‘Jimmy Kimmel is next': Trump gloats after cancellation of Colbert's ‘Late Show'
'I absolutely love that Colbert got fired. His talent was even less than his ratings,' Trump wrote Friday morning on Truth Social. 'I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next. Has even less talent than Colbert!'
He added that Greg Gutfeld, who has a late-night show and co-hosts 'The Five' on Fox News, 'is better than all of them combined, including the Moron on NBC who ruined the once great Tonight Show,' referring to Jimmy Fallon.
Although 'Late Night' is the top-rated late-night broadcast show, 'Gutfeld!' draws a bigger audience.
Colbert, 61, has hosted the show for a decade and shared the news of its cancellation Thursday night, noting that he was made aware of the decision only the night before. 'The Late Show' will end in May.
'It's not just the end of our show, but it's the end of 'The Late Show' on CBS,' Colbert said. 'I'm not being replaced. This is all just going away.'
CBS said the decision was 'purely financial.' The cancellation comes after Colbert criticized the network's parent company, Paramount Global, for settling a lawsuit filed by Trump last year over the editing of a '60 Minutes' interview with Kamala Harris. Colbert called the $16-million settlement a 'big fat bribe' Monday night, noting that Paramount is awaiting federal approval for its $8-billion merger with Skydance Media.
Both branches of the Writers Guild called on New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James to investigate Paramount.
'Cancelations are part of the business, but a corporation terminating a show in bad faith due to explicit or implicit political pressure is dangerous and unacceptable in a democratic society,' read a statement released Friday by the union.
Fellow late-night hosts have since criticized the show's cancellation.
'Love you Stephen. F— you and all your Sheldons CBS,' Kimmel wrote in an Instagram story, referencing the network hits 'The Big Bang Theory' and 'Young Sheldon.'
'I'm just as shocked as everyone. Stephen is one of the sharpest, funniest hosts to ever do it. I really thought I'd ride this out with him for years to come,' Jimmy Fallon posted in an Instagram story. 'I'm sad that my family and friends will need a new show to watch every night at 11:30. But honestly, he's really been a gentleman and a true friend over the years — going back to The Colbert Report, and I'm sure whatever he does next will be just as brilliant.'
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who called for an investigation into the Paramount settlement this month, suggested that the move was politically motivated.
'CBS canceled Colbert's show just THREE DAYS after Colbert called out CBS parent company Paramount for its $16M settlement with Trump — a deal that looks like bribery,' she wrote Thursday night on X. 'America deserves to know if his show was canceled for political reasons.'
'If Paramount and CBS ended the Late Show for political reasons, the public deserves to know. And deserves better,' said Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who was a guest on the show Thursday night.
Trump had called for Colbert's termination in September.
'I briefly watched an interview of Stephen Colbert on highly government subsidized PBS, and found it fascinating for only one reason — Why would they be wasting time and the public's money on this complete and total loser?' he wrote on Truth Social. 'He is not funny, which he gets paid far too much to be, he is not wise, he is VERY BORING, and his show is dying from a complete lack of viewers.
'CBS should terminate his contract and pick almost anyone, right off the street, who would do better, and for FAR LESS MONEY,' he continued. 'Or I could recommend someone, much more talented, and smarter, who would do it for FREE! The good news for Stephen is that the two DOPES on NBC & ABC are not much better than him!'
In a Variety interview published Wednesday, Kimmel shared his concerns about the Trump administration targeting him and his competitors.
'Well, you'd have to be naive not to worry a little bit. But that can't change what you're doing,' the ABC late-night host told the outlet. 'And maybe it is naive, but I have the hope that if and when the day comes that he does start coming after comedians, that even my colleagues on the right will support my right to say what I like. Now, I could be kidding myself, and hopefully we'll never find out. But if we do, I would hope that the outrage is significant.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
American Military News
25 minutes ago
- American Military News
Sexual LGBT books revealed in list of 596 books banned by Pentagon
A list of 596 books banned from use at the Department of Defense's military schools under President Donald Trump's administration was recently released by a U.S. district court. The list includes numerous books on graphic LGBTQ topics, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) topics, and other left-wing topics. According to The Daily Caller, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia released a list on July 11 of the books the Pentagon has banned from its military schools. The list was released as part of the lawsuit brought against the Department of Defense Education Activity by the American Civil Liberties Union. The Trump administration's Department of Defense was sued by the American Civil Liberties Union, military students, and the family members of military students in April following multiple book bans and curriculum changes implemented by the administration to remove DEI policies and curriculum from the military. 'Our DoDEA schools are not playgrounds for left-wing activists pushing race-baiting, gender confusion, and anti-American propaganda,' DOD Watch Executive Director Nicole Kiprilov said in a statement to The Daily Caller. 'This isn't about banning ideas; it's about stopping the deliberate indoctrination of military children with a radical ideology that directly contradicts the values that should be shaping our children's growth and development.' READ MORE: Defense Department sued over Trump admin's alleged 'book bans' 'The Trump administration is fighting for military families by making sure DoDEA schools reflect the values of service, sacrifice, and country, and not the woke agenda of activist bureaucrats,' Kiprilov added. The Daily Caller reported that a significant number of the books included in the list feature sexual LGBTQ themes aimed at minors, while other books on the list feature DEI and other left-wing topics. One of the books on the list is a children's book titled 'My Dad Thinks I'm a Boy?!: A Trans Positive Children's Book.' According to a description on Amazon's website, 'This powerful and uplifting book for children aged 6 – 9 and their families humorously portrays a situation that is often too common, where a trans child is forced to negotiate between their true self and their parents' love.' Another book on the list is titled 'Dude, You're a Fag: Masculinity and Sexuality in High School.' A description of the book claims that it explains 'how the 'specter of the fag' becomes a disciplinary mechanism for regulating heterosexual as well as homosexual boys and how the 'fag discourse' is as much tied to gender as it is to sexuality.' Other books included as part of the Pentagon's ban include 'Sex Is a Funny Word: A Book about Bodies, Feelings, and YOU, 'ABC's of LGBT+,' 'Auntie Uncle: Drag Queen Hero,' and 'Baby Drag Queen.'
USA Today
25 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump DOJ wants Supreme Court to bring down hammer on gun rules
WASHINGTON − After the Supreme Court in 2022 made it harder to restrict who can arm themselves in public, some states took a different approach. Five Democrat-led, mostly densely populous states passed laws that prohibit bringing a handgun onto someone else's property without that person's express consent. Now the Trump administration wants the Supreme Court to declare that such rules in Hawaii, California, New York, Maryland and New Jersey violate the Constitution. 'The United States has a substantial interest in the preservation of the right to keep and bear arms and in the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment,' Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in explaining why the Department of Justice wants the high court to weigh in. That's not the only example of how the change in administrations is affecting litigation over gun regulations. Justice Department stopped defending federal handgun rule In a move alarming to groups working to prevent gun violence, the DOJ declined to continue to defend a federal law setting 21 as the minimum age to own a handgun after an appeals court ruled the restriction unconstitutional. 'For the government to step back and say, `Hey, here's a major piece of federal firearms legislation that was passed by Congress; we're just not going to bother to defend it any longer,' that's a really, really significant thing,' said Esther Sanchez-Gomez, litigation director for the Giffords Law Center. The DOJ has also told the Supreme Court that the federal government no longer opposes all aspects of a Missouri law – blocked by lower courts after the Biden administration and others challenged it – that would penalize state police for enforcing federal gun control laws. 'This is the first time we've seen a Justice Department really actively fight for the Second Amendment rights of all Americans," said Hannah Hill, vice president of the National Foundation for Gun Rights. Hill said it's taken the administration longer than she'd hoped to take a stand and her group is eager for President Donald Trump to repeal federal regulations − including rules on untraceable "ghost guns" that the Supreme Court upheld in March. "But you're seeing a slow pivot of a massive ship back toward the Constitution," she said. "And I'm extremely encouraged by the trajectory." Trump: `No one will lay a finger on your firearms' During a 2024 campaign stop to address thousands of members of the National Rifle Association in Pennsylvania, Trump promised that 'no one will lay a finger on your firearms' if voters put him back in the White House. "Your Second Amendment will always be safe with me as your president," Trump said. Soon after taking office, Trump signed an executive order directing a review of Biden-era firearm policies and of the positions the government has taken in gun-related litigation. Legal challenges to firearm rules spiked after the court created a new test for gun laws in its 2022 decision striking down a New York law that required state residents to have "proper cause" to carry a handgun. The court said gun rules must be similar to a historical regulation on weapons to pass constitutional muster. Lower courts divided over age restriction on handguns As the administration was changing hands in January, the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said a decades-old federal law banning handgun purchases by 18- to 20-year-olds fails that test. "The history of firearm use, particularly in connection with militia service, contradicts the premise that eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds are not covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment," U.S. Circuit Judge Edith Jones wrote for the court. In July, the DOJ told a lower court that the government is not going to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court. But the high court may still take up the issue. More: Supreme Court rules Mexico can't sue US gunmakers over cartel violence In June, the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached the opposite conclusion as the 5th Circuit, ruling against a similar challenge. "From English common law to America's founding and beyond, our regulatory tradition has permitted restrictions on the sale of firearms to individuals under the age of 21," U.S. Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote for the court. The four 18- to 20-year-olds challenging the age restriction have appealed that decision to the Supreme Court. The DOJ has not yet filed its response. More: Supreme Court sides with Biden and upholds regulations of ghost guns to make them traceable Debate over the right to carry a gun in public In its brief supporting a challenge to Hawaii's law prohibiting the carrying of handguns onto someone else's property without their consent, the government said that the rule 'effectively nullifies' the general right to carry a gun in public that the court upheld in 2022. 'Someone carrying a firearm for self-defense cannot run errands without fear of criminal sanctions,' Sauer told the court. Sanchez-Gomez, the litigation director for the Giffords Law Center, said property owners have always had the ability to restrict weapons. But Hawaii's law makes the default that handguns aren't allowed unless there's express permission, rather than that they are allowed unless they're expressly prohibited. When the court limited states' control over who could publicly carry guns, she said, the focus turned to where in public they could bring them. Alex McCourt, an assistant professor with the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, said the Supreme Court could take up the case not so much because the Trump administration wants them to but because one appeals court upheld Hawaii's rule while a different appeals court rejected New York's. 'The fact that we have these differing opinions across the country probably weighs even heavier in the Supreme Court's mind," he said. Still, McCourt said, it's relatively rare for the high court to weigh in on gun laws. 'They often say no,' he said. Justice Department backs challenge to bans on AR-15s In June, the justices declined to hear a challenge to Maryland's ban on assault-style weapons, although Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he expects his colleagues 'will address the AR-15 issue soon, in the next term or two.' Days later, the Justice Department urged the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down a similar law in Illinois. 'Because the Act is a total ban on a category of firearms that are in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful reasons, it is flatly unconstitutional,' lawyers for the DOJ wrote in a legal brief supporting the challenge. The Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the groups fighting Illinois' law, called the DOJ's filing a critical step toward Trump fulfilling his promise to defend the Second Amendment. 'We hope Solicitor General Sauer will stand with us on this issue at the Supreme Court,' coalition president Brandon Combs said in a statement, 'when this case inevitably heads up.'
USA Today
25 minutes ago
- USA Today
Of course Trump lied about Project 2025. Now he's enacting it.
The similarities between what Project 2025 proposed and what Trump's second administration has unleashed on Americans is striking, but now is not the time to be complacent and simply hope for change. A year ago, as delegates to the Republican National Convention gathered in Milwaukee to nominate Donald Trump for president, I sent an urgent warning to voters about an innocent enough sounding proposal – "Project 2025" –punctuated by this admission: "Honestly, it scares me." The 922-page report from a conservative think tank outlined the first 180 days of a second Trump presidency. At the time, then GOP-nominee Trump claimed to know nothing about it, despite his name being mentioned 312 times in the document. While Trump tried to distance himself from its politically unpopular ideas, I recognized that if he won, Trump would support many of its radical plans that could disrupt nearly every aspect of our lives, including healthcare, education, taxes and civil rights. The question looms: Was I right? I was right, and it's so much worse than I thought The short answer is yes, and in ways even more frightening than I first feared, but you don't need to take my word for it. Just ask Maurice Cunningham, a retired professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts Boston, who studied politics for decades and is well-versed in Project 2025. When I asked Cunningham if the policies outlined in the document implemented by Trump are hurting the average American as much as I suspected, he responded: "It's not just bad; it's possibly worse than you could have imagined.' Although the situation may seem dire, Cunningham warned that now is not the time to be complacent and simply hope for change. Instead, it is crucial for people to organize, protest and hold their elected officials accountable. Opinion: I'm exhausted by attempts to pretend discrimination doesn't exist in America Trump appointed Project 2025 authors to administration posts The similarities between what Project 2025 proposed and what Trump's second administration has unleashed on Americans is striking, and it would be unwise to dismiss them as mere coincidence. And keep in mind, we still have another 3.5 years to go. In the first 100 days since he took office alone, nearly 45% of his executive orders closely resemble the policy recommendations advocated by Project 2025, according to an analysis conducted by the Hearst Television Data Team. And that was just the beginning. A number of Trump administration appointees were contributors to the project, including Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing Peter Navarro, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr and border czar Tom Homan. Cunningham said Trump's policies, put into place by the people behind Project 2025, are beginning to take a toll on the most vulnerable sectors of society. This alignment appears to be a key component of his overall strategy. We saw this at work with the passage of Trump's "big beautiful" budget bill where cuts to Medicaid alone could cause as many as 20 million people to lose their health coverage over the next decade. This will happen despite Trump's repeated promises not to cut Medicaid benefits as recently as March. That fits a familiar pattern. Lie. Deny. Enact. Repeat. Opinion: How much of Project 2025 has been implemented? Enough to break us beyond repair. It's worth noting that Project 2025 proposed significant changes to Medicaid, including work requirements, limiting eligibility and possibly imposing lifetime caps or time limits on coverage, while also weakening reforms from the Affordable Care Act. As we look back on the past five months under the Trump administration, the key question is whether we're better off now or if we've fallen further into hardship. "I think that's easy to answer and it will only get worse,' Cunningham said. This will be a slow burn. Tax cuts under the bill happen immediately while Medicaid changes are phased in. In other places, the pain is already being felt from mass layoffs of federal employees and DOGE budget cuts. Education and social safety net endure DOGE chainsaw Education is place where changes outlined in Project 2025 will begin making a major impact this fall. It called for allowing discrimination against LGBTQ+ students, redirecting taxpayer money to private schools, eliminating Title 1 funding and making cuts to Head Start, which would affect 800,000 preschoolers. U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon has promised to dismantle the department and has pushed to cut the Education Department's budget by $12 billion. This reduction would seriously impact minority and low-income children and their families in public schools and rural communities. The administration already cut and delayed funding for Head Start programs for preschoolers from low income families, which assists 16,000 children in Wisconsin alone. Project 2025 proposed to make it even more difficult for low-income individuals to afford food. The proposal aims to reverse the Biden administration's initiative to increase SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits over the next decade, a measure designed to keep pace with rising food costs. Under Trump's budget bill, SNAP will face its largest cut in history, resulting in an estimated 3.2 million adults losing food benefits each month, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Opinion: Senate just passed Trump's Big Beautiful Bill – and made it even uglier Picture this: young students stepping into their classrooms, their bellies empty and growling, struggling to concentrate and absorb knowledge as the shadow of budget cuts hovers ominously over their futures. And it doesn't stop there. Then came Alligator Alcatraz Trump's mass deportations align directly with Project 2025's plan to increase executive power and undermine the U.S. immigration system. It proposed implementing asylum procedures at the border, reducing access to legal immigration options, utilizing local resources for mass deportations and detention, and separating immigrant children from their families. Trump's budget bill allocates $170 billion to deport 1 million people each year. ICE officials have gotten more aggressive, arresting undocumented immigrants at their homes, workplaces, protests, churches, near schools, and even at the Milwaukee courthouse. On April 18, Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was taken into custody by FBI officials after she allegedly assisted Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an undocumented Mexican immigrant, in escaping federal agents following his appearance in her courtroom. Flores-Ruiz, 31, was arrested after a brief foot chase outside the courthouse. A week later, Dugan, 65, was also arrested at the courthouse. She was charged on April 25 with two federal counts: obstructing a U.S. agency and concealing an individual to prevent an arrest. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee political science professor Kathleen Dolan called the arrest of Dugan an 'intimidation tactic.' 'If a judge can be handcuffed on their job, what do you think will happen to you?' she said. The ongoing mass deportations continue to rip families apart, leaving a trail of profound emotional devastation in their wake. It's disheartening to witness the stark absence of compassion among Republicans regarding this crisis. Just this month, a migrant detention facility opened in the Florida Everglades. Some Republicans have dubbed the facility 'Alligator Alcatraz,' due to its isolated location and the fact that it's surrounded by lurking alligators and slithering pythons. The term "Alligator Alcatraz" not only evokes a sense of danger but also highlights the callousness that the Trump administration is willing to exhibit to drive home its message. Disturbingly, they are even merchandising T-shirts that mock what I would call a modern-day concentration camp. This tumultuous situation sends shockwaves through immigrant communities, escalating fear and uncertainty at every turn. But when you have a president who has continuously labeled immigrants as sex offenders, murderers, and gang members or suggested that many came to America from insane asylums, one can only imagine the atmosphere of dread that permeates these communities. This is not the time to become complacent or tune out news While Trump may seem to have the upper hand, it doesn't mean that everything is bleak. Both Cunningham and Dolan emphasized that now is not the time for people to become complacent. Dolan urged individuals to stay engaged in politics, even when it feels confusing and tedious. Cunningham stressed the importance of making one's voice heard through protests and by challenging both Republican and Democratic leaders to address the public's needs. Opinion: White House wants us to see Trump as Superman. We all know he's the villain. These are remarkable times with head spinning twists. One time ally and now enemy of Trump, Elon Musk, poised the idea of an third political party on Tuesday. Musk said the "America Party," would be the place for those not happy with the Republican or Democratic parties. While I agree something needs to change, Musk, who was Trump's largest donor for his campaign is not the right person to lead such a party, especially given Musk's brutal and haphazard spending cuts in his time at the poorly named Department of Government Efficiency and considering Trump said he would look at having Musk deported to his native South Africa. Besides, Americans don't have time for a new political party. I think a better idea would be for people to unite for a new nationwide "Poor People's Campaign," similar to the one led by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in 1968. This campaign would tackle issues like wealth inequality, poverty and racism, which continue to divide our society. A group in North Carolina has taken up this mantle. It's astonishing that issues from 57 years ago persist today, including the lack of access to health care and education, as well as inadequate wages. I know there are people who don't believe that marching has an impact, but when you consider that Project 2025 was designed for a specific type of individual – one who doesn't look like me – and that Trump aligns with that inherently racist, sexist and classist document, it is clear that something drastic needs to change. This moment presents an opportunity to unite everyone – from diverse backgrounds, races, religions and socioeconomic statuses – around a shared mission. Too many people are still on the sidelines, watching as individuals are deported, others lose their healthcare and civil rights continue to be eroded. We can either sit back and hope we aren't the next ones affected by the issues on Trump's long list, or we can fight to not only protect what we have but also to help those who have already lost so much. James E. Causey is an Ideas Lab reporter at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, where this column originally appeared. Reach him at jcausey@ follow him on X @jecausey.
