MAGA Erupts Over ‘60 Minutes' Correspondent's Viral Warnings About Trump
The MAGA faithful lashed out at Scott Pelley after the veteran CBS reporter delivered a thinly veiled attack on President Donald Trump during a commencement speech.
Speaking to the graduating class of North Carolina's Wake Forest University, the 60 Minutes correspondent warned that 'freedom of speech is under attack' and that 'insidious fear' is creeping into schools.
While Pelley didn't mention Trump by name, his comments appeared to reference troubling shifts since Trump returned to the White House in January, as well as the president's escalating feud with Harvard University.
CBS News is also locked in its own battle with Trump, following a lawsuit from the president accusing the network of editing an interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris to portray his 2024 rival in a more favorable light weeks before the election.
'To move forward, we debate, not demonize; we discuss, not destroy. But in this moment, our sacred rule of law is under attack,' Pelley said in the May 19 address, which is now going viral. 'Journalism is under attack. Universities are under attack. Freedom of speech is under attack. And insidious fear is reaching through our schools, our businesses, our homes, and into our private thoughts. The fear to speak, in America.'
Clips of the speech have rocketed on social media, with one post criticizing Pelley racking up over 2.3 million views on X.
'This self-important, sermonizing propagandist is what passes for a legacy media 'journalist,'' the Western Lensman X account posted while sharing the footage.
Other Trump supporters and Republican figures also criticized Pelley over the remarks.
Curtis Houck, managing editor of the right-wing site NewsBusters, accused Pelley of being 'pompous,' sharing a separate clip in which the CBS anchor told graduates they are 'the vanguard against ignorance.'
Pro-Trump podcaster Scott Adams added: 'Liberals who once controlled speech and the power to censor are now upset that a majority of Americans reject their lies and deception. 60 Minutes' Scott Pelley raged at Trump in an angry, unhinged commencement address at Wake Forest: as he speaks openly and freely in America.'
'It is very sad that CBS/60 Minutes' Scott Pelley chose one of the happiest days for graduates and their families to display his undeniable case of TDS [Trump Derangement Syndrome],' one MAGA account with more than 220,000 X followers posted. 'Wake Forest University should be ashamed that it allowed this to take place.'
CBS News did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Beast.
Last month, Pelley delivered a strong on-air rebuke of Paramount, the parent company of CBS, claiming it was attempting to appease the Trump administration in order to win approval a merger deal with entertainment company Skydance Media. Pelley cited the recent departure of executive producer Bill Owens over claims the higher-ups were overly monitoring 60 Minutes' content.
'Stories we've pursued for 57 years were often controversial, lately the Israel-Gaza war and the Trump administration. Bill made sure they were accurate and fair—he was tough that way,' Pelley said during the broadcast. 'But our parent company, Paramount, is trying to complete a merger. The Trump administration must approve it. Paramount began to supervise our content in new ways.
'None of our stories has been blocked, but Bill felt he lost the independence that honest journalism requires.'
Wake Forest University praised Pelley's speech in a press release, describing it as one filled with 'urgency and hope.'
CBS News has called Trump's $20 billion lawsuit 'without merit' but are trying to settle with the president's lawyers.
The network released a full transcript of its interview with Harris in February, following pressure from Trump and his supporters, to prove the footage was not 'doctored or deceitful.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
36 minutes ago
- Fox News
Lara Trump: China wants to replace us
All times eastern FOX News Saturday Night with Jimmy Failla FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: President Trump attends UFC event in Newark, New Jersey
USA Today
36 minutes ago
- USA Today
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts
4 Social Security changes Washington could make to prevent benefit cuts Show Caption Hide Caption Biden criticizes Trump administration's handling of Social Security Social Security overhaul sparks criticism from Biden over service disruptions, layoffs and automation as Trump defends changes as efficiency. Straight Arrow News Social Security is an important source of income for millions of Americans, but the program has a serious financial problem. Costs have increased faster than revenues in recent years because the aging population is growing more quickly than the working population. As a result, the trust fund, the financial account that pays benefits, is on track to be depleted within a decade. Specifically, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the trust fund will be exhausted in 2034. That would eliminate one source of revenue (i.e., interest earned on trust fund reserves), and the remaining tax revenues would only cover 77% of scheduled payments. That means a 23% benefit cut would be necessary in 2035. Fortunately, the lawmakers in Washington have several years to find a better solution. Here are four Social Security changes that could prevent deep, across-the-board benefit cuts. 1. Apply the Social Security payroll tax to income above $400,000 Social Security is primarily funded by a dedicated payroll tax, which takes 6.2% of wages from workers and employers. But some income is exempt from the payroll tax. Specifically, the maximum taxable earnings limit is $176,100 in 2025. Income above that threshold is not taxed by Social Security. Importantly, the Social Security program is projected to run a $23 trillion deficit over the next 75 years as it's strained by shifting demographics. But the deficit could be slashed by applying the payroll tax to more income. For instance, including income above $400,000 would eliminate 60% of the 75-year funding shortfall, says the University of Maryland. 2. Gradually increase the Social Security payroll tax rate to 6.5% over six years Under current law, the Social Security payroll tax rate is 6.2% for workers and their employers. But gradually raising that figure would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit. For example, increasing thetax rate by 0.05% annually over a six-year period would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. Now that I've discussed two possible changes, let's step back and look at the big picture. There are basically three ways to resolve Social Security's financial problems: (1) increase revenue, (2) reduce costs or (3) some combination of the first two options. The changes discussed so far would increase revenue, but the next two changes would cut benefits. However, they are more subtle cuts than the 23% across-the-board reduction that would follow trust fund depletion. 3. Gradually increase full retirement age to 68 by 2033 Workers are eligible for retirement benefits at age 62, but they are not entitled to their full benefit — also called the primary insurance amount (PIA) — until full retirement age (FRA). Anyone that claims before full retirement age receives a smaller payout, meaning they get less than 100% of their PIA. FRA is currently defined as 67 years old for workers born in 1960 or later, but raising the figure would reduce the long-term deficit. For instance, increasing FRA to 68 years old by 2033, meaning it would apply to workers born in 1965 or later, would eliminate 15% of the 75-year funding shortfall, according to the University of Maryland. 4. Reduce benefits for retired workers with income in the top 20% Social Security benefits are determined as percentages of two bend points. Specifically, income from the 35 highest-paid years of work is adjusted for inflation and converted to a monthly figure called the average indexed monthly earnings (AIME) amount. The AIME is then run through a formula that uses two bend points to determine the PIA for each worker. Modifying the second (highest) bend point would eliminate a portion of the long-term deficit by reducing benefits for high earners. For instance, the University of Maryland estimates that reducing benefits for individuals with income in the top 20% could reduce the 75-year funding deficit by 11%. Here's the big picture: The four changes I've discussed would eliminate 101% of Social Security's $23 trillion funding shortfall, which would prevent across-the-board benefit cuts in 2035. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »
CNN
37 minutes ago
- CNN
‘If you fall silent, the country is doomed': CBS News' Scott Pelley stresses courage as network faces pressure campaign
A climate of fear is perceptible in the United States today, and it must be resisted no matter what, CBS News correspondent Scott Pelley says. 'People are silencing themselves for fear that the government will retaliate against them, and that's not the America that we all love,' Pelley told Anderson Cooper in an exclusive interview after CNN's Saturday telecast of 'Good Night, and Good Luck.' The Broadway play, which recounts CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow's unflinching 1954 broadcasts about Sen. Joseph McCarthy's Cold War witch hunts, has stirred comparisons between McCarthyism and Trumpism, and between the CBS network then and now. Fear and courage 'are the two themes that run through both of these moments in American history,' Pelley told CNN's Cooper. 'The most important thing is to have the courage to speak, to not let fear permeate the country so that everyone suddenly becomes silent,' the former 'CBS Evening News' anchor added. 'If you have the courage to speak, we are saved. If you fall silent, the country is doomed.' Cooper asked Pelley, a nearly 40-year veteran of CBS: 'Do you still believe in journalism? Do you still believe in the role of journalists?' 'It is the only thing that's gonna save the country,' Pelley responded. 'You cannot have democracy without journalism. It can't be done.' Cooper, who also works alongside Pelley as a correspondent on '60 Minutes,' anchored a discussion about the state of journalism after the Broadway telecast Saturday night. One inescapable topic was President Donald Trump's pressure campaign against CBS News. Trump filed a legally dubious lawsuit against CBS over a '60 Minutes' interview with Kamala Harris last fall. CBS News journalists and executives have sought to fight the suit and its allegations of 'election interference.' But lawyers at CBS parent Paramount Global have been trying to strike a settlement with Trump, perhaps believing that such a deal will help secure the Trump administration's approval of Paramount's pending deal to merge with Skydance Media. The settlement could look like a payoff in exchange for government approval and would spark an outcry from CBS News journalists. At '60 Minutes,' 'everyone thinks this lawsuit is an act of extortion, everyone,' a network correspondent recently told CNN. When Cooper asked Pelley what Murrow would think of the state of play at CBS, Pelley said that 'he would probably be waiting to see how this lawsuit from the president works out and how the Paramount Corporation deals.' Murrow, he said, 'would be for fighting,' not settling. A settlement would be 'very damaging to CBS, to Paramount, to the reputation of those companies,' Pelley added. 'I think many of the law firms that made deals with the White House are at this very moment regretting it. That doesn't look like their finest hour.' When asked about the April resignation of '60 Minutes' executive producer Bill Owens, Pelley repeated what he told viewers — that Owens felt that he no longer had 'the independence that honest journalism requires.' At the time, the correspondents talked about leaving with him, but Lesley Stahl recently told The New Yorker that Owens 'explicitly asked us not to resign.' Pelley told Cooper that, on the one hand, 'you really wish the company was behind you 100%, right?' On the other hand, 'my work is getting on the air.' Paramount bosses have not killed any '60 Minutes' segments, even though the newsmagazine has aggressively covered the Trump administration. 'While I would like to have that public backing,' Pelley said, 'maybe the more important thing is the work is still getting on the air.' Pelley caused a stir with a commencement address at Wake Forest University last month. Many conservative media outlets said Pelley ripped Trump, though he never mentioned the president by name. 'Why attack universities? Why attack journalism? Because ignorance works for power,' Pelley said in the speech. 'First, make the truth seekers live in fear. Sue the journalists. For nothing.' Pelley also talked in the speech about the Trump administration's actions against major law firms and warned that people in power 'can rewrite history.' 'With grotesque, false narratives, they can make heroes criminals and criminals heroes,' Pelley said. 'And they can change the definition of the words we use to describe reality. 'Diversity' is now described as 'illegal.' 'Equity' is to be shunned. 'Inclusion' is a dirty word. This is an old playbook, my friends.' In the sit-down with Cooper, Pelley said he thought he was echoing the sentiments of Murrow in the 1950s, 'that freedom of speech is what matters in this country.' 'You can agree with the government. You can disagree with the government. But you have the right to speak no matter what your opinion is. If the government begins to punish our citizens because of what they have to say, then our country's gone terribly wrong.' As for the furor over his commencement speech, Pelley remarked, 'what does it say about our country when there's hysteria about a speech that's about freedom of speech?'
