In a stunning shake-up of daytime television, ABC has officially announced that it is canceling The View, one of its most recognizable and controversial talk shows. After decades of sparking debates, heated moments, and cultural conversations, the show has been permanently replaced by a new program:
The upcoming show will feature conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, alongside co-hosts Erika Kirk and veteran journalist Megyn Kelly. ABC executives confirmed the move, with one insider stating bluntly,
For years,
The launch of The Charlie Kirk Show signals a direct effort by ABC to pivot toward a different kind of conversation. Known for his outspoken conservative views, Charlie Kirk has built a massive following among younger audiences through Turning Point USA and his digital platforms. Pairing him with Erika Kirk — a media personality and advocate — along with Megyn Kelly, who brings decades of experience in journalism and broadcasting, suggests the network is betting on strong personalities to carry the program.
According to early reports, the new show will focus on cultural debates, political commentary, high-profile interviews, and issues that resonate with audiences who feel overlooked in mainstream media. While critics argue that the change is a risky gamble, supporters say it’s long overdue for daytime television to showcase a wider spectrum of voices.
ABC has not yet announced an official premiere date, but sources indicate the rollout will be accompanied by a major promotional campaign. Industry watchers are already speculating on how the shift could reshape the daytime television landscape — and whether
What is clear, however, is that the era of The View is officially over. With ABC declaring
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) is preparing to use the “nuclear option” to clear a logjam of Trump nominees due to unprecedented Democratic Party obstruction in the Senate.
Thune is setting the stage to use the parliamentary maneuver in order to lower the filibuster threshold for confirming large batches of lower-level presidential nominees, marking the latest use of the so-called “nuclear option” in the upper chamber’s history.
Now, Thune is expected to apply the tactic to expedite confirmation of dozens of Trump administration nominees for subcabinet and lower-level positions. Judges and cabinet secretaries would not be included.
Thune’s plan relies on the Senate’s rules of debate and the chamber’s unique procedures. On Tuesday night, he introduced a resolution to accelerate the approval of about 40 nominees grouped together. By rule, the Senate must first vote on whether to break a filibuster on that resolution. That procedural vote requires 60 yeas.
Democrats are expected to block it, leaving the tally short of the threshold. But a failed vote is precisely what Thune is aiming for.
Under Senate rules, only a senator who voted on the winning side of a roll call can request that the chamber reconsider the vote. After the filibuster vote fails, Thune will likely switch his own vote from yes to no, putting himself on the prevailing side. That procedural move allows him to call for a revote.
Because Senate debate is cut off following a failed cloture attempt, Democrats would be unable to delay or obstruct Thune’s next steps.
At that point, Thune is expected to raise a point of order that cloture on his type of resolution requires only a simple majority, not 60 votes. The presiding officer — either Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Grassley (R-IA) or Vice President J.D. Vance in his role as Senate president — will rule against Thune, affirming existing precedent.
Thune will then appeal the ruling. That appeal requires only a simple majority to succeed. If at least 51 senators vote to overturn the chair, a new Senate precedent will be established.
From that point forward, similar resolutions grouping together lower-level nominees would require just 51 votes to advance.
If the gambit succeeds, Thune would need to schedule another cloture vote under the newly established precedent. That vote could take place as soon as Monday, Sept. 15. It would clear the way for final approval of the slate of nominees in one vote on Wednesday, Sept. 17.
Supporters of the move say it would streamline the Senate’s ability to process a backlog of nominees by cutting down on hours of debate for positions that historically face little opposition.
Critics argue that each use of the nuclear option erodes the Senate’s tradition of extended debate and consensus-building, weakening minority party rights and further polarizing the chamber.
The maneuver reflects a familiar playbook in recent Senate history. Reid’s Democrats used the nuclear option to speed up the confirmation of President Barack Obama’s executive branch picks after repeated Republican blockades. McConnell’s Republicans later deployed it to ensure President Trump’s Supreme Court nominees faced only majority thresholds.
The Senate has long considered the filibuster to be the “coin of the realm,” allowing unlimited debate unless a supermajority agrees to end it. Each time that barrier has been lowered through the nuclear option, it has fundamentally altered the way the chamber conducts business.
Thune’s move would follow in the footsteps of the late Harry Reid (D-NV) and former Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who each used similar tactics to chip away at the filibuster over the past decade. Reid led the first change in 2013, lowering the 60-vote requirement to a simple majority for executive branch nominees other than Supreme Court justices. McConnell followed in 2017, extending that precedent to cover Supreme Court confirmations, beginning with Justice Neil Gorsuch.
Later this week, the Senate will find out if Thune is able to add another chapter to that history.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that, for now, President Trump may remove President Biden’s three appointees to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) without cause. This temporary decision, reported by NPR, weakens a nearly century-old precedent designed to preserve the independence of regulatory agencies by limiting presidential removal powers.
The Court’s order referenced similarities to a prior case involving the National Labor Relations Board, emphasizing that the CPSC exercises executive power in a comparable way. Justice Brett Kavan augh noted he would have preferred the Court take up the case in full this fall. The Court’s three liberal justices—Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—dissented, criticizing the use of the emergency docket to shift power away from Congress and toward the Executive Branch.
Justice Kagan warned that the ruling undermines Congress’s authority to structure independent agencies, writing that the Court acted “with little time, scant briefing, and no argument” to override legislative protections. She cautioned that such actions could gradually transfer governing power from Congress to the president.
This ruling challenges Humphrey’s Executor, a landmark 1935 Supreme Court case that limited a president’s authority to remove officials from independent agencies without cause. That decision arose when President Franklin Roosevelt tried to dismiss a Federal Trade Commission official for policy disagreements and was blocked by the Court.
Watters Breaks Down ‘Secret Note’ Left by Kirk’s Alleged Assassin
Fox News host Jesse Watters on Tuesday spotlighted newly revealed evidence against Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old charged with assassinating Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. Among the most damning items was a handwritten note Robinson left for his partner, Lance Twiggs, confessing to the killing. The note, found under a keyboard in their shared home, read: “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.”
According to Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray, the note, along with text messages and digital evidence, proves the attack was premeditated and politically motivated. Robinson reportedly planned the shooting for over a week and even boasted in a Discord group, “It was me at UVU yesterday. I’m sorry for all of this.”
Watters explained on Jesse Watters Primetime that the note had been destroyed, but a photograph and forensic evidence recovered by investigators confirmed its contents. FBI Director Kash Patel said DNA and digital findings, including Robinson’s DNA on the rifle’s trigger and on a towel used to wrap the weapon, further tie him to the crime.
Authorities say Robinson climbed to a rooftop at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10 and shot Kirk in the neck with a bolt-action rifle during a speech. Despite immediate medical attention, Kirk died shortly after the shooting, prompting widespread condemnation and calls for justice.
Described by the FBI as having a “rabid obsession” with Kirk, Robinson allegedly viewed the killing as politically justified. Prosecutors are pursuing a first-degree murder indictment, and both Utah Governor Spencer Cox and Attorney General Pam Bondi support seeking the death penalty—potentially by firing squad under state law.