View

Stephen A. Smith is arguably the most-well known sports commentator in the country. But the outspoken ESPN commentator’s perspective outside the sports arena has landed him in a firestorm.

The furor is due to his pointed comments defending an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who fatally shot a Minneapolis woman driving away from him.

Just hours after the shooting on Wednesday, Smith said on his SiriusXM “Straight Shooter” talk show that although the killing of Renee Nicole Good was “completely unnecessary,” he added that the agent “from a lawful perspective” was “completely justified” in firing his gun at her.

He also noted, “From a humanitarian perspective, however, why did he have to do that?”

Smith’s comments about the agent being in harm’s way echoed the views of Deputy of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who said Good engaged in an “act of domestic terrorism” by attacking officers and attempting to run them over with her vehicle.

However, videos showing the incident from different angles indicate that the agent was not standing directly in front of Good’s vehicle when he opened fire on her. Local officials contend that Good posed no danger to ICE officers. A video posted by partisan media outlet Alpha News showed Good talking to agents before the shooting, saying, “I’m not mad at you.”

The shooting has sparked major protests and accusations from local officials that the presence of ICE has been disruptive and escalated violence. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frye condemned ICE, telling agents to “get the f— out of our city.”

The incident, in turn, has put a harsher spotlight on Smith, raising questions on whether he was reckless or irresponsible in offering his views on Good’s shooting when he had no direct knowledge of what had transpired.

An angered Smith appeared on his “Straight Shooter” show on YouTube on Friday, saying the full context of his comments had not been conveyed in media reports, specifically calling out the New York Post and media personality Keith Olbermann, while saying that people were trying to get him fired.

He also doubled down on his contention that Good provoked the situation that led to her death, saying the ICE agent was in front of Good’s car and would have been run over had he not stepped out of the way.

“In the moment when you are dealing with law enforcement officials, you obey their orders so you can get home safely,” he said. “Renee Good did not do that.”

When reached for comment about his statements, a representative for Smith said his response was in Friday’s show.

It’s not the first time Smith, who has suggested he’s interesting in going into politics, has sparked outside the sports universe. He and journalist Joy Reid publicly quarreled following her exit last year from MSNBC.

He also faced backlash from Black media personalities and others when he accused Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas of using “street verbiage” in her frequent criticisms of President Trump.

“The way that Jasmine Crockett chooses to express herself … Aren’t you there to try and get stuff done instead of just being an impediment? ‘I’m just going to go off about Trump, cuss him out every chance I get, say the most derogatory things imaginable, and that’s my day’s work?’ That ain’t work! Work is, this is the man in power. I know what his agenda is. Maybe I try to work with this man. I might get something out of it for my constituents.’ ”

In a State of the State speech that largely ignored any talk of the big, fat budget black hole that threatens to swallow the California dream, Gov. Gavin Newsom instead laid out a vision of the Golden State that centers on inclusivity and kindness to combat Trump’s reign of darkness and expulsion.

In a week dominated by news of immigration authorities killing a Minnesota mother; acknowledgment that “American First” really means running Venezuela for years to come; and the U.S. pulling even further out of global alliances, Newsom offered a soothing and unifying vision of what a Democratic America could look like.

Because, of course, far more than a tally of where we are as a state, the speech served as a likely road map of what a run for president would sound like if (or when) Newsom officially enters the race. In that vein, he drove home a commitment to both continuing to fight against the current administration, but also a promise to go beyond opposition with values and goals for a post-Trump world, if voters choose to manifest such a thing.

It was a clear volley against Republicans’ love of using California as the ultimate example of failed Democratic policies, and instead positioning it as a model.

“This state, this people, this experiment in democracy, belongs not to the past, but to the future,” Newsom told the packed Legislative chamber Thursday. “Expanding civil rights for all, opening doors for more people to pursue their dreams. A dream that’s not exclusive, not to any one race, not to any one religion, or class. Standing up for traditional virtues — compassion, courage, and commitment to something larger than our own self-interest — and asserting that no one, particularly the president of the United States, stands above the law.”

Perhaps the most interesting part of Thursday’s address was the beginning — when Newsom went entirely off script for the first few minutes, ribbing the Republican contingent for being forced to listen to nearly an hourlong speech, then seeming to sincerely thank even his detractors for their part in making California the state it is.

“I just want to express gratitude every single person in this chamber, every single person that shaped who we are today and what the state represents,” Newsom said, even calling out Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, one of his most vociferous foes, who released a questionable AI-generated “parody” video of Newsom in response to the speech.

It was in his off-the-cuff remarks where Newsom gave the clearest glimpse of what he might look like as a candidate — confident, at ease, speaking to both parties in a respectful way that the current president, who has labeled Democrats as enemies, refuses to do. Of course, he’d likely do all that during a campaign while continuing his lowbrow online jabbing, since the online world remains a parallel reality where anything goes.

But in person, at least, he was clearly going for classy over coarse. And gone is the jargon-heavy Newsom of past campaigns, or the guarded Newsom who tried to keep his personal life personal. His years of podcasts seem to have paid off, giving him a warmer, conversational persona that was noticeably absent in earlier years, and which is well-suited to a moment of national turmoil.

Don’t get me wrong — Newsom may or may not be the best pick for Democrats and voters in general. That’s up to you. I just showed up to this dog-and-pony show to get a close-up look at the horse’s teeth before he hits the track. And I’ve got to say, whether Newsom ends up successful or not in an Oval Office run, he’s a ready contender.

Beyond lofty sentiments, there was a sprinkling of actual facts and policies. Around AI, he hinted at greater regulation, especially around protecting children.

“Are we doing enough?” he asked, to a few shouts of “No,” from the crowd. This should be no surprise since his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, has made oversight of artificial intelligence a priority in her own work.

Other concrete policy callouts included California’s commitment to increasing the number of people covered by health insurance, even as the federal government seeks to shove folks off Medicaid. In that same wellness bucket, he touted a commitment to getting processed foods out of school cafeterias and launching more medications under the state’s own generic drug label, including an $11 insulin pen launched last week.

On affordability, he found common ground with a proposal Trump put out this week as well — banning big investors from buying up single family homes. Although in California this is less of a problem than in some major housing markets, every house owned by a big investor is one not owned by a first-time buyer. Newsom called on the Legislature to work on a way to curtail those big buyers.

He also hit on our high minimum wage, especially for certain industries such as fast food ($20 an hour) and healthcare ($25 an hour), compared with states where the federal minimum wage still holds sway at just more than $7 an hour.

And on one of his most vulnerable points, homelessness, where Republicans and Trump in particular have attacked California, he announced that unsheltered homelessness decreased by 9% across the state in 2025 — though the data backing that was not immediately available. He also said that thousands of new mental health beds, through billions in funding from Proposition 1 in 2024, are beginning to come online and have the potential to fundamentally change access to mental health care in the state in coming years. This July, a second phase of Proposition 1 will bring in $1 billion annually to fund county mental health care.

Newsom will release his budget proposal on Friday, with much less fanfare. That’s because the state is facing a huge deficit, which will require tough conversations and likely cuts. Those are conversations about the hard work of governing, ones that Newsom likely doesn’t want to publicize. But Thursday was about positioning, not governing.

“In California, we are not silent,” Newsom said. “We are not hunkering down. We are not retreating. We are a beacon.”

It may not be a groundbreaking stand to have a candidate that understands politics isn’t always a battle of good and evil, but instead a negotiation of viewpoints. It’s surely a message other Democrats will embrace, one as basic as it is inspiring in these days of rage and pain.

But Newsom is staking that territory early, and did it with an assurance that he explained in a recent Atlantic profile.

He’d rather be strong and wrong than weak and right — but strong and righteous is as American as it gets.

SACRAMENTO — In his final State of the State address, Gov. Gavin Newsom will look to define his legacy by touting California’s economic and policy achievements while casting the state as a counterweight to dysfunction in Washington.

The speech, which he will deliver Thursday morning to lawmakers in the Capitol, highlights economic strength, falling homelessness and expanded education funding, while also offering a glimpse of how Newsom is positioning himself beyond his final year in office.

In a summary of the speech provided Thursday morning, Newsom portrayed California as a financial powerhouse that strives to help those in need and works diligently to address its own shortcomings, including high housing costs, unlike the chaotic Trump administration. Newsom, who has acknowleged that he is considered a 2028 bid for president, argues that the state is positioned not just to endure the moment but to help shape what comes next nationally.

Newsom is expected to announce an estimated 9% drop statewide in unsheltered homelessness last year, addressing a topic that has been a persistent political vulnerability for the two-term governor and former San Francisco mayor. Despite some improvements, California has been home to nearly a quarter of the nation’s homeless population, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

Newsom also said two of his top priorities — the mental health program known as CARE Court and Proposition 1, the statewide bond measure he championed to provide funding for mental health and homelessness — are achieving results ahead of schedule, with counties now equipped with funding, authority and tools to combat the crisis.

Calling affordability a multi-layered crisis, Newsom is expected to signal a tougher stance toward the buying spree of homes by private equity and institutional investors in California. That message is a rare point of rhetorical overlap with Trump, who has said the United States should bar such practices because they push prices beyond the reach of many Americans.

Newsom offered a few previews of select budget priorities, with his office set to unveil the full proposed budget on Friday. The governor will announce that the state would set a record on per-student funding in public schools and fully fund universal transitional kindergarten under his budget proposal. He is also expected to announce a major shift in how the state oversees education, unifying the policymaking State Board of Education with the California Department of Education, which is responsible for carrying out those policies.

The address will mark the first time in five years that Newsom delivers a State of the State from the Assembly rostrum. His last in-person address came shortly before COVID-19 shut down the Capitol in early 2020.

Last year, he delivered his written remarks unusually late, in September, during which he said the state was under siege by the Trump administration — which he accused of dismantling public services, flouting the rule of law and using extortion to bully businesses and universities — all while California grappled with the aftermath of the devastating Los Angeles County fires, spiraling housing costs and an uneven economic recovery.

Like past speeches, Newsom will tout the successes of California, now the world’s fourth-largest economy.

The U.S. Marine Corps is looking for companies that can provide 10,000 first-person view drones by Jan. 1, 2027, according to a Request for Information (RFI) posted Thursday on a government procurement website. While just a minute fraction of the number of FPV drones being used by both sides of the war in Ukraine monthly, the RFI is the latest move by the Marines to put these swift and maneuverable weapons into the hands of its troops. It was issued as the Pentagon seeks to dramatically increase drone supplies across the services.

The USMC, as we have previously noted, wants strike weapons at the squad level with far greater reach than rifles and mortars. The Corps has created “attack drone teams” to integrate the lessons in Ukraine about the effectiveness of these weapons against personnel and equipment into their formations. We’ll talk more about those teams later in this story.

The use of FPV drones by both Russia and Ukraine has changed the face of war. They have enabled small units to strike targets in some cases as far away as 40 kilometers, though more typically less than half that distance, greatly extending the depth of the front lines.

The Marines want the same capabilities.

“FPV drones offer squad-level lethality up to 20 kilometers for under $5,000, compared to more expensive weapons systems with less capability,” the Marines explained in March. “This provides a cost-effective and scalable solution for modern combat.”

The RFI, published on Thursday, is one step toward meeting that goal. It calls for FPV drones costing less than $4,000 per unit for the aircraft, with the understanding that ground-control stations, communications equipment, goggles, batteries and charging stations for swarming will add to the price tag.

These can be controlled by radio frequencies as well as fiber optic cables. First employed by Russia last year, these cable-controlled drones are now widely used by both sides because they are immune to jamming and many other forms of electronic warfare. They also help mitigate interference from geography and structures that can impede radio signals.

The use of these types of FPV drones has become so ubiquitous that some Ukrainian cities are covered in cables, which you can see in the following video.

The Marines are also seeking designs that can be easily converted from non-kinetic to multiple different kinetic payloads by troops on the front lines. In addition, the RFI calls for drones giving Marines the ability to “modify, within reason, the system with a variety of third-party payloads, armaments, and munitions without vendor involvement.” The Corps also wants the ability to repair these drones by itself, without vendor involvement, a critical need in any swiftly evolving fight.

There are no requirements listed for speed, range, altitude, or payload weights; however, the RFI asks that interested companies provide those specifications. Regardless, the Corps is looking to move out quickly — at least in terms of notoriously sluggish U.S. military procurement norms — on this effort. The RFI calls for the delivery of an initial tranche of these weapons by Jan. 1, 2027, “with the ability to quickly ramp production and deliver larger quantities up to 5,000 air vehicles within 6 months and 10,000 units within 12 months.”

The RFI comes as the Marines are testing FPV drones to see how they function in simulated combat and to certify troops on their use. There have been at least two examples of that since November alone.

Earlier this month, the 3rd Marine Division, III Marine Expeditionary Force, participated in the Marine Corps Attack Drone Competition at Camps Hansen and Schwab, Okinawa, Japan.

“The competition put Neros Archer, first-person view attack drones into the hands of the Division’s capable warfighters,” the Marines said in a release. The Neros Archer is “capable of carrying a 2 kg/4.5 lb payload over 20 kilometers,” the company asserts on its LinkedIn page. In November, the company was awarded a $17 million contract to provide about 8,000 drones, including kinetic-strike capable FPVs, to the Corps. It was previously awarded a contract under the U.S. Army’s Purpose-Built Attritable Systems (PBAS) program and had produced 6,000 of these drones for Ukraine.

The attack drone competition on Okinawa allowed Marines “to test and improve their drone skills alongside the top operators in the Marine Corps, enhancing their confidence and capabilities on the battlefield,” said U.S. Marine Corps Sgt. Grant Doran, an attack drone instructor with the Marine Corps Attack Drone Team in Quantico. “It also lets us train the people who will be taking over our positions in the future. Other branches were also able to bring their top operators in, so we can share our tips and tricks to increase lethality across all services.”

The certification “increased 3rd Marine Division’s tactical drone use in both offensive and defensive scenarios,” the division explained.  “The Neros Archer drone extends the Marines’ understanding of the battlespace by 20 kilometers, and this capability increases the Marines’ lethal reach and ability to attack using precision weapons.”

“I believe that with [any potential] crisis, small Unmanned Aerial Systems development and integration within small unit formations is going to be super relevant given its longer reach,” Doran posited.

In November, the Marine Corps Battalion Landing Team 3/6, 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) conducted FPV attack drone training on Camp Santiago, Puerto Rico.

“The 2d Marine Division and the Marine Corps Attack Drone Team are training and certifying 22nd MEU(SOC) Marines on the Neros Archer first-person view drone system, demonstrating the 22nd MEU(SOC)’s commitment to innovation, adaptability, and enhanced combat readiness,” a release explains. That training came as the U.S. was ramping up its Operation Southern Spear campaign against drug traffickers and Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, which you can read more about here.

22nd MEU FPV Drone Training

The RFI and the recent competition and training come after the Corps announced the establishment of its experimental Marine Corps Attack Drone Team (MCADT) at the service’s base in Quantico, Virginia, earlier this year.

MCADT’s creation was a direct response to “the rapid proliferation of armed first-person-view drone technology and tactics observed in modern conflicts, particularly in Eastern Europe,” the Marines said in a press release issued back in March. “As emerging threats continue to evolve, the Marine Corps is prioritizing the integration of FPV drone capabilities to enhance lethality and operational effectiveness across the Fleet Marine Force.”

The Marine Corps’ growing interest in FPV drones is unfolding as their use, popularized by the war in Ukraine, has spread to conflicts across the globe by states and non-state actors. Still, it is important to note, as TWZ regularly does, that the threats posed by weaponized uncrewed aerial systems, including small modified commercial designs, far predate the all-out war in Ukraine. The following image shows a drone used by a Mexican cartel in 2020.

The U.S. is increasingly heeding the wake-up call emanating from the battlefields of Ukraine. In July, War Secretary Pete Hegseth unveiled an ambitious Pentagon-wide effort to dramatically boost the number of troops armed with small drones. Earlier this month, the Pentagon unveiled its $1 billion “Drone Dominance” program to purchase hundreds of thousands of kamikaze drones of all types. Last month, the Army announced its own plans to purchase a million kamikaze drones over the next two to three years and recently signed a $1 billion agreement to purchase Switchblade-series loitering munitions. These Trump administration efforts, among several others, have subsumed the Biden administration’s $1 billion Replicator program, created to buy small drones.

The Marines, meanwhile, have a separate program to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on small drones. In April 2024, the Marine Corps Systems Command (MARCORSYSCOM) awarded three companies – Teledyne FLIR Defense, AeroVironment and Anduril Industries  – an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract worth up to $249 million under its Organic Precision Fires-Light (OPF-L) program. The most recent order came earlier this month, when the Corps agreed to purchase 600 Rogue-1 loitering munitions from Teledyne FLIR Defense for $42.5 million, or about $71,000 a piece. That follows an initial $12 million order for 127 Rogue-1s, which had a price tag of about $90,000 per unit.

As the Marines eye a potential future peer conflict where drones will play a huge role, there is another lesson from the Ukraine war to consider. Magazine depth for these weapons is critical, which is why the Corps is also looking for a mix of short-range, troop-controlled drones, including ones far cheaper, albeit less capable in some ways, than the Rogue-1.

Still, the procurement of 10,000 FPV drones, as we noted earlier in this story, pales in comparison to what is seen in Ukraine, a nation in an existential fight. Kyiv, for instance, plans to produce 4.5 million FPV drones by the end of this year. Russia, for its part, plans to produce 2.5 million of these weapons. Still, Ukraine is a unique, well-established conflict with largely static lines, and is not what the U.S. would likely face in the Pacific, for instance, where FPV drones won’t be needed in such massive quantities. Still, FPV drones will be a staple of land warfare going forward.

Though its goals are comparatively small in number, the RFI is a small step toward closing the Pentagon’s yawning drone development and procurement gap that TWZ has frequently highlighted. 

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com