Latest news with #JohnOliver
The Guardian
21 hours ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
John Oliver on police gang databases: ‘Get rid of them'
After an extended summer holiday, John Oliver returned to his desk at Last Week Tonight to dissect US law enforcement's overreliance on faulty and unregulated gang databases. Such databases – as Oliver put it, 'basically lists the police keep of people they say are involved in gangs' – have been used to justify numerous deportations under the Trump administration, including the deportation and detention of Kilmar Ábrego García, a Salvadorian immigrant from Maryland whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) illegally deported due to what they later admitted was an 'administrative error'. The deportation stemmed from a wrongful inclusion on a gang database – in 2019, officers apparently observed Ábrego at a Home Depot and filed a report that he belonged to a gang, based on the fact that he wore a Chicago Bulls hat and a hoodie with 'rolls of money covering the eyes, ears and mouth of the presidents' and that they 'know such clothing to be indicative of the Hispanic gang culture'. According to the report, 'wearing the Chicago Bulls hat represents [that] they are in good standing with the MS-13'. 'Which is already a little bit weird, because it implies that somehow, if you're not up to date on your monthly MS-13 dues, your Bulls hat privileges get revoked,' Oliver joked. The officer who filed that report also cited an anonymous tip that Ábrego was a member of MS-13; the officer was also suspended a week later for unrelated misconduct and ultimately fired. 'Nevertheless, that gang allegation meant that Ábrego García was denied bond and spent months locked up in Ice detention,' Oliver explained, an outcome that was 'ridiculous. A person's clothing shouldn't be criteria for locking them up for eight months. As we all know, the worst consequence of fashion choices should be getting roasted by teens on TikTok.' Ábrego's saga is one of many stories that bring the government's use of so-called 'gang databases' into question. Around the country, many local and state police departments keep these databases, often without disclosing them, despite investigations finding them to be 'notoriously inconsistent and opaque', 'riddled with questionable entries and errors' and 'rife with unreliable intelligence', to quote several reports cited by Oliver. When it comes to what constitutes a 'gang', there's 'a lot of variability here', said Oliver. 'Not all gang members may even be engaged in crime.' As one researcher put it: 'Not all gang members are criminals, and not all criminals are gang members.' 'Unfortunately, none of that nuance is on display in these databases,' said Oliver, and none of these lists have oversight from any other branch of government or other law enforcement. The criteria for inclusion are police observations and 'self-admissions', which basically means, according to Oliver, 'We found something on your social media that we decided constitutes you admitting that you're in a gang.' That could include posts with the word 'gang', such as a post from a teenager with the caption 'happy birthday, gang', added to a database on the grounds of self-admission. 'And if the bar is that low, anything is basically a confession,' said Oliver. 'A pic of you holding a diploma with the caption 'killed it?' Congratulations, grad, but now you're wanted for murder. 'And while so far I've been saying anyone can be added to these lists, those who end up on them are heavily people of color,' he continued. At one point, Washington DC's database had only one white person on its list. 'Do you know how few lists there are with only one white guy on them?' Oliver joked. 'It's basically this database and the cast of Hamilton. That is it.' Additions can also be motivated by spite; in 2020, a cop in Phoenix registered 17 Black Lives Matter protesters as 'ACAB gang members' in retaliation. Most states also do not require states to notify people if they put them on a gang database. 'And when it comes to immigrants, the designation of gang member can be truly life-altering,' said Oliver. 'It can be the reason that someone is denied various pathways to remain in the US, and it can make someone a higher priority for deportation and the target of a raid.' Oliver relayed the story of a Hispanic teen in Long Island named Alex who was added to a gang database by a school resource officer after he was seen wearing bright blue sneakers, which school security guards told him was associated with the gang MS-13. He had also doodled '504' on his backpack, which is the country code for Honduras, his country of origin. A few months later, Ice agents arrested him, saying they heard he was a gang member, and eventually deported him. When a police commissioner in Alex's county was asked why he felt local law enforcement needed to partner with Ice, he answered: 'If we have intelligence that they are a gang member, that's not necessarily a crime … The intel that we have may not indicate a state crime. The intel may be small on them, but nothing that is going to keep them in jail. So if we perceive someone as a public safety threat, we utilize all of our tools, which again includes immigration tools, so we'll partner with the Department of Homeland Security to target them for detention.' Oliver fumed in response: 'If someone is on your list of big bad criminals, and you can't find any big bad crime to arrest them for, that suggests the issue might be your fucking list. 'It is pretty clear that gang databases are way too easy to get on, way too hard to get off, and can turn people's lives upside down,' he added. 'So what do we do? Well, I'd argue we get rid of them. And if you think, 'Well, hold on, how will police then stop gang violence?' I'd say, with police work. They could and should do actual police work focusing on where violence is concentrated, instead of fixating on labels. 'I'm not saying that violence associated with gangs isn't real or isn't a problem,' he concluded. 'I'm just saying the answer needs to go beyond policing and way beyond these databases.'
The Guardian
a day ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
John Oliver on police gang databases: ‘Get rid of them'
After an extended summer holiday, John Oliver returned to his desk at Last Week Tonight to dissect US law enforcement's overreliance on faulty and unregulated gang databases. Such databases – as Oliver put it, 'basically lists the police keep of people they say are involved in gangs' – have been used to justify numerous deportations under the Trump administration, including the deportation and detention of Kilmar Ábrego García, a Salvadorian immigrant from Maryland whom Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) illegally deported due to what they later admitted was an 'administrative error'. The deportation stemmed from a wrongful inclusion on a gang database – in 2019, officers apparently observed Ábrego at a Home Depot and filed a report that he belonged to a gang, based on the fact that he wore a Chicago Bulls hat and a hoodie with 'rolls of money covering the eyes, ears and mouth of the presidents' and that they 'know such clothing to be indicative of the Hispanic gang culture'. According to the report, 'wearing the Chicago Bulls hat represents [that] they are in good standing with the MS-13.' 'Which is already a little bit weird, because it implies that somehow, if you're not up to date on your monthly MS-13 dues, your Bulls hat privileges get revoked,' Oliver joked. The officer who filed that report also cited an anonymous tip that Ábrego was a member of MS-13; the officer was also suspended a week later for unrelated misconduct and ultimately fired. 'Nevertheless, that gang allegation meant that Ábrego García was denied bond and spent months locked up in Ice detention,' Oliver explained, an outcome that was 'ridiculous. A person's clothing shouldn't be criteria for locking them up for eight months. As we all know, the worst consequence of fashion choices should be getting roasted by teens on TikTok.' Ábrego's saga is one of many stories that bring the government's use of so-called 'gang databases' into question. Around the country, many local and state police departments keep these databases, often without disclosing them, despite investigations finding them to be 'notoriously inconsistent and opaque', 'riddled with questionable entries and errors' and 'rife with unreliable intelligence', to quote several reports cited by Oliver. When it comes to what constitutes a 'gang', there's 'a lot of variability here', said Oliver. 'Not all gang members may even be engaged in crime.' As one researcher put it: 'Not all gang members are criminals, and not all criminals are gang members.' 'Unfortunately, none of that nuance is on display in these databases,' said Oliver, and none of these lists have oversight from any other branch of government or other law enforcement. The criteria for inclusion are police observations and 'self-admissions', which basically means, according to Oliver, 'We found something on your social media that we decided constitutes you admitting that you're in a gang.' That could include posts with the word 'gang', such as a post from a teenager with the caption 'happy birthday. gang', added to a database on the grounds of self-admission. 'And if the bar is that low, anything is basically a confession,' said Oliver. 'A pic of you holding a diploma with the caption 'killed it?' Congratulations grad, but now you're wanted for murder. 'And while so far I've been saying anyone can be added to these lists, those who end up on them are heavily people of color,' he continued. At one point, Washington DC's database had only one white person on its list. 'Do you know how few lists there are with only one white guy on them?' Oliver joked. 'It's basically this database and the cast of Hamilton. That is it.' Additions can also be motivated by spite; in 2020, a cop in Phoenix registered 17 Black Lives Matter protesters as 'ACAB gang members' in retaliation. Most states also do not require states to notify people if they put them on a gang database. 'And when it comes to immigrants, the designation of gang member can be truly life-altering,' said Oliver. 'It can be the reason that someone is denied various pathways to remain in the US, and it can make someone a higher priority for deportation and the target of a raid.' Oliver relayed the story of a Hispanic teen in Long Island named Alex, who was added to a gang database by a school resource officer after he was seen wearing bright blue sneakers, which school security guards told him was associated with the gang MS-13. He had also doodled '504' on his backpack, which is the country code for Honduras, his country of origin. A few months later, Ice agents arrested him, saying they heard he was a gang member, and eventually deported him. When a police commissioner in Alex's county was asked why he felt local law enforcement needed to partner with Ice, he answered: 'If we have intelligence that they are a gang member, that's not necessarily a crime … the intel that we have may not indicate a state crime. The intel may be small on them, but nothing that is going to keep them in jail. So if we perceive someone as a public safety threat, we utilize all of our tools, which again includes immigration tools, so we'll partner with the Department of Homeland Security to target them for detention.' Oliver fumed in response: 'If someone is on your list of big bad criminals, and you can't find any big bad crime to arrest them for, that suggests the issue might be your fucking list. 'It is pretty clear that gang databases are way too easy to get on, way too hard to get off, and can turn people's lives upside down,' he added. 'So what do we do? Well, I'd argue we get rid of them. And if you think, 'Well hold on, how will police then stop gang violence?' I'd say, with police work. They could and should do actual police work focusing on where violence is concentrated, instead of fixating on labels. 'I'm not saying that violence associated with gangs isn't real or isn't a problem,' he concluded. 'I'm just saying the answer needs to go beyond policing and way beyond these databases.'
Yahoo
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
John Oliver Returns to Dunk On Trump's Epstein Disaster
John Oliver teased President Donald Trump for his inability to escape the increasingly loud calls to release the Epstein files. 'Trump has been struggling to move past this as new revelations keep coming out,' Oliver said in his opening monologue for Sunday's Last Week Tonight, his first since returning from summer hiatus. Oliver noted Trump's lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal for its scoop alleging Trump had submitted a special message for Epstein's 50th birthday card that included a scrawl from Trump in the form of a naked female with pubic hair. 'But also, and I know this isn't the point, Why the f--- is this Trump's signature?' Oliver asked, displaying the president's squiggly penmanship. 'Donald Trump has 11 letters, not 400 m's. His signature looks less like pubes and more like the polygraph results when he's asked if he's ever been friends with Jeffrey Epstein.' Despite 'desperately trying to draw people's attention anywhere else,' including the Washington Commanders, Oliver referenced Trump's attempts at trying to change the subject and switch focus to former President Barack Obama. 'Yeah. It's that easy,' Oliver replied mockingly. 'And if they keep asking, just say Hillary shot JFK, Rosie O'Donnell did 9/11, and Nancy Pelosi f---ed a bat. That's how we got COVID. No further questions. And while distraction is usually one of Trump's greatest weapons, it doesn't seem to be working here.' Even ordering his employees to dump files related to the 1968 assassination of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. didn't do the trick, Oliver said, adding that King's own daughter, Bernie, quipped on X to the administration: 'Now, do the Epstein files.' 'In terms of internet clapbacks, that is up there with Wendy's asking if we can send Katy Perry back to space—and I don't say that lightly,' Oliver said, before adding that even the so-called 'QAnon Shaman,' Jacob Chansley, also had ranted about Trump's connections to Epstein, calling the president a fraud and cussing him out on July 23. 'Once you've lost Dipshit Daniel Boone here, you are in trouble,' Oliver said. 'And it's understandable why Trump's struggling to get even his own base to take his word for it that there is nothing to see here. Because to do so, you'd essentially have to believe that everything we've learned about Trump over the years is irrelevant or sheer coincidence. That all Trump did was repeatedly host Epstein at Mar-a-Lago, have him at his wedding, hang out with him at Victoria's Secret fashion shows, get listed as a passenger on his plane eight times, joke with him at a party while pointing out hot women and saying something into his ear that got the most grotesque smile in the history of human expressions, tell a reporter 'I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He likes women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.' And allegedly host a calendar girl competition where other than the two dozen or so women flown in to provide the entertainment, the only guests were him and Jeffrey Epstein.' Oliver continued with a long list of grievances against Trump: 'You'd also have to forget about Trump bragging about his ability to grab women's genitals,' he said, referencing the infamous Access Hollywood tape. 'I guess, ideally, Trump would have Jeffrey Epstein on tape vehemently denying their connection. Unfortunately, what he's got instead is this moment in Epstein's 2010 deposition,' Oliver said, noting recently resurfaced footage showing Epstein pleading his 'Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights' when asked about his relationship with Trump. 'Yeah, not great!' Oliver said. 'If the answer's no, just say that. Instead, Epstein started listing amendments like he was ordering off the value menu.'
Fox News
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Fox News
'Daily Show' co-creator sounds off on cancellation of Colbert's show, accuses CBS of being 'afraid'
Lizz Winstead, the co-creator of "The Daily Show", sounded off during an MSNBC interview about the cancellation of late-night host Stephen Colbert's show, accusing CBS of being afraid. "To just drop the franchise itself, right, its not like Stephen Colbert, its a double, its a twofer, right? And that says to me, you're afraid, because we've watched, with 'The Daily Show,' with John Oliver, we've watched how people who do not have a dog in the fight, and what I mean by that is people who call BS no matter who the powerful person is, on their hypocrisy or screwing up. And that's what Stephen has done brilliantly, Jon [Stewart] has done brilliantly, John Oliver has done brilliantly," Winstead said. Winstead wrote a piece for Rolling Stone on Friday about the cancellation of Colbert and said she didn't believe CBS' explanation for canceling the show. CBS announced that Colbert's show would be canceled at the end of its broadcast season and said it was a "purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night." "So when the truthtellers are the comics and those comics are actually resonating with the people that Donald Trump has not been able to reach, then he's got to go plan b and plan b is, 'oh, look at me, I have a merger I need, look at me. I can ask for what I want, and I can silence those voices because my, lardo-thin skin cannot take the ridicule,' that most people can who are grown adults running a nation," she continued. Liberals have overwhelmingly argued that Colbert's show was canceled for political reasons. Days before the cancellation, Colbert slammed Paramount's recent settlement with President Donald Trump over his lawsuit against "60 Minutes" as a "big fat bribe" ahead of a pending merger between Paramount and Skydance Media. Winstead argued Colbert, along with other comedians, was an authentic voice on late-night television. "When you are authentic, people gravitate to you, and there is nothing and no one more authentic than Stephen, John. You look at these passionate pleas that they give nightly, and you're like, that is real. And the fire is what makes people come back. And if you lack the fire, man, do you hate it. And if that fire is directed at you, you have no other choice, because you're small, to want to squelch it and put it out," Winstead continued. Winstead wrote in Rolling Stone that she didn't believe CBS' financial excuse and suggested networks didn't want progressive voices. "This is why Colbert's cancellation hits different. Not just because he's one of the greats, but because his ousting is a warning shot. It tells comedians — even the white, male, successful ones — that there's a line. And if you cross it, they'll find an excuse to take you out," Winstead, who identified herself in the commentary essay as a loud and proud, pro-abortion progressive, wrote. "Underneath those thinly veiled excuses is fear. Fear of the power comedians have. Fear that people might actually listen while they are laughing," she continued.
CNN
22-07-2025
- Entertainment
- CNN
All-star roster of comedians show solidarity with Stephen Colbert in first ‘Late Show' after cancellation
Stephen Colbert gained a little help from his friends and late-night rivals on Monday, his first night back on 'The Late Show' since announcing that CBS is ending the legendary show. NBC's Jimmy Fallon, HBO's John Oliver, and Comedy Central's Jon Stewart were among the faces in the 'Late Show' crowd during a spoof of the now-famous 'Coldplay cam.' The fellow comedians didn't speak and they didn't have to: Being there was the point. The 'Late Show' cancellation raised concerns about the future of late-night comedy — and about something bigger. Are big TV networks going to keep supporting political satire and free speech at a time when President Trump's campaign of retribution is rattling corporate America? 'Some people see this show going away as a sign of something truly dire,' Colbert acknowledged Monday night. 'And while I am a big fan of me, I don't necessarily agree with that statement,' he said. 'Because we here at 'The Late Show' never saw our job as changing anything other than how you felt at the end of the day.' He also made some jokes about CBS saying the show was ending for 'purely financial' reasons. Through humor, he raised an eyebrow at news reports about the show becoming unprofitable, though he didn't directly dispute that. 'Folks, I'm going to go ahead and say it: Cancel culture has gone too far,' he quipped. After the 'Coldplay cam' spoof, which was led by Lin-Manuel Miranda and 'Weird Al' Yankovic, Colbert pretended that CBS had just cancelled the song because it lost money. The cameos were a testament to Colbert's long-lasting relationships in the TV industry. Fallon and his NBC colleague Seth Meyers were seated together. Bravo late-night host Andy Cohen sat with his best friend, CNN's Anderson Cooper. Actors Adam Sandler and Christopher McDonald were there with Robert Smigel and his Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. Beyond the partisan arguments about whether anti-Trump comics are funny is a broader fear about institutions caving to Trump and removing room for dissent. There is a long history of American TV networks giving comics space to poke politicians and even network executives in the eye, despite the potential ramifications. Fans feel that tradition is under threat now. Outside the 'Late Show' studio, the Ed Sullivan Theater, on Monday, pro-Colbert and anti-Trump protesters held up signs criticizing CBS for cancelling the show. One sign read, 'Silencing comedians is no joke.' Another read, 'Colbert forever.' Stewart spoke out about it from his own television perch, 'The Daily Show,' on Monday night. Both shows are owned by the same company, Paramount Global, which has been in a perilous political position in recent months. Colbert catapulted to fame on Stewart's show twenty years ago; the two men have remained friends ever since; and Stewart is now an executive producer of Colbert's 'Late Show,' so he has some visibility into the situation. 'If you're trying to figure out why Stephen's show is ending, I don't think the answer can be found in some smoking gun email or phone call from Trump to CBS executives, or in CBS's QuickBooks spreadsheets on the financial health of late night,' Stewart said on-air. 'I think the answer in the fear and pre-compliance that is gripping all of America's institutions at this very moment — institutions that have chosen not to fight the vengeful and vindictive actions of our pubic hair-doodling commander in chief,' he said. Stewart, whose 'Daily Show' contract expires at the end of this year, added, 'This is not the moment to give in. I'm not giving in! I'm not going anywhere — I think.' Stewart also had a profane message for Paramount and other media companies: 'If you believe, as corporations or as networks, you can make yourselves so innocuous, that you can serve a gruel so flavorless that you will never again be on the boy king's radar, why will anyone watch you, and you are f***ing wrong.' 'The Late Show' has been a cornerstone of the CBS programming schedule for decades, so fans and industry followers were shocked when the network announced its cancellation last Thursday. Top executives at CBS said it was an 'agonizing' decision but one that was unrelated to 'other matters happening at Paramount.' In other words, the merger. Paramount has been attempting to merge with Skydance Media, which means billions of dollars and some big egos are on the line. However, the deal requires approval from the Trump administration, and the review process has been taking longer than usual, which has raised concerns about political interference. Earlier this month, while Colbert and 'The Late Show' were on a mid-summer break, Paramount settled Trump's legally dubious lawsuit against CBS News by agreeing to pay $16 million toward his future presidential library. The settlement was widely criticized, and Colbert joined the chorus when he returned from vacation last week, likening the payoff to a 'big fat bribe.' Two days after that telecast, Colbert was informed that CBS was retiring 'The Late Show' franchise. The move will take effect next May, when Colbert's contract expires and the broadcast TV season ends. Colbert referred to the settlement again on Monday night's show. He cited the media leaks indicating that the 'Late Show' was losing 'between $40 million and $50 million a year.' 'Forty million's a big number,' Colbert said. 'I could see us losing $24 million, but where would Paramount have possibly spent the other $16 million… oh, yeah.' Meantime, the founding host of 'The Late Show,' David Letterman, weighed in on the franchise's retirement on Monday by publishing to his YouTube channel a 20-minute highlight reel of his past jokes about CBS. The video caption read: 'You can't spell CBS without BS.'
