakers celebrated Christianity’s ties to American history, a blending of ideas that critics decried before the gathering as Christian nationalism.

Trump read a passage of Scripture in a video shown at the rally. Filmed in the Oval Office, it was the same footage used during a marathon Bible-reading event last month. The verses from 2 Chronicles are often cited by those who claim America was founded as a Christian nation.

“If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways,” Trump read, “then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

Other leading Republicans, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), were also on the schedule for the event, part of the celebrations marking the nation’s 250th anniversary.

Only one name on the Rededicate 250 program was not Christian. Most were among Trump’s longtime evangelical supporters, including Paula White-Cain of the White House Faith Office and evangelist Franklin Graham of Samaritan’s Purse.

“We are deeply concerned that what is really being rededicated is a nation to a very narrow and ideological part of the Christian faith that betrays our nation’s fundamental commitment to religious freedom,” said the Rev. Adam Russell Taylor, a Baptist minister who leads the progressive Christian organization Sojourners.

The conservative Christian lineup featured guests who often assert that the United States was founded as a Christian nation, a narrative disputed by many historians and other religious traditions and inconsistent with American legal precedent.

Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, noted the religious diversity of early America, including Jews, Muslims and Indigenous people. “I want to shine a light on America’s history as a nation that welcomes, celebrates and protects people of all faiths and those of no faith,” Pesner said.

‘It’s all about Jesus’

Many in the crowd wore Trump hats and patriotic colors, joining the festivities under a sweltering sun.

“It’s all about Jesus,” said Denny Smith, 72, of Rhode Island, who rented a motorized scooter to traverse the National Mall.

Retha Bond, a 58-year-old from southern Illinois, said she was here to hear Trump speak nearby on Jan. 6, 2021. She said she did not join the protesters who rioted later that day at the Capitol, attacking police officers while attempting to overturn the presidential election result, but she has remained a steadfast Trump supporter.

“I’m not saying Trump is the savior,” Bond said. But she said that “this is one of the most important things that could be going on in the world, for us to rededicate our nation back to God.”

At least one event speaker mentioned the slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Kirk’s activism has been a powerful example for Alessandra Seawright, 15, of Santa Fe, N.M., who came to Rededicate 250 with her mother.

“I think we just need more of this in our country, and we just need to share the word of the Lord,” she said. “We love going to events like this.”

They also attended Kirk’s memorial service in Arizona, which mixed Christian worship and political messages. Events like these, Seawright said, help her feel less alone in her conservative Christian beliefs.

Prayer event spurs protest

Hegseth, who has infused Christian language and worship with his role leading the Pentagon — drawing criticism — asked the gathering in a video to pray to “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” Referencing George Washington’s faith, he said, “Let us pray without ceasing. Let us pray for our nation on bended knee.”

Orthodox Jewish Rabbi Meir Soloveichik was the only non-Christian religious leader listed on the program. To applause, he told the crowd, “Antisemitism is utterly un-American” — a seeming reference to debates dividing the right.

Soloveichik serves on the Trump administration’s Religious Liberty Commission along with White-Cain, Graham and Cardinal Timothy Dolan and Bishop Robert Barron, Catholic clerics also featured on the program.

The event was organized by Freedom 250, a public-private partnership backed by the White House. Congressional Democrats have questioned the nonprofit’s structure and finances, which they see as a Trump-controlled end run around a separate commission charted by Congress a decade ago to prepare semiquincentennial events.

Progressive groups staged counter-programming. Among them were the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which advocates a strict separation of church and state, and the Christian organization Faithful America. The two groups displayed a large balloon near the mall of a Trump-like golden calf, a biblical reference to idolatry.

On Thursday evening, the Interfaith Alliance projected protest slogans onto an exterior wall of the National Gallery of Art. “Democracy not theocracy,” said one. Another said: “The separation of church and state is good for both.”

Stanley writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Peter Smith in Pittsburgh contributed to this report.

The television industry has changed dramatically over the last decade, but one tradition that won’t die is the annual gathering of ad-buying execs in Manhattan to hear the pitches of networks and streamers looking to sell their commercial time.

This past week’s lavish presentations, known as the upfronts, included the usual array of big-name actors (Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Lopez), NFL legends (Tom Brady and Mike Tomlin) and “Real Housewives,” past and present.

Jennifer Lopez and Brett Goldstein speak onstage during the 2026 Netflix Upfront at Sunset Pier 94 Studios on May 13.

(Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for Netflix)

The selling buzzwords are far different from the days when the presentations were a vehicle for networks to boast about their ratings and present new program line-ups. The 2026 upfronts talked a lot about “connections” and “community” as the personalized nature of TV viewing brought on by streaming video-on-demand has been fully integrated into the buying and selling of commercials.

“Three of us could be watching the same show, maybe at a different time, maybe at the same time, but receive very different advertising based on what ad technologies, know about us as an audience segment,” said Josh Mattison, executive vice president of digital revenue pricing, planning and operations for Walt Disney Co. “The old model would be, hey, did 10 million people watch this ad? 
I think the new model is, which 10 million people watch this ad.”

Here’s a sampling of what ad executives were seeing and hearing this week:

Using new ad tools that target viewers

Every company presentation touted advancements in the ability to target consumers now that advertising has become the main source of revenue growth in the streaming business. They also played up new services — such as NBC’s Performance Insights Hub — providing advertisers with up to date information on the effectiveness of their advertising so they can adjust accordingly.

Streamers can take the consumer research collected by advertisers and align them with the viewing habits of their subscribers. The data are analyzed in a secure room to protect consumer privacy.

Netflix doesn’t ask subscribers for personal information in the sign-up process, as it can discourage people from buying the service. But the company does use the viewer habits on the platform to help advertisers reach the customers they seek.

“We are seeing where there is overlap and use that to help our advertisers target better,” Amy Reinhard, president of advertising for Netflix, told The Times. “It’s all based on viewer preferences.”

Every company is turning to AI to respond to the needs of advertisers. NBC now offers them the chance to insert commercials that relate to the action seen on the screen during live sports events.

Creators are going mainstream

YouTube’s annual upfront gatherings used to have the feel of an alternative show business universe, with personalities who built their rabid followings on the streaming platform far away from the audiences for traditional TV.

Now creators such as the sports stunt group Dude Perfect have their own studios. Beast Industries, the corporate home of MrBeast, held its own invitation-only breakfast for marketing executives at a high-end New York venue . YouTube stars, such as Jesser, are landing shows on other platforms.

At YouTube’s presentation at Lincoln Center, longtime favorites such as “Call Her Daddy” podcast mogul Alex Cooper and “SubwayTakes” host Kareem Rhama appeared on stage to announce new projects on the platform, looking more like established show producers rather than social media renegades.

Ten years ago, YouTube advertisers had to worry about their spots running next to Islamic State videos. Now it’s become common for marketers to embrace YouTube stars and fully integrate products and messages into their programs.

“When creators talk about your products on YouTube, viewers are 13 times more likely to search for your brands and five times more likely to buy,” said Paul Downey, president of Americas & Global Partners for YouTube.

Mary Ellen Coe, chief business officer for YouTube, told The Times that advertisers can determine if a creator is right for their brand by looking at audience numbers, subscriber data and comments from their communities of fans. But many have their own personal focus groups at home that introduce the hottest YouTube personalities.

“Most of these advertisers have children and teenagers and they go nuts for them,” Coe said.

YouTube is the most watched TV platform according to Nielsen, accounting for nearly 13% of all TV viewing. But that share is much higher among younger consumers.

“My kids don’t watch TV — they watch YouTube,” said Anthony Pedalino, vice president and head of media investment at the ad buying firm Giant Spoon. “So I think this is a bit of future proofing.”

Other companies are seeking creators for their platform.

Amazon Prime Video introduced an alternative feed of some of its NBA games on its streaming platform Twitch, which will turn them into a “CreatorCast.” The streamers who are regulars on the site call the action live in an effort to bring in younger fans. The format will be used in WNBA games in the league’s new season.

Fox touted its creator initiative that develops programs for Tubi, the company’s fast-growing ad-supported streaming platform that now has 100 million active users. The company also has a partnership with TikTok to support creators who want to turn their short-form clips into full-length programs.

There’s always room for comfort food

Amid all the innovations in ad buying and audience measurement presented during the week, many of the programs and personalities offered up by the major networks and streamers were extremely familiar.

“They may be resigned to the fact that people are going to go to emerging platforms for more niche and esoteric programs,” Pedalino said.

Oprah Winfrey made an entrance on the Beacon Theatre stage to promote the move of her podcasts to Amazon Prime Video.

Disney rolled out the cast of “Scrubs” to announce another 10-episode order of the early 2000s sitcom for Hulu. The series had a successful reboot as Gen Z viewers continue to devour vintage programs. Amazon Prime announced “The Greatest,” a Michael B. Jordan-produced mini-series on legendary heavyweight fighter Muhammad Ali, not exactly uncharted territory.

Fox introduced a reboot of “Baywatch,” which was canceled after a single season on NBC in 1990, but went on to become a worldwide hit in syndication over the decade that followed. The slow-motion shots of toned lifeguard bodies running into Venice beach waters are coming back without a hint of irony.

Netflix brought out the set of “Pop Culture Jeopardy” at its presentation at Sunset Pier 94 Studios, NBC previewed comedies with proven prime time stars and touted its 100th anniversary which will be celebrated with an old-fashioned variety special later this year.

Vice President JD Vance said Wednesday that the Trump administration is deferring $1.3 billion in Medicaid reimbursements to California over concerns the state is allowing “fraudsters” to drive up costs to taxpayers, including by pushing unnecessary medications on unsuspecting patients.

“There are California taxpayers and American taxpayers who are being defrauded because California isn’t taking its program seriously. But also, you have people who’ve been prescribed medications that they don’t even need,” Vance said. “Sometimes they’ve had drugs put into their bodies that they don’t need because fraudsters have actually encouraged false prescriptions and false administration and medications.”

Vance, standing alongside Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said the administration is also sending letters to all 50 states informing them that if they do not “effectively and aggressively prosecute Medicaid fraud in their states,” they will see federal funding cut off as well.

“We want California to get serious about this fraud,” said Vance, who President Trump named his “fraud czar” last month.

Oz called out what he said was widespread fraud in hospice services and similar in-home care programs nationally — and particularly in the Los Angeles region — and announced a six-month moratorium on new Medicare enrollment for hospices and home health agencies.

“A third of all these programs in the entire country are in Los Angeles. Ask yourself, how is that possible? It’s not,” Oz said. “They’re not that many people dying in Los Angeles. We’re not talking about California, just Los Angeles.”

He said he and others in the administration determined that “at least half of the hospices, in the entire area around Los Angeles, are fraudulent,” and had shut down 800 of them that last year had “charged the federal taxpayer $1.4 billion,” which “will no longer be paid.” That is a major increase from the 450 providers the administration said it had suspended as of last month.

The announcement was the latest attempt by the Trump administration to highlight and rein in fraud in federal healthcare benefits programs, particularly in blue states. The actions were met with immediate push back from California officials.

“We hate fraud. But that’s NOT what this is,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office posted on the social media site X. “Vance and Oz are attacking programs that keep seniors and people with disabilities OUT of nursing homes. Pretty sick.”

Newsom’s office said that the growth of In-Home Supportive Services placements in California was “simple,” and due to California “keeping more people OUT of far more expensive nursing homes!”

Such services cover assistants who help people with daily tasks such as bathing, laundry or cooking; provide needed care such as injections under the direction of a medical professional; and accompany them to and from doctor’s appointments. A 2020 report by the California state auditor found that nearly three-quarters of IHSS caregivers assist a family member.

Newsom’s office wrote IHSS care costs $30,000 a year, while nursing home care costs $137,000 a year. “SAVING TAXPAYERS: $107K per person,” it wrote.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta also criticized the administration’s moves.

“Once again, California appears to be targeted solely for political reasons,” Bonta said. “The Trump administration is planning to defer over $1 billion in Medicaid funding for vital programs that helps seniors and people with disabilities remain safely in their homes.

“My team is carefully reviewing all available information. We have not hesitated to challenge unlawful actions by the Trump administration, and we will continue to act whenever Californians’ rights or access to critical services are threatened,” he said.

Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla also lashed out at the Trump administration.

“The Trump Administration is attacking California over claims that they can’t back up,” Padilla wrote on social media. “Let’s be real, this isn’t about fraud — it’s about punishing a state that didn’t vote for him. Political retribution plain and simple.”

Fraud in California’s hospice industry has been a problem for years.

Authorities in the state promised to crack down on the issue after a Times investigation in late 2020 revealed that unscrupulous providers were billing Medicare for hospice services and equipment for patients who were not actually dying — with the hospice industry in the state exploding in size.

California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, is expected to cost about $222 billion for the budget year starting July 1, including both state and federal funding. Roughly 15 million Californians, more than a third of the state, are on Medi-Cal.

Vance, a potential 2028 presidential hopeful, has taken up his work as “fraud czar” with vigor, traveling around the country to drive home the idea that the Trump administration is working diligently to bring down healthcare costs by addressing waste, fraud and abuse that is rampant across the system.

He has said that waste and abuse is particularly prevalent in Democratic-led states such as California, New York and Minnesota.

“We have red states and blue states that go after fraud aggressively, but we also, unfortunately, have some states, mostly blue states, unfortunately, that do not take Medicaid fraud very seriously,” he said Wednesday.

Vance specifically threatened to cut off what he said is billions in federal funding for state-run fraud control units that are meant to prosecute people who abuse the system, but which he said aren’t doing the work. “This is a tool that we want the states to use, but unfortunately, a lot of states aren’t using these tools at all,” he said.

The focus on fraud comes against a backdrop of criticisms that other policy measures pushed by the administration have driven healthcare costs up or made it harder for people to access healthcare — including cuts to Obamacare subsidies and new work requirements in Medicaid, which are expected to strain hospitals around the country and led to millions of people losing healthcare coverage.

Democrats and Republicans have argued over who is to blame for rising healthcare costs, and Vance and Oz have clashed with California leaders before.

In January, Newsom filed a civil rights complaint against Oz after he posted a video accusing Armenian crime groups of carrying out widespread healthcare fraud in Los Angeles. In the video, Oz was shown driving around Van Nuys, saying about $3.5 billion worth of Medicare fraud had been perpetrated by hospice and home care businesses — and “run, quite a bit of it, by the Russian Armenian mafia.”

Newsom called Oz’s claims “baseless and racist.”

The administration previously launched investigations into potential healthcare fraud in at least five states — California, Florida, Maine, Minnesota and New York — and halted some $243 million in Medicaid payments to Minnesota over fraud concerns.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has also acknowledged using errant figures to justify a fraud probe in New York, deepening concerns in the administration’s methods for identifying problematic activity.

Vance said the deferral of funds to California and the letters warning other states to get serious is not about political retribution, but a wake up call. He said the Trump administration wants to help states root out fraud and abuse, including with new technologies — but can’t do so if they are not “willing to help themselves” first.

“We don’t want to turn off any money. What we want to do is ensure that people are taking fraud seriously. We want to protect Medicaid, we want to protect Medicare,” Vance said. “But we can’t do that if the states that are administering those programs are allowing those programs to be fleeced by fraudsters.”

The Associated Press contributed to this article.

Here’s a riddle for you: A conservative Republican senator, a top economic advisor to the Trump White House and a venture capitalist walk into a conference room at a financial conference and claim a new government program will be a boon for all American families.

Question: Do you think these people are looking out for your interests?

If you trust Sen. Ted Cruz, economic advisor Kevin Hassett and millionaire Brad Gerstner to do so, feel free to stop reading here.

If you’re skeptical, read on.

But keep in mind that Cruz (R-Tex.) was last seen in these pages promoting yet another big tax break for the 1%, Hassett appeared the other day on Fox Business arguing that while Americans are spending a lot more on gasoline, “they’re spending more on everything else too” on their credit cards, as if forcing households to max out their credit is a good thing; and Gerstner is, well, a millionaire tech investor.

At their panel discussion on May 4 at the annual Milken conference, Cruz, Hassett, Gerstner and their interlocutor, Michael Milken, talked as though the Trump accounts would be so fabulous for average American families that they would obviate the need for Social Security.

“Here’s the dirty little secret,” Cruz said. “Trump accounts are Social Security personal accounts.”

Milken echoed that thought: “Do you have the right to decide where your money goes, or should you be giving it to the government and [letting] them decide where it goes?”

That gave the game away — this is yet another effort by Republicans and conservatives to end a program they’ve been trying to kill, and to give Wall Street firms a bigger bite of your retirement resources.

Let’s start with a primer about the Trump accounts, which were part of last year’s GOP budget bill and will be open to investment starting on July 4.

The headline pitch for these accounts is that they’ll be seeded with a one-time $1,000 government contribution for children born from 2025 through 2028, unless Congress extends the government donation. Accounts can be opened for children born before or after those dates, but they won’t get the government donation.

Families can add up to another $5,000 in contributions every year until the child reaches 18, but those donations won’t be tax-deductible.

The money must be invested in low-cost stock index funds or exchange-traded stock index funds, and can’t be withdrawn for any reason without penalty until age 18. After that, the funds can be withdrawn without penalty for certain purposes such as educational expenses or the purchase of a first home. The accounts eventually become converted to conventional individual retirement accounts, or IRAs, and distributions will be taxed as ordinary income, though family contributions will be returned tax-free.

That $1,000 donation is the best feature of the accounts. But that may be their only good feature. For almost all the financial goals confronting average American families, such as saving for college or retirement, they’re inferior to tax-advantaged savings plans already on the books.

Like those programs, they’re much more advantageous for wealthier than to low-income families: Wealthier families typically have the wherewithal to make their annual contributions, and get a larger break from the tax deferrals of investment growth within the accounts because their tax rates are higher.

Though their promoters claim that the accounts will level the economic playing field for all families — “helping the bottom 10%,” Hassett said on the panel — that’s not the case. “Clearly, the program is structured to subsidize savings for those who already have the capacity to save, rather than meaningfully closing the wealth gap,” observes Sheryl Rowling of Morningstar.

Another drawback cited by economists and financial planners is that the accounts are locked into corporate equity investments. Before the beneficiary reaches age 18, the investment mix can’t be adjusted. That’s dangerous because portfolio concentrations in corporate shares are inherently risky.

“A high school senior who plans to enroll in college next year cannot change the investment to a lower-risk portfolio,” say, to a mix of equities and bonds, notes Greg Leiserson of the Tax Law Center at NYU. “If the market crashes the summer before she plans to enroll, the Trump Account is of greatly reduced use.”

Trump account promoters have massively overstated the potential wealth gains for ordinary Americans. At the Milken conference, Cruz said that a child with a Trump account will have about $170,000 in it when he or she reaches 18 and $700,000 at age 35. “And very quickly after that, you get into the millions,” he said.

Cruz did acknowledge that those figures apply to households that “contribute regularly.” In fact, they apply largely to households that contribute the maximum $5,000 every year.

The White House estimates of potential returns are based on questionable assumptions about stock market gains over the 18-year periods in which the accounts will grow on a tax-deferred basis.

According to the government’s own estimates, the account of a family taking the $1,000 seed money but making no contributions beyond that would have as little as $2,577 in their account after 18 years if stock market returns come to 5.4% over that period.

The government estimates, however, that the account would hold $730,395 if the family contributes the maximum every year and the stock market returns more than 18%. Another 10 years of growth at that level, and the account would grow to $1.9 million when the child reaches age 28.

The problem with long-term market estimates, such as the ones offered by the White House, is that they’re highly variable. No 18-year periods are the same. One thousand dollars deposited in a hypothetical account invested in a Standard & Poor’s 500 index fund would grow to about $6,600 if its 18-year lifetime culminated in 2025; if the 18 years ended in 2008, however, that deposit would have grown only to $3,960. In the 18-year period that ended in 1960, the account would have grown only to $2,940. What will the next 18 years bring? Who knows?

Variability like this, along with the sheer uncertainty of stock market projections for the future, helped sink George W. Bush’s 2005 attempt to convert Social Security into private accounts, which was also pitched as a key to minting millionaires by the millions through the magic of the market.

I asked the White House to respond to these criticisms. Spokesman Kush Desai called my questions “both a stupid and out-of-touch take,” asserting that the accounts are “already shaping up to make a generational difference for working-class children.”

The truth is that if Trump were really intent on taking steps to “strengthen the financial security of American workers” and creating a “path to prosperity for a generation of American kids,” as he claims to be, he and his GOP followers in Congress wouldn’t have scissored away the American safety net, which is what they’ve done.

They wouldn’t have imposed new work requirements and narrowed eligibility standards for food stamps, resulting in the exclusion of more than 3 million people from the program, a decline of 8%. They wouldn’t have cut nearly $1 trillion in funding for Medicaid over 10 years, jeopardizing coverage for 3.6 million young adults. They wouldn’t have allowed Affordable Care Act premium subsidies to expire, resulting in a drop in Obamacare enrollments of about 1.2 million Americans this year compared with last year.

If they really cared about educational opportunities for “a generation of American kids,” they wouldn’t have narrowed eligibility for higher education Pell grants, and wouldn’t slash research grants for universities coast to coast.

So how can families better prepare for college and retirement expenses? For education, 529 plans are probably preferable to Trump accounts. The investment choices are more flexible, withdrawals are tax-free at the federal level and sometimes at state levels if used for most education expenses, and there are no federal limits on contributions (contributions aren’t tax-deductible).

For retirement, advisers have been favoring Roth IRAs. Contributions are not tax-deductible, and this year can be made by couples filing jointly with taxable income up to $242,000 ($153,000 for singles) and are limited to $7,500 a year ($8,600 for those 50 and older). But withdrawals aren’t taxed if you’ve held the account for at least five years and you take the money out after you turn 59 1⁄2.

The bottom line, then, is this. Take the $1,000 if your child is eligible. As Rowling wisely advises, “Any time the government offers free money, you should take it.”

As for the rest, treat any claims offered by Trump account promoters as inherently suspect.