Fox host Martha MacCallum snaps during tense exchange with guest
Fox host Martha MacCallum snapped at Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, after she called the journalist 'sweetheart' on-air. The pair discussed the Supreme Court case that was taken up early Tuesday about censorship over LGBTQ + materials in public schools.
They scoffed with each other after Weingarten praised a Massachusetts school district for creating 'a real culture of a safe and welcoming school.' MacCallum then chuckled and shook her heard before stating: 'So what you're saying is if we can find other areas in the country where the proficiency levels are also abysmal and should be embarrassing to any education organization, then we can start to make assessments and say, "Oh it's because of choice." or "Oh it's because of money?" We know that money doesn't equate to a better outcome.'
While the news anchor explained the topic, Weingarten abruptly cut her off - and it did not sit well with 'The Story' host at all. 'Martha, Martha, Martha, sweetheart, sweetheart listen to me,' Weingarten said as she moved her hand toward the camera. 'Please don't call me sweetheart,' McCallum quickly replied as she shook her head and appeared to be in disgust about the 'condescending' phrase.
Weingarten swiftly apologized for her comment, telling McCallum: 'I'm sorry, my bad,' before carrying on with their conversation. While she did so, MacCallum's face told a different story as she appeared to be annoyed with the guest for the duration of the segment. Further into their discussion, MacCallum told Weingarten that books suggesting that someone should change their gender or that they were born in the wrong body will 'freak out' kids and their families.
Weingarten then said that schools across the county have the obligation to alert parents about any controversial book, including Harper Lee's 'To Kill A Mockingbird.' 'You don't want a child to hear a book read to the whole classroom and go home and say "Why am I being taught that I was born a girl but that was just a guess?" I mean, that is going to freak out some children, MacCallum said.
'They're going to be very confused at four, five and six years old and I know that you said you don't agree with reading this in the classroom, but I'm saying this is the problem. And then that same kid can't read and is pushed all the way to 8th grade and they still can't read.' Weingarten then quipped: 'So Martha, I suspect that you and I agree on more than we don't. I know you don't believe me.' 'But, what I'm saying to you is that I saw that case and if you had not socialized books with parents and a book that may be controversial and you talk to the parents of your kids in that classroom, that's gonna be a problem regardless of what's in the book.
'And look, that was a problem, look at 'Catcher in the Rye,' think about 'To Kill A Mockingbird,' think about other books out of different eras that's a problem. You have to actually spend time, as a schoolteacher or a school principal, with parents before you end up talking about issues that some people will think is controversial,' she added. This is not the first time MacCallum and Weingarten have spared on-air, as they had a similar heated conversation in 2021 regarding the reopening of schools following the Covid-19 pandemic.
MacCallum cited a New York Post report that accused the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) of influencing the CDC's timeline for when schools were supposed to reopen nationwide, Mediaite reported. After welcoming Weingarten on the show, the labor leader said the AFT was concerned about coronavirus variants that kept schools closed in the United Kingdom.
'We believe that the conditions have changed now so that everybody can be back in full time, but the bottom line is this: I begged the Trump administration, I can show you — I have many, many letters right now. I went to my office to find them,' Weingarten said. 'I begged the Trump administration to do exactly what the Biden administration did, which is real safety guidance that the former president didn't mock every other day.' She then went on to praise former President Joe Biden, but that's when MacCallum cut her off and said: 'transmission among children is very low.' The Fox host then went on to note that schools in China and Europe had already reopened at that point.
MacCallum then went on to say that Weingerten previously blamed the slow school return on the lack of money allotted for other pressing issues, including mold. 'Obviously you didn't have the pull with the prior administration, but in this administration there's been $20 million that has gone from — to Democrats — from teachers unions and teacher organizations. So that money seems to be working,' MacCallum said.
Weingerten then refuted her statement and praised the Covid-19 vaccine as 'a real game changer.' MacCallum, again, pushed back on her statement before Weingerten said: 'The bottom line is it's time for our kids to be back in school. 'I am grateful that the Biden administration is listening to parents and to teachers and to administrators and to even Fox to try to figure out how we get people vaccinated, how we get our kids back to school and how we get our country back to being back.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
UK urged to reverse ruling on litigation funding, introduce 'light-touch regulation'
LONDON, June 2 (Reuters) - Britain should urgently reverse a landmark ruling that threw third-party funding of lawsuits into disarray, an influential advisory body recommended on Monday in a report which was welcomed by funders and industry critics alike. The Civil Justice Council (CJC) also called for "light-touch regulation" of the litigation funding sector, which is currently self-regulated, particularly where funding is provided for class action-style lawsuits or to consumers. Monday's report comes after Britain's funding industry was dealt a surprise blow in 2023, when the UK Supreme Court ruled that agreements used to fund many mass lawsuits were unenforceable as they did not comply with rules on so-called damages-based agreements. The CJC said the government should pass legislation to overturn the Supreme Court's decision "as soon as possible", citing the importance of funding for access to justice. Britain's previous government, which asked the CJC to review the sector, said last year it would reverse the Supreme Court decision, before the current government put legislation on hold pending the CJC's report. The Ministry of Justice said in a statement that it welcomed the report and would "outline next steps in due course." The CJC – which advises the government and judiciary on the civil justice system – called for some regulation, including requirements for funders to have adequate capital and provisions to prevent conflicts of interest. It also recommended that class action-style cases need court approval of funding agreements, to allow the court to consider whether the funder's return is fair, just and reasonable. The report rejected, however, the introduction of caps on funders' returns, which the CJC said could not properly take account of the risks of funding cases and was unnecessary for consumer protection if courts had to approve funding deals. Neil Purslow – chair of industry body the International Legal Finance Association, who also founded litigation funder Therium – welcomed the CJC's recommendation to legislate to reverse the Supreme Court ruling. Seema Kennedy, executive director of Fair Civil Justice, which has called for greater regulation of litigation funding, said the CJC's call to regulate the industry was "long overdue". She said: "Proper oversight is essential to protect consumers, ensure transparency, and restore public confidence in a sector that currently operates without sufficient safeguards." Litigation funding is increasingly used in Britain, with the CJC citing figures that funders in England and Wales had assets of 2.2 billion pounds ($3 billion) in 2021. English courts have repeatedly recognised the need for funding to bring mass lawsuits, where the case's total value is often in the billions but payouts to individual consumers can be as low as double figures. The CJC report comes after court approval of a 200 million-pound settlement in a case against Mastercard, despite the opposition of funder Innsworth, which stands to receive around 68 million pounds.
Daily Mail
6 hours ago
- Daily Mail
GRAHAM GRANT: Drained of credibility by a woke crusade, Police Scotland is now disconnected from the lives of those it serves
You might dimly remember that the police are supposed to be impartial, refusing to take sides in political debate. But that is a fast-receding memory in Scotland, where officers were told gender-critical campaigners are on a par with Nazis. As we revealed last week, a dangerously barmy message was circulated within the ranks making the obscene comparison. It came to light just as top brass were preparing to host a summit with diversity groups about the Supreme Court transgender ruling. In the best traditions of the single force, the media were kept out and we've no idea, officially, about what went on behind closed doors. The timing couldn't have been much worse – it's hard to build bridges with people you've just smeared as fascists. Police officers and staff were told that 'gender binary' - the belief there are only two genders - was a 'key feature' of Nazism. The identities of the person who sent the memo, or the officers who okayed it, haven't been disclosed - but it was removed from the force intranet and 'advice will be given around the use of language'. Police Scotland officers were told gender-critical campaigners are on a par with Nazis Well, that's all right then – but doesn't it seem a woefully inadequate response, given the seriousness of the charge the document contained? In any sane universe, whoever gave the green light for this inflammatory and grossly offensive document would be sacked, or at the very least severely disciplined, with questions asked about how they passed vetting procedures. Tory MSP Tess White is pressing the Chief Constable, Jo Farrell, for answers - but so far the force hasn't gone beyond the rather woolly statement about 'advice' on language. There's a deafening silence, as you would expect, from John Swinney and his colleagues - passionate advocates of the radical transgender policies recently found to have been without legal foundation by the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court ruling in April stipulated that 'sex' means biological sex under the Equality Act 2010 - which presents something of a challenge for the public sector, including Police Scotland. Trans ideology is baked into their protocols to comply with SNP government diktats - and now it will have to be rooted out. Much dragging of feet has ensued - though we're promised a new Police Scotland gender strategy soon, which will make everything crystal clear. Presumably, it won't repeat the Nazi slur - but who knows? The police position on these issues is hopelessly muddled. It had to write to the Equality and Human Rights Commission for guidance on whether rapists should be allowed to self-identify as women. And last month Ms Farrell said police wouldn't be rushed into change in the wake of the Supreme Court judgment, while her deputy Alan Speirs said it had had 'no bearing' on how the force does business. The Scottish Police Authority, which is supposed to hold the force to account, seemed largely content with this inertia, with some honourable exceptions on the board. The lack of urgency comes as the United Nations warns against letting criminals choose their own gender, after a new report found that 49 rapists were allowed to identify as female offenders in the UK. Reem Alsalem, the UN's special rapporteur for violence against women and girls, said at least a third of UK forces were still collecting data on criminals and victims' self-identified gender rather than their assigned sex at birth. Police Scotland has been accused of misleading parliament over its own policy on recording gender, after any number of apparent flip-flops. Ms Farrell said last year that a man who commits rape or serious sexual assault will always be recorded as male. But in March it emerged that this stance - which campaigners said was a major policy U-turn - was not communicated to officers. With the number of claims of rape and attempted rape soaring to a record level, it's hard to see how any of this will provide reassurance to victims who might be considering whether to report their ordeal to the police. A woke crusade has drained credibility from a force which seems to be disconnected from the reality of life for those it is supposed to serve. Outside the sanctuary of police bosses' Zoom chats, gangland and youth violence are spiralling out of control. A diminished front line is battling this rising tide while police chiefs, who once kowtowed to a legally baseless equalities agenda, are busy trying to reverse out of the cul-de-sac they built for themselves. On streets where the reek of cannabis fumes is ever-present, young people are being stabbed and addicts are openly injecting drugs, sometimes only yards away from the SNP-backed heroin 'shooting gallery' - which costs us more than £2million a year. Beat bobbies are rarely seen on patrol and police stations are being sold off, reinforcing the impression that the force is in headlong retreat. More than 12,000 supposedly 'minor' crimes have been effectively written off under the 'proportionate response' approach, which is good news for criminals - but just another slap in the face for long-suffering victims. Yet the many mistakes of the SNP as it inflicted swingeing cutbacks on policing have been compounded by the misjudgments of police chiefs who approved this disgraceful abdication of responsibility. Last month a senior officer broke ranks to suggest that police need to stop 'wasting their time' probing social media posts and get back on the streets to deter crime. Rob Hay, president of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents, deserves praise for pointing out that it is not the job of police to intervene when people were offended by posts. He said unless a crime was suspected, officers should be 'nowhere near' social media and must get back into the community to prevent and fight crime. Mr Hay has previously warned police must be 'pacifists in the culture war' and stay away from the 'divisive, political and toxic nature of some of the debate raging in wider society'. It's the kind of common sense which Police Scotland badly needs - but it shows no sign of heeding Mr Hay's wise counsel. For proof, consider the case of Tory MSP Murdo Fraser, whose mocking tweet about the SNP government's transgender policy was logged as a 'hate incident'. He shared a column which claimed the government's non-binary equality action plan would lead to children being 'damaged by this cult'. The row over Police Scotland's Nazi claim gives us an insight into the mindset of police chiefs - and makes it easier to see why police would regard an MSP's honestly held view as something akin to a thought crime. Once again, the only beneficiaries of this absurd shambles are the real criminals who are running riot - while policing is reduced to a laughing stock.
Reuters
8 hours ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court to review GEO Group's loss in immigrant detainee forced labor case
June 2 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide if GEO Group can quickly appeal a judge's ruling denying the private prison operator governmental immunity in a class action claiming immigrant detainees were forced to work and paid $1 a day. The justices will consider, opens new tab whether the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was correct that it could not immediately hear GEO's appeal of that ruling because it was incremental and merely allowed the 2014 lawsuit to proceed. The issue is technical, but a Supreme Court ruling in favor of GEO could be an important victory for other federal contractors who are sued in connection with government contracts and raise immunity as a defense. The lawsuit in Colorado federal court accuses GEO of engaging in labor trafficking by threatening detainees at an Aurora, Colorado, facility with solitary confinement if they refused to participate in a work program. GEO operates more than a dozen federal civil immigrant detention centers across the country and has faced at least two lawsuits over a work program at a Washington facility. The company in its petition said the appeal issue has divided federal appeals courts and created uncertainty for federal contractors. The government is generally immune from legal liability arising from its performance of typical governmental functions, and that can extend to contractors in some situations. "The alternative is a legal backdoor through which activists can undermine policies with which they disagree by targeting contractors with lawsuits they could never bring against the government," the company said in its petition. Florida-based GEO and lawyers for the former detainees who filed the lawsuit did not immediately respond to requests for comment. GEO has said that work programs at its facilities are voluntary and that federal regulations permitted the company to pay detainees as little as $1 a day to cook, clean, perform repairs, and staff a barber shop and library. The plaintiffs in a brief, opens new tab urging the Supreme Court not to take the case said the immunity issue overlaps with the merits of their claims against GEO, which should first be reviewed by the lower court. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in January upheld rulings in separate cases requiring GEO to pay more than $23 million to the state of Washington and hundreds of immigrant detainees in the state for failing to pay the minimum wage to detainees who worked. The court rejected GEO's claim that it was entitled to immunity, saying the government did not dictate the wages GEO must pay to detainees or require it to operate the work program. The case is GEO Group v. Menocal, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 24-758. For GEO: Dominic Draye of Greenberg Traurig For the plaintiffs: Jennifer Bennett of Gupta Wessler Read more: GEO Group can't nix $23 mln verdict over immigrant detainee pay GEO Group must pay minimum wage to immigrant detainees, court rules GEO Group wins legal challenge to California ban on private immigrant prisons
