City and county employees in Asheville, North Carolina, were caught on hidden camera admitting that DEI programs were still operating inside local government — even as the political and legal landscape turned sharply against taxpayer-funded diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

Accuracy in Media investigators went undercover to find out what was really happening inside North Carolina’s local governments. What officials said when they thought the cameras weren’t rolling tells a very different story from the one taxpayers might expect.

Watch the undercover footage captured by Accuracy In Media

An Asheville city employee spoke with an undercover Accuracy in Media investigator who asked about the government’s DEI office.

The response was enthusiastic.

“Yeah, it’s amazing and it’s growing, too. Yeah, yeah, we’re still chugging along.”

And that wasn’t an isolated admission.

Nnweyna Smith, Human Affairs Coordinator for Buncombe County, North Carolina, was also captured speaking candidly with an AIM investigator about the future of the county’s equity efforts.

Asked about the equity department, Smith acknowledged that the political environment threatened its survival.

“Because, you know, with all that’s happening in politics nowadays, we don’t know how long we’re going to be around. That’s the frightening gamble.”

Buncombe is the county in which Asheville lies. As such, Asheville residents have been funding DEI on both the city and county levels.

Smith’s comments reveal officials who were well aware that DEI programs were under fire — but whose offices nevertheless continued operating.

Following AIM’s previous investigations into DEI programs operating across the Tar Heel State, the North Carolina House of Representatives passed legislation banning DEI programs in local government. Those who violate the law can face fines of up to $10,000 per infraction.

The Senate, however, has yet to act.

Visit SaveCarolinaCities.com to send one email to the relevant North Carolina officials and demand action.

President Donald Trump renewed his attacks on CNN anchor Kaitlan Collins.

Trump made the remarks in a Truth Social post following Monday night’s special “Countdown to Election Night” edition of Collins’ program, The Source, which focused on the approaching November midterm elections.

“Very dumb and unhappy Fake News CNN ‘reporter,’ Kaitlan Collins (really low ratings, also!), had a panel where discussions were all FICTION AND LIES,” Trump wrote.

“You would think that CNN, which is suffering terribly in the TV Ratings, would get rid of their 3rd rate ‘anchors,’ and try to bring credibility back to their once storied network,” he continued. “It is fading FAST!”

Republican Strategist Criticizes Trump’s Spending

Collins’ Monday program included a panel featuring Republican strategist Doug Heye, New York Times reporter Shawn McCreesh, NOTUS correspondent Jasmine Wright and Ashley Etienne, a former communications director for Vice President Kamala Harris.

Another panel later in the program included CNN political director David Chalian, Democratic strategist Paul Begala and Kevin Madden, who previously advised Mitt Romney’s presidential campaigns.

During the program, Heye criticized Trump for not deploying more of his political operation’s money to support Republican candidates fighting to maintain control of Congress.

“Donald wants to spend money on himself,” Heye said. “He doesn’t want to give things away.”

Trump did not specify exactly which remarks from the program he considered false.

The president’s super PAC, MAGA Inc., has accumulated hundreds of millions of dollars ahead of the midterms and recently began making significant expenditures in congressional races, including a $10 million investment in Texas.

Trump’s Running Feud With Collins

Tuesday’s post was the latest in a series of increasingly personal clashes between Trump and Collins, who regularly covers the president from the White House while also anchoring her CNN program.

Trump called Collins “Stupid” and “Nasty” in a Truth Social post in December. During an Oval Office exchange in June, he described her as a “corrupt reporter” and claimed she had “hatred in her eyes.”

He returned to his criticism of Collins at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in July, telling her to “smile” and comparing her appearance to transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. Trump later posted a digitally altered image depicting Collins as Mulvaney.

The feud reflects a broader pattern of contentious exchanges between Trump and reporters with coverage he considers hostile. Collins has frequently questioned the president and members of his administration directly during White House events and interviews.

CNN Defends Collins

CNN responded to the latest attack by defending Collins’ work.

“Kaitlan Collins is an exceptional journalist, reporting every day from the White House and the field with real depth and tenacity,” a network spokesperson said.

“She skillfully brings that reporting to the anchor chair and CNN platforms every day, which audiences around the world know they can trust.”

Trump’s post also arrived just before the Republican midterm convention in Dallas, where the president was scheduled to play a central role as the party turns its attention toward the final stretch of the 2026 campaign.

The dispute therefore unfolded against a particularly political backdrop: Collins was hosting a program examining Republicans’ midterm prospects, one of the Republican guests criticized Trump’s campaign strategy, and Trump responded the following day by attacking the anchor and dismissing the panel’s discussion as false.

View the original post.

The White House directly confronted Fox News leadership following Maria Bartiromo’s abrupt departure from the network, according to top Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro.

Navarro revealed Tuesday that Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott received a call conveying the administration’s displeasure over the treatment of one of President Donald Trump’s most prominent media allies.

“Suffice it to say that Suzanne Scott got a call,” Navarro said during an appearance on Newsmax, adding that the White House considered the network’s handling of the situation “totally unacceptable.”

The unusually public rebuke escalated the fallout from Bartiromo’s sudden exit after more than 12 years at Fox News and Fox Business.

Navarro Accuses Fox of Sidelining MAGA Voices

Navarro did not hold back when discussing Fox’s leadership, declaring that the network was “out of control.”

He accused some Fox producers and reporters of discouraging coverage favorable to Trump and the president’s political movement. In a separate opinion piece published Tuesday, Navarro alleged that the network was “suppressing MAGA news” and imposing a “shadow ban” on certain Trump surrogates, CNN reported.

Navarro claimed producers were reluctant to devote airtime to issues important to Trump’s supporters, even though several of the network’s most recognizable hosts remain outspoken supporters of the president and Fox regularly broadcasts his speeches and rallies.

Bartiromo was among Trump’s strongest defenders on the network. Her programs frequently featured administration officials and focused heavily on economic policy, tariffs, border security, and questions surrounding election administration.

Dispute Over Why Bartiromo Left

Fox News announced Bartiromo’s departure Sept. 3 but offered no explanation for the decision.

“Effective today, Maria Bartiromo is no longer with Fox News Media,” the company said, thanking her for more than 12 years at the network and wishing her well in her next chapter.

Multiple outlets subsequently reported that Bartiromo had shared internal editorial instructions with White House officials. Those reports alleged that network executives considered the disclosure a violation of company policy.

Bartiromo’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, has forcefully disputed that account. He called claims that she was fired over the alleged disclosure “absolutely and unequivocally false” and maintained that she was still a Fox employee, according to Entertainment Weekly.

Freedman said Bartiromo’s legal team had evidence and witnesses capable of challenging the reports. Fox, meanwhile, has declined to provide further details and has continued referring reporters to its original statement.

Trump Praises Bartiromo

Trump responded to the announcement by praising Bartiromo as a seasoned journalist and steadfast supporter.

“I can’t believe Maria Bartiromo is no longer going to have her great show(s) on FoxNews/Business,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. He called her a “true warrior” and predicted that her fans would be unhappy with the network’s decision, according to the New York Post.

Bartiromo hosted three programs across Fox’s television properties: “Mornings with Maria,” “Maria Bartiromo’s Wall Street,” and “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Fox replaced her weekday program with “Mornings with FOX Business,” featuring rotating anchors. Her weekly financial program was rebranded as “FBN’s Wall Street,” while former Republican congressman Jason Chaffetz temporarily took over “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Neither Fox News nor Bartiromo has publicly provided a definitive account of what ultimately caused the split. But Navarro’s disclosure establishes one important part of the story: Bartiromo’s decision to share the internal guidance quickly reached senior levels of the White House, and administration officials made sure Fox leadership knew exactly how they felt about it.

A reported demand for additional records could extend Washington’s review of the proposed media merger, although it does not mean the Justice Department has decided to challenge the transaction.

The Justice Department is preparing to intensify its antitrust review of Fox Corp.’s proposed $22 billion acquisition of Roku, according to a new report, adding another regulatory hurdle to a deal that would combine a major television content producer with one of America’s most widely used streaming platforms.

Antitrust officials plan to issue what is known as a “second request” for documents and information from the companies, Semafor reported, citing people familiar with the review. The Justice Department and Fox declined to comment to the outlet.

Neither company had publicly announced the reported request as of Wednesday.

A second request is a formal part of the federal merger review process. It generally means regulators concluded that the information provided during the initial review was insufficient to resolve potential competition concerns.

The move can significantly extend a transaction’s regulatory timetable because the companies must collect and turn over additional records before the government completes its examination.

Roku’s position raises competition questions

Fox announced its agreement to acquire Roku on June 15. Under the agreement, Roku shareholders would receive $96 in cash and 0.9693 shares of Fox Class A common stock for each Roku share, representing $160 per share.

The companies valued the transaction at approximately $22 billion, including assumed debt and other adjustments.

The proposed merger would place Fox’s television and streaming operations — including Fox News, Fox Sports, the Fox broadcast network, and the advertising-supported Tubi service — under the same corporate ownership as Roku’s streaming devices, television operating system, advertising technology, and Roku Channel.

Roku says its platform reaches more than 100 million streaming households worldwide. That reach makes Roku more than a hardware manufacturer: Its software influences how millions of viewers search for programs, encounter advertisements, and discover streaming services.

That gatekeeping role appears central to the regulatory questions surrounding the deal. Competitors could argue that a Fox-owned Roku would have an incentive to give Fox programming more prominent placement, better data access, or more favorable commercial terms than rival content providers receive.

Roku Channel and Fox-owned Tubi also compete for viewers and advertising dollars in the market for free, ad-supported streaming television. Regulators could examine whether combining the services would reduce competition, even if Fox continues operating them as separate brands.

Fox promises an open platform

Fox and Roku have presented the merger as a way to build a stronger competitor in a television market increasingly dominated by major technology and streaming companies.

The companies said Roku would remain an “open, partner-friendly platform,” while Fox content would continue to be widely distributed. They also said the combined business would become the third-largest television company in the United States when measured by its share of viewing.

Fox Executive Chairman and CEO Lachlan Murdoch has said Roku and Tubi are expected to remain separate consumer offerings, although the company anticipates coordinating advertising sales across its expanded portfolio.

Roku founder and CEO Anthony Wood is expected to remain involved in the combined company and join Fox’s board after the deal closes. At the time of the announcement, Wood said the transaction would allow Roku to accelerate innovation while maintaining its platform’s role in the broader streaming market.

Those commitments could become a focus of the Justice Department’s review. Regulators typically examine not only what merging companies say they intend to do, but also what economic incentives the combined company would possess once the transaction is complete.

The deal remains pending

Fox’s existing shareholders would own approximately 73% of the combined company, while Roku shareholders would hold the remaining 27%. Both companies’ boards unanimously approved the agreement.

Fox expects the acquisition to produce approximately $400 million in annual cost savings. It has also arranged $12 billion in bridge financing to fund the cash portion of the transaction.

The companies initially said they expected to complete the merger during the first half of 2027, subject to shareholder votes and regulatory approvals in the United States and a limited number of foreign jurisdictions. A lengthy second-request process could place pressure on that schedule, although no delay has been formally announced.

The agreement reportedly includes a roughly $1.24 billion payment by Fox if the transaction fails because required regulatory clearance cannot be obtained, underscoring the financial consequences of an unsuccessful review.

The Justice Department’s options remain open. After reviewing the additional information, officials could allow the acquisition to proceed without conditions, negotiate changes intended to resolve competition concerns, or file a lawsuit seeking to stop the transaction.

For now, the reported second request represents closer scrutiny, not a government rejection. Its importance lies in what regulators are examining: whether Fox can own both valuable television programming and a platform that helps determine which programming millions of viewers see.