#スクールアイドルミュージカル 物販情報を公開しました！ https://t.co/0aRTKfe3yw さらに、会場物販で販売するランダムブロマイドに キャスト直筆のサイン入りブロマイドが 公演日ごとに若干数登場することが決定🎉 ✅グッズ情報 https://t.co/BTLbyaL7Uj #livelive #スクミュ

⋆ ˚｡⋆୨♡୧⋆ ˚｡⋆falls in love with fictional men⋆ ˚｡⋆୨♡୧⋆ ˚｡⋆ — Ecchanniee streams live on Twitch! Check out their videos, sign up to chat, and join their community.

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 0:40Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -0:40 President Donald Trump claimed that a military plane that secretly flew him out of Turkey last month was “at greater risk” of being targeted even though the Secret Service determined it was the safer option. Trump traveled to last month’s NATO summit in Turkey aboard a new Qatari-gifted Air Force One plane. However, upon departing the country, he said he would depart on the “former Air Force One.” That turned out not to be the case. On Monday, The Washington Post reported that Trump boarded the “former Air Force One” in view of TV cameras and was stealthily whisked away to a catering container, which was then transported to an Air Force C-32A. Meanwhile, White House staff and reporters used the plane that was allegedly a target that, in such a scenario, acted as a decoy plane. Trump spoke with reporters on Tuesday night at Joint Base Andrews and was asked about the plane change. He made clear that he deferred to the Secret Service and added that the plane he was put on “was at greater risk”: TRUMP: It’s only up to Secret Service. I just follow what they’d like to do. So, I go by the Secret Service – and the military. They wanted me to go in a different flight, a different plane, uh, equal safety. But they wanted me to do it, so I do it. I do what they say. […] REPORTER: Why was it too dangerous for you to fly on Air Force One, but not too dangerous for the press? TRUMP: Well, I don’t know. I think, actually, the plane that I flew on was at greater risk. I think it was at greater risk because that would be the plane I think that they would be more likely to go for. REPORTER: Were you worried about a shoulder-fired missile? TRUMP: Uh, I don’t worry about anything, to be honest. Whatever it is, you know, my attitude? Whatever. The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday that Israeli officials briefed their U.S. counterparts while Trump was in Turkey, and warned of an alleged Iranian threat on the president’s life – specifically, “a threat to use shoulder-to-air missiles to target Air Force One.” Back in February, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu showed Trump alleged intelligence indicating that the Islamic Republic was ripe to be toppled if Trump started a massive bombing campaign against the country. The president did so on Feb. 28 with Israeli assistance. The war has been ongoing since. Watch above via CNN. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 3:41Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -3:41 President Donald Trump raged to Fox News’s Trey Yingst about Tuesday night’s surprise attack by Iran on U.S. troops in Jordan, telling him “we are going to beat the f*cking sh*t out of them.” Yingst, Fox’s chief foreign correspondent, reported on Trump’s comments while joining Fox & Friends on Wednesday morning and noted that Trump added, “We’ll be hitting them hard.” “Yeah, guys, good morning. President Trump reacting to that Iranian attack on U.S. forces overnight in Jordan. President Trump tells Fox News about Iran: ‘We are going to beat the effing sh*t out of them.’ He went on to say, ‘We’ll be hitting them hard. They’re going to get a beating,’” Yingst began his report, adding: So clearly, the United States is going to respond to what the president described as a surprise attack. He says U.S. forces had just minutes to shoot down these incoming Iranian ballistic missiles. The president says he has reviewed video of the shoot-down, and it was U.S. forces conducting this operation to defend that area. He said it was real-time — they were calling out coordinates and ensuring that none of this incoming Iranian fire got through. I also asked the president about those U.S. and Saudi airstrikes against Iran-backed Iraqi Shia militias overnight. He says those strikes were coordinated with the Iraqi government. He called these Iran-backed militias “a cancer on the world” and says he is considering additional warnings against Iranian proxies and their link to the Iranian regime. The president also talked about his meeting yesterday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office. He says it was a great meeting — he understands now. It appears that the relationship between President Trump and the Israeli prime minister is strengthening. And again, the president called that meeting in the Oval great. In terms of possible talks with the Iranian regime, the president says, “We’re going to let them keep talking.” Remember, the Iranians came to President Trump after 13 straight days of U.S. bombing against Iran, asking to meet about the Strait of Hormuz and their broader nuclear ambitions, and those talks are taking place as we speak, behind the scenes — and then this surprise attack launched against U.S. forces overnight. And again, President Trump telling Fox News, “We are going to beat the effing s*** out of them,” and that U.S. strikes will take place against Iran in response to the surprise attack overnight against U.S. forces in Jordan. “What’s intriguing, too, is we understand the previous attacks were with Saudi Arabia. This whole thing started with Epic Fury, with Israel. Do you sense that there might be a comprehensive plan in place, or being worked on, that would involve Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE — who at various times have taken unilateral action on their own — along with the IDF?” followed up host Brian Kilmeade. “It’s absolutely possible, because the Iranian plan here backfired. By attacking all of these Gulf countries, they built an informal coalition that is now targeting Iranian proxies in the region, and even Iranian territory,” Yingst replied, adding: And we saw that last night on display: Saudi Arabia publicly admitting that they are participating in strikes against Iranian proxies in Iraq alongside U.S. forces. And other countries in the Gulf have participated in a limited capacity against the Iranians, targeting some of these coastal areas around the city of Bandar Abbas, next to the Persian Gulf, where many of those U.S. strikes took place. And remember, when we spoke with President Trump earlier this year during Operation Epic Fury, he said he was most surprised by the fact that the Iranians were targeting these countries that were uninvolved — that were not striking Iran at the time. And so, again, what Iran has done here by targeting these Gulf countries is actually building this informal coalition that is now being used to pressure the Iranian regime. The question remains if these talks will lead to some sort of agreement. But again, President Trump tells Fox News there will be a U.S. response to this surprise attack overnight against U.S. forces in Jordan. Watch the clip above via Fox News. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 2:46Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -2:46 Former CIA Director Leon Panetta wasn’t buying President Donald Trump‘s excuse for switching planes for his journey home from the NATO Summit in Turkey. On Wednesday, Shawn McCreesh of The New York Times asked Trump during a news conference in Ankara why he wasn’t flying the much-ballyhooed new Air Force One home. The $400 million jet was a gift from the Qatari government and has long prompted security concerns. “It’s flying to Europe to one of the big bases, two or three of the big bases where we can show it to the people,” Trump said. “And we’ll be going home by normal methods. But we, we have it going to Europe to a couple of bases, actually one in particular, but it’s going to go to a couple of bases so the soldiers can see it because it’s truly magnificent.” Panetta, who served under President Barack Obama, appeared on MS NOW’s The Moment with Katy Tur Wednesday — and he wasn’t buying it: LEON PANETTA: You know, I’ve always been concerned about security issues with this kind of plane that’s built by another country, regardless of the fact that that country, we may have good relations with that country. The fact is that for from a security point of view, you have got to be concerned that there are going to be efforts to try to gather intelligence. And I’m sure they’ve reviewed the whole plane. But as somebody involved with security, I would be very concerned about making sure that the president’s security is protected. The only way to do that is by having that plane made in the United States and carrying the equipment that is provided by the United States, so that we can assure that the president is not only secure, but safe. So I don’t, I don’t think there’s any question that there are security concerns here. What they are we don’t know, but I’m sure that’s involved. KATY TUR: Have you ever heard of a situation where the president switches planes like this? I mean, I know usually there are two air force ones. You know, one is not called air force one. When the president travels, there’s always a backup. Usually there’s if there is a problem, there’s it’s a maintenance issue, right? Could it just be a maintenance issue? PANETTA: Well, it’s a, it’s a brand new plane. If there’s a maintenance issue with a brand new plane that raises even more concerns. I don’t think this is about maintenance. This is a cover story of some kind to try to deploy one plane to Britain and have the president return to the old plane that was Air Force One there. There’s more going on. I think the war in Iran may have some something to do with it. He is in Turkey. It’s right next to Iran. There does have to be some real concerns about the president’s security. Even he himself basically admitted the concern about his personal security. So for for all of those reasons, I think that a decision was made to try to protect the safety of the presidency. Watch above via MS NOW. Jason Cohen contributed to this report. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 1:28Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -1:28 Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) reportedly yelled at President Donald Trump during a Senate GOP lunch on Wednesday as Trump attacked Cassidy and three other Republicans for voting in favor of a war powers resolution to limit the war in Iran. MS NOW’s Mychael Schnell reported some of the details from inside the closed-door lunch, from a source inside. Cassidy “confronted President Trump over the Iran memorandum of understanding, a source familiar with the lunch conversation,” reported Schnell, adding: Cassidy was “yelling” at Trump, the source said. This source also tells me that Trump went after Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) for missing yesterday’s war powers vote, which was successful, 48-50. But worth noting: McCormick was with Trump at a Pennsylvania rally. And even if he were at the Capitol, the resolution still would’ve been successful because McConnell was absent. PunchBowl’s Andrew Desiderio added, “Per multiple people in the room: Cassidy came in guns blazing, at one point stopped calling Trump ‘Mr. President’ and referred to him as ‘brother.’ Trump repeated what he’s said on social media about the housing bill, SAVE Act & the filibuster, but nobody pushed back.” Cassidy later told reporters his version of events, “I stood and said, ‘You have not told the American people what’s going on. It’s lasted four months. Our original objectives have not been achieved, and I want to know what’s going on.” Cassidy added that Trump “did not particularly care for my comments, raised his voice, I lost my temper…it’s the Irish in me.” “But again I matched his tone and his volume, and it went back and forth… so I sat down and tried to de-escalate, I guess my point is, though, that the American people need to know more than we are being told. The Senate needs to know,” he concluded. Semafor’s Burgess Everett added of the lunch, “The Senate GOP meeting with Trump is not going well. ‘A total cluster f#ck,’ one person said.” Trump reportedly also slammed Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY), Susan Collins (R-ME), and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who joined Cassidy in voting to rebuke Trump on the Iran war. Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Dave McCormick (R-PA) were absent for the vote and also received jabs from Trump during lunch, despite McCormick missing the vote to campaign with Trump. MS NOW anchor Katy Tur had senior Hill correspondent Ali Vitali on to discuss the meeting. “Do we have any insight about what is being talked about?” “Sounds like not much good. Sounds like it was going to be pretty tense,” Vitali replied, adding: And frankly, that was already going to be the mood before Trump added this whole new wrinkle to the mix: canceling a bipartisan housing bill that, frankly, both parties were eager to run on as an example of “hey, we’re trying to solve affordability.” How many times were you and I on the campaign trail hearing people say, “I cannot afford housing”? This wasn’t just something championed by an ally of the president — Tim Scott was a co-sponsor on the bill. He’s the head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee; his job is to keep and grow the Senate majority. This could have helped them do that. And so all of this now culminates in that very tense walk down the hallway that Trump took with John Thune, whom he has continuously put in tough positions. Now, a source familiar with what’s going on in the room says Trump is being taken to task over things like the Iran Memorandum of Understanding — by people like Senator Bill Cassidy, who, of course, Trump endorsed against. The reason Cassidy didn’t win his primary, in large part, is because Trump worked against him. And apparently — in the words of this source, telling my colleague Mychael Schnell on the Hill — Cassidy was yelling at the president over this deal, which, as we were discussing before we came on, effectively forces Republicans to do a 180 on ten years of talking points about how bad the Obama deal was — and now here they are, again, with Trump. Watch the clip above via MS NOW. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Trump vows to work ‘very hard’ to enact permanent daylight saving time Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 1:33Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -1:33 It's once again time to fall back with the end of daylight saving time. That means setting your clock back an hour before you go to bed Sunday at 2 a.m. Experts say the seasonal time shift can be hard on your body by disrupting your circadian rhythm. That's the 24 hour cycle that determines when we become sleepy and when we're more alert. It's *** 24 hour clock. It's *** near 24 hour clock that needs to get synchronized to our 24 hour day. There are ways to help your body ease into the time change. When you wake up, get that light, and that'll help accelerate the switch faster. If you can go outside. If not, try to be in ***, in ***, in *** brightly lit room. Uh, as much as possible or sit by *** window. This will help facilitate kind of um shifting your clock faster uh in the fall. You can move your clock earlier if if it's something that is difficult, you can kind of move it, you know, you can do the fall back like 15 minutes. You know, *** night for *** couple of nights preceding it. Some health groups have long advocated to do away with time change altogether. New data recently released from Stanford University agrees. If we transition to constant year-long daylight saving time, that's better. But what's even better than that is transitioning to year-long standard time. Some experts believe sticking with standard time aligns better with the sun and your body's natural rhythm. A proposal to make daylight saving time permanent has advanced in the House, reigniting an age-old American debate around the twice-annual clock changes.And this time, the proposal has the president’s backing.President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will work “very hard” to sign the so-called Sunshine Protection Act into law after the House Energy and Commerce Committee overwhelmingly approved the bill by a 48-1 vote.Above video | Here's what happens to your body when clocks 'fall back' an hourThe bill still needs to pass the full U.S. House, and then the U.S. Senate would consider taking up the measure.Rep. Vern Buchanan has put forward the idea every year since 2018. And the Florida Republican again put forth the idea this year in a bill that has 32 cosponsors, including 29 Republicans and three Democrats.It would allow states to exempt themselves from the twice-yearly time change by permanently advancing the nation’s clocks by one hour. States would be able to opt out of the change.“The biannual clock change is inconvenient, unnecessary, and out of step with the needs of today’s families and economy,” Buchanan said. “Permanent Daylight Saving Time will provide Americans with greater stability and more usable daylight hours throughout the year.”President Trump has pushed his support behind the bill following its passage out of committee, saying in part, "I am going to work very hard to see The Sunshine Protection Act signed into Law. It’s time that people can stop worrying about the 'Clock,' not to mention all of the work and money that is spent on this ridiculous, twice yearly production."But the notion has some vocal critics, including Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who argues the notion would push winter sunrises absurdly late, making children wait for the school bus in complete darkness in winter months.Past efforts to enact year-round daylight saving time have been stymied by lawmakers with similar views. WASHINGTON — A proposal to make daylight saving time permanent has advanced in the House, reigniting an age-old American debate around the twice-annual clock changes. And this time, the proposal has the president’s backing. President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will work “very hard” to sign the so-called Sunshine Protection Act into law after the House Energy and Commerce Committee overwhelmingly approved the bill by a 48-1 vote. Above video | Here's what happens to your body when clocks 'fall back' an hour The bill still needs to pass the full U.S. House, and then the U.S. Senate would consider taking up the measure. Rep. Vern Buchanan has put forward the idea every year since 2018. And the Florida Republican again put forth the idea this year in a bill that has 32 cosponsors, including 29 Republicans and three Democrats. It would allow states to exempt themselves from the twice-yearly time change by permanently advancing the nation’s clocks by one hour. States would be able to opt out of the change. “The biannual clock change is inconvenient, unnecessary, and out of step with the needs of today’s families and economy,” Buchanan said. “Permanent Daylight Saving Time will provide Americans with greater stability and more usable daylight hours throughout the year.” President Trump has pushed his support behind the bill following its passage out of committee, saying in part, "I am going to work very hard to see The Sunshine Protection Act signed into Law. It’s time that people can stop worrying about the 'Clock,' not to mention all of the work and money that is spent on this ridiculous, twice yearly production." But the notion has some vocal critics, including Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who argues the notion would push winter sunrises absurdly late, making children wait for the school bus in complete darkness in winter months. Past efforts to enact year-round daylight saving time have been stymied by lawmakers with similar views.

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 1:48Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -1:48 Puck’s Dylan Byers told MS NOW’s Ana Cabrera on Wednesday that 60 Minutes could see a mass exodus of all “existing talent” on the show within the next few weeks. During a discussion about the firing of Scott Pelley after the longtime CBS personality lobbed a number of insults at network editor-in-chief Bari Weiss and newly-installed 60 Minutes executive producer Nick Bilton during a show-wide staff meeting on Monday, Cabrera asked Byers to “Talk to us about just how striking both this firing is and to see it all play out so publicly.” He replied: Well, it’s incredibly striking, and it comes on the heels, of course, not only of the firings of Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega, but also the departure of Anderson Cooper. And no one has left the building at 60 Minutes without some version of what Scott did, some sort of criticism toward the new management, and indeed the new ownership about the direction of the show. And Scott was only the most vocal among them. And the real problem now for 60 Minutes and for Bari Weiss is that he is being extremely vocal. As that statement you mentioned that he put out this morning, he is now accusing her of [INAUDIBLE] in their meeting. And it is very difficult to see how this new leadership is able to usher 60 Minutes as it has existed in the past into the future. We only have three remaining correspondents there. I know that they currently are deliberating over what they are going to do. It’s very possible that we’re going to arrive at a moment here in a matter of weeks, if not days, where there is no existing talent left at 60 Minutes and they are going to have to build this back up from scratch. Weiss told her CBS colleagues on Wednesday that Pelley had “broken” the “foundation” of “trust and mutual respect” on Monday and that her team’s “attempts to engage with Scott Pelley and to find a way back” were not successful. Pelley subsequently accused Weiss of lying about the meeting she held with him, Bilton, and CBS News President Tom Cibrowski on Tuesday. Watch above via MS NOW. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 3:36Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -3:36 FBI Director Kash Patel’s testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee got off to a fiery start on Tuesday afternoon when Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) peppered him with questions about reports on his alcohol consumption, including The Atlantic‘s reporting about how Patel is prone to “excessive drinking and unexplained absences.” Van Hollen asked whether that report was true and whether FBI employees ever had challenges contacting Patel due to drinking. Patel denied multiple allegations along those lines. “Nope, it’s a total farce. I don’t even know where you get this stuff,” Patel said. “But it doesn’t make it credible because you say so.” “I’m not saying it, Director Patel, it’s been written and documented,” Van Hollen responded. “You are literally saying it,” Patel punched back. “No, I’m saying they’re reports,” Van Hollen said. That’s when Patel went nuclear on the senator. “Unlike those baseless reports, the only person that was slingin’ margaritas in El Salvador on the taxpayer dollar with a convicted gangbanging rapist was you!” Patel told him. He was referring to Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who immigrated to the United States illegally from El Salvador and has been at the center of an immigration battle with the Trump administration. The Department of Homeland Security has accused Abrego Garcia of being a wife-beater and MS-13 gang member. Abrego Garcia and his legal team have denied allegations of him being a member of MS-13. Van Hollen visited Abrego Garcia last year in El Salvador, after he was wrongfully deported from the U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ruled last April that not only did the Trump DOJ wrongfully deport Abrego Garcia, who another judge had granted protected status in the U.S., Xinis slammed the Trump administration for providing “no evidence” of any gang affiliations to her court before arresting and indefinitely incarcerating him in one of the world’s most notorious prisons. The senator was seen sipping on water in pictures taken of their meeting, with Van Hollen saying afterwards it was a “simple humanitarian request” to check on Abrego Garcia’s well-being. El Salvador President Nayib Bukele mocked him for the trip at the time, saying Van Hollen was “sipping margaritas” in the “tropical paradise.” Van Hollen denied that framing and said he and Abrego Garcia did not enjoy any alcoholic drinks; he denied the margarita claim again on Tuesday when Patel revived it. Reporting at the time revealed that an aide to Bukele, who is ardently pro-Trump, staged the meeting in a casual setting and placed tropical drinks on the table. Patel continued pelting Van Hollen from there. “The only person that ran up a $7,000 bar tab in Washington, D.C at The Lobby Bar was you!” Patel said while pointing his finger at Van Hollen. “So the only individual in this room that has been drinking on the taxpayer dime during the day is you!” “Director Patel, come on!” Van Hollen protested. “These are serious allegations against you.” Patel said the allegations were bogus and reiterated his claim that Van Hollen was drinking margaritas with Abrego Garcia. The senator said that was not true. “This is the example of ultimate hypocrisy. I will not be tarnished by baseless allegations,” Patel added. The two continued to squabble after that. Watch above via C-SPAN3. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Fullscreen Close Modal Dialog Rules: No spamming. Do not insist the cam hosts to do as you please. Do not announce other rooms or websites that would conflict with this room. Avoid any argumentative and/or rude posts related to the cam viewing. Do not attempt to post your e-mail address in the public chat.

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 3:00Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -3:00 CBS’s chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett kicked off an interview with acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Wednesday by asking him whether MAGA influencer Jack Posobiec could be prosecuted for the same threat that former FBI Director James Comey is currently being indicted for. Speaking to Blanche Wenesday on CBS Mornings, the day after Comey was charged over his “86 47” seashell Instagram post in 2025, Garrett began by asking Blanche about a similar post by Posobiec, which said “86 46.” The number 86 is commonly used in restaurant kitchens to mean discard or get rid of. In the Comey case, it has been interpreted by prosecutors as a threat against Donald Trump, the 47th president. “Let’s do a compare and contrast, Mr. Blanche,” Garrett told the AG. “In 2022, someone well known in right-wing circles, Jack Posobiec, posted on X, ‘8646.’ He did not take it down. Mr. Comey has done both of those things. The Biden Justice Department never prosecuted him. By the standard of that grand jury, Jack Posobiec should face charges as well. Will the Justice Department pursue that case, because they sound very similar?” “That’s just completely not true,” Blanche fired back. “That’s not how a grand jury does its work. They don’t just look at a single image and then say, ‘OK, yes, we’ll indict,’ or ‘OK, no, we won’t indict.’ They do an investigation. This conduct took place in May of last year, May 15. It has been almost a year. I assure you, the FBI, the Secret Service, and the U.S. Attorney’s office have not been sitting around doing nothing. They have been investigating. I have no idea whether there was an investigation into the other times that that post has been made and whether that investigation yielded different results. Blanche added: “This investigation that we undertook resulted in a two-count indictment. So you cannot compare, ‘Well, what happened last time?’ What happened this time, every investigation is different. You know that. The American people know that. A lot of factors going into whether someone should or should not be charged. The mere fact there’s a similar photo posted or similar statement made. That’s true every day. There’s comments made about President Trump, threats made against President Trump. Every one of those are not indicted. It depends on the facts of every case.” Shortly after the charges were filed on Tuesday, Comey himself responded to the indictment, his second in just one year, in a video message posted to Substack. “Well, they’re back. This time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach over a year ago, and this won’t be the end of it,” he said. He added: “But nothing has changed with me. I’m still innocent, I’m still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary, so let’s go.” The case against Comey has been attacked as flimsy by many legal experts — including Fox News contributor Andy McCarthy, who called it “absurd.” Watch above via CBS. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Want to avoid video ads? Subscribe to Video Player is loading. Current Time 0:00 Duration 0:43Seek to live, currently behind liveLIVE Remaining Time -0:43 President Donald Trump spoke to reporters outside the White House on Thursday and was asked about gas prices, which he declared are “not very high.” “Okay, and then on gas prices, how much longer will Americans continue to see these high gas prices?” Trump was asked by a reporter during the lengthy Q&A. “Well, they’re not very high. If you look at what they were supposed to be in order to get rid of a nuclear weapon, with the danger that entails, so the gas prices have come down very much over the last three, four days,” hit back Trump. “$4 a gallon still,” replied the reporter. “I know, you know, that’s what ABC says, but the fact is that if you look, the stock market’s up, everything is doing really well. And the big thing we have to do is we have to make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, because if they do, you want to talk about problems, you’d have problems. So, very important is that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, and they’ve agreed to that. Iran’s agreed to it, and they’ve agreed to do it very powerfully,” Trump replied. According to AAA, the national average cost of a gallon of gas on Thursday was $4.093, with the highest price in California at $5.864 and the lowest in Oklahoma at $3.435. Watch the clip above. New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters" Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!

Roger WatersParanoids In Brisbane - The Wall LiveLive at Brisbane Entertainment Center, Brisbane, Australia2nd Of February 2012Bootleg