The Final 5: September 03, 2026

play a competitive college football snap. The pastor and father of three taking the field for San Jose City College. Nearly 30 years after a finger injury ended his first college football career, buzzer played two snaps against College of the Redwoods, helping set up a sack on one of the place. In case you're wondering, the oldest college football player ever was 61 years young. Hope you have a good night. Here's the final five with Jim Locay right now in your final five. Another hiccup in the Trump administration's effort to crack down on birthright citizenship. The effort to sell off parts of Yosemite National Park and the White House apparently is a soft spot for video games. That's your final five. Let's do this. Everybody welcome into the final five. On Thursday night, we start with another chapter in a legal battle that started with an executive order on the first day of President Trump's second administration. It was the first of two about birthright citizenship. January 20th last year at Capital One Arena, he signed an order in front of a cheering crowd that sought to widely deny automatic U. S. Citizenship for Children of just about everybody born to immigrants who were undocumented or just temporary visitors. Of course, something that is enshrined in the Constitution. However, in June, the Supreme Court agreed that was unconstitutional. So President Trump tried to sign a different one. This one was more narrow, specifically targeting something called birth tourism. It instructs immigrant immigration agencies to deny or revoke visas if they think somebody is coming into the U. S. Primarily to give birth on U. S. Soil. It would have taken effect this week, but a federal judge today issued a preliminary injunction to stop it. The White House says they'll appeal and they may fight it back up to the Supreme Court. Like the first one, opponents claim the order violates the 14th Amendment, which guarantees citizenship to all people born on American soil. The only way you can change the Constitution is not by way of executive order, but with a two third majority in both houses or by a constitutional convention of the states. And that takes a lot of agreement. Right now, they don't seem to agree on anything that come up every day are discouraging and disappointing. And honestly, I don't know why we're here today, because the Constitution is remarkably clear on birthright citizenship has been clear since it was ratified in 18 68. Republicans are just making up ambiguity to justify their bigotry. There is simply no way that the framers of the 14th Amendment intended birthright citizenship to operate as it does today. And we know the amendment was intended to establish citizenship for those who already had a meaningful connection and allegiance to the United States, namely enslaved people here in Pennsylvania. Congresswoman Summer Lee there on one side and Harriet Hageman of Wyoming on the other. Meantime, Iran fired on an American allies territory in the Persian Gulf today as the White House denied the war is happening at all. Yeah, that happened. Iran fired missiles and drones at American forces in Kuwait, continuing a string of air strikes in the region that have gone on since Sunday. A couple of months ago, both chambers of Congress approved a war powers resolution to demand the White House either end the war or request approval from Congress. Of course, the White House has just ignored it. Part of the war powers acts as an American president must seek congressional approval for any conflict or war lasting more than 60 days. The Iran war started 187 days ago, but some say it doesn't count because it's not actually a war. Will this war be over by the time of the midterm elections? Okay, let again. I don't. I wouldn't call it a war right now. There is no active shooting. I recognize there is. There have been places where this is flared up. Uh, major combat operations again. Major combat operations lasted for about six weeks. Fact check in tonight's final five fact check. JD Vance's quote. I wouldn't call this a war except, you know, when he does, as the president has said very shortly, this war is going to conclude. Well, first of all, if they to make me own the effort to try to bring this war to a successful conclusion, I'm happy to let them make me on it. Vance, by the way, seemed to be under a lot of pressure today. This was the first White House press briefing without Caroline Levin, who stepped down after returning from maternity leave. Vance didn't seem too excited to fill in for her, at least in a video his team put out. Yeah, they're ready for you, sir. Thank you. All right, guys, we're gonna find out which reporters are gonna be nice and which Mr Cups of coffee. Where is how we doing? You guys want to do the briefing instead of me? You probably do a better job, man. Meantime, work is moving forward on President Trump's 250 ft tall arch. Despite legal challenges today, Doug Burgum, the secretary of the interior, announced excavation will start at Memorial Circle within the next two weeks. Veterans and preservationists are suing to stop the project, arguing the administration doesn't have the authority to build that arch without congressional approval. Last week, the National Park Service issued a report supporting the project, but acknowledged it would have detrimental impacts on sight lines and traffic. Technically, the National Park Service is in charge of that land a lot like Yosemite. But this week, new reports emerged, saying the Trump administration is considering trading off some land in Yosemite to a developer. New York Times is a Nevada based company wants a small parcel of land within Yosemite National Park to build a road. Some in Congress seemed a bit surprised by the move. I don't need to engage in insults because I show up with receipts. What I have is President Trump's budget requests to Congress to the Appropriations Committee. And so, Mr Chairman, I asked for unanimous consent to enter Donald Trump's budget into the record where he describes this land spot within Yosemite National Park. It's already in the record. Well, I asked to offer it again since my colleague still hasn't read it. We've talked quite a bit about how President Trump has been working to make his imprint on the nation's capital. He's also doing that on the nation's parks. An unprecedented proposal put forth could cease part of Yosemite National Park. Seated the private developers and a Kramer from notice broke this story, and she's up late with me tonight here on the final five to talk about this and more. And it's good to see again. Really good to see you, too. Let's talk about this. This is I mean, we have seen development pushes for development in national parks before. Why is this one different? So I wouldn't describe this as a push for development so much is it's the Trump administration asking National Park Service staff to explore a land swap where a small part of Yosemite National Park would be given up to a private developer in a land exchange. And that's something land exchanges are something that we see quite a lot of across federal lands, broadly speaking, but they're not really that common within the national park system. When we're talking about parks that you and I know about parks that are very popular with Americans on when they do happen, they usually happen to benefit or expand the size of the park not to see the small amount of the park for the private interest. Interesting. So this is obviously, as mentioned, as you say, you know, we've seen efforts like this on different scales. I think it's gotten a lot of attention because it is. It's Yosemite. It's one of the most most visible ones, one of the most prominent national parks here in terms of what what the end game here is and what the process looks like. How does this? How does this work? And can it actually become reality? Absolutely. So from my understanding, it absolutely can become reality. If it's something that the Park Service decides to pursue to the end, we're currently in the early stages of it. So what's happening now is the Park Service has to appraise this small piece of land inside Yosemite National Park. It's about it would be about a quarter mile strip that would be used to build a private road that would connect a private development just outside the park to the sort of central one of the central roads within Yosemite National Park. So the Park Service has to appraise the value of the land that the private developer would like to use. Then they have to set a number that it's worth. And then the private developer has to find a piece of land that the Park Service wants in the state of California that's worth the same amount. So the Park Service can essentially trade it like they see a little bit of Yosemite and then they get something else in exchange. And that process, we're still in the appraisals phase, right? So there needs to be, you know, that other piece of land needs to be identified. You probably have to have some kind of public notice period. We're not at the point yet where this is actually happening. We're just at the point where the Park Service is trying to figure out how to do it. That being said, there are people, I think when when the headlines started coming to bear and a lot of people, as I incorrectly did off the top, made that jump to this means development. But there has been a lot of there has been a lot of pushback from people who have been ingrained in the National Park Service. Absolutely. So my sources tell me that inside the Park Service, this is a really unpopular idea. It's actually something the Park Service has refused to do historically. So there used to be a different private developer who owned the same plot of land outside of Yosemite, and he really wanted to build a road that would connect the park to the lands that he could develop a resort on the private plot of land. And both the Bush and Obama administrations said absolutely not. And they even ended up having to defend that decision in court because the developer sued and the Park Service won both in district court and then again on appeal. And then when this property sold to the current owner, which is a Las Vegas based company called Kingsburn Realty Capital, sort of threw a web of LLCs. They're the end owner. When it sold, the new developer went to the Biden administration and said, We want to build this road. And the Biden administration said, Absolutely not. We're not changing Park Service precedent here. This is not something we would ever consider. And now, of course, we're seeing the Trump administration actually entertaining the proposal, and they're the first to sort of break with that those decades of precedent. And based on what you've heard from sources, are they feeling? Are they feeling the pressure from from high above on this? Yeah, absolutely. My sources tell me that inside the Park Service there, the political appointees inside the Interior Department have made it clear that they're interested in making this happen and have put quite a bit of pressure on making it happen. And, you know, sources have described it to me as even berating, asking, Why isn't this happening faster? As we know, in government, normally nothing really happens quickly. Nothing ever really happens faster. But in terms of and I know you alluded to this just a little bit, but in terms of a time frame where some decisions could be made, I mean, is there a conservative estimate on how long that could take? And maybe there's not a decision made period. Unfortunately, there's no estimate that I think I can give you quite yet. What I can tell you is there is a process. The appraisal has to finish. The developer has to, you know, propose the land one way or another. Assuming it moves forward, it is something that before it were to actually happen, there will be more reporting to come, and I promise you I'll be reporting on it when we get to that point. That's why we love having you on and Anna Kramer from notice joining us here on the final five time. And thanks again. Have a great Liberty weekend. Thank you so much. You too. And we're back after this a case out of Ohio is raising a much larger question about what happens when immigration policy collide to the young person's education. Pierre DeMoss Bell was a 20 year old Haitian college student whose family says he became despondent after losing immigration protections and being required to wear an electronic monitor. Alejandro Vasquez Bauer is Ed Trust director of immigrant students, policy, advocacy and partnerships. She's up late with me side here on the final five. Welcome in tonight. Thank you so much for having me. I want to talk about this case first and foremost, because this this got a lot of attention over the last couple of weeks, especially as TPS temporary protected status for Haitian students went by the wayside. Uh, among many other countries, the Trump administration is pulled back from. This story, though, is really putting a human face on on the effects. This could have. Yeah, Pierre DeMoss Bell should be here today. Pierre DeMoss Bell is an example of the tragedy when immigration enforcement impacts and it hurts the mental health of Children who have dreams and goals when they come here to the United States to contribute to their communities, just like everybody else. Uh, T. P. A. We've talked about this for so many different countries, and this has been. It's not just this administration. A lot of administrations have extended this. This is for people who were here or seeking, seeking, just seeking protection. It's not. It's not citizenship, but it certainly gives them protections from from immigration enforcement. Yeah, absolutely. Temporary protected status is one of several pathways to come to the United States with protection. And so TPS holders are your teachers, your neighbors. They work in the hospitals, your health care workers. Um, and so temporary protected status is really an important part of the immigration system and important part of our communities, especially here in the DMV. So many of our neighbors from in Salvador to Haiti, Syrians and others have previously held temporary protected status, and it's been such an important part of building this DMV community and the communities around us. You know, you mentioned El Salvador. Actually, today, Congressman Eugene Vim in a Virginia introduced legislation to extend that once again. TPS status you to those here from El Salvador. But we're talking about Pierre, and we talk about a lot of students. You're looking at this from immigration or from an education perspective, and the reality is that a lot of parents bring their kids here under the promises of escaping whatever tragedies maybe be falling their home country. The kids don't have a lot of saying in the process here, and when they lose the status, they they lose a lot of they lose a lot of their self their self worth as well. Yeah, I think about a child who comes into your classroom every day. I was a high school teacher, so I and I worked with immigrant students in Miami every single day at seven a.m. 25 Children walked into my classroom, many of them immigrants who were on time and so excited to learn math, which is what I was teaching. Who wants to learn math at seven a.m. My kids actually, and they were just so excited to learn in the mornings. But immigrant I was teaching during Trump 1.0 and immigration enforcement and the rhetoric that we're seeing today that's echoed in policy was starting then as well. And so my students who started the year bright eyed, super excited, smart and showing up early started to take on the pressures of immigration immigration. And so, you know, sometimes for a few of them, they'd show up a little later later in the year. They had to carry on more family responsibility. It impacts their mental health, and you see that in their academic performance. And I think the data and the research actually shows that that immigrant students, when impacted by immigration enforcement, impacts their their development. It impacts their ability to pay attention in classrooms. Um, you know, our schools are students carry so much from outside. We know that schools and students cannot pay attention in the same way when they haven't had breakfast in the morning when they are not doing well. And in this case, specifically for immigrant students, they carry an extra weight on their shoulders because of the lack of security around them. So that's happening for many of our kids. We saw some local districts where administrators said they were noticing a downturn in attendance when it came to some of these students who were worried about showing up to school, wondering where the immigration enforcement operations were having. We saw a rally, I believe, in Northeast this past week or last week with D. C. Students as they return to school with parents saying, you know, keep this away. There are people, though, who say temporary protected status is just temporary, and the government has the right to revoke this any time they choose, which which presumably is how it works. But but do you see the students? Is this sort of a collateral damage of a policy like that? Absolutely. I mean, our immigrant students at the intersection of immigration policy, education policy, and that impacts our mental health. And so, yes, unfortunately, I think, um, we're seeing that our students are scared. They carry that into the classrooms. They carry that all around them, sort of like a backpack weighed down with weights. Um, that is the fear of immigration enforcement. That's the fear that when they leave school, they're gonna go home and their parents not there anymore. It's a fear that they could leave school on on the walk home, be picked up by immigration enforcement officers. What could you imagine? What can be done? I mean, I think that first it is important that our schools recognize that we do this work as educators because we love and care about Children, all Children. And we live in a country where actually there is a right to free public education, regardless of citizenship status. If we're a country that believes in opportunity for all, then we have to uphold that in our schools. Um, and we have to ensure that all those Children and their families feel safe, supported, have access to health resources and beyond. And so what we can do, I mean, I think it's important that people in the DMV remember that our TPS holders immigrants are our neighbors. And again, they are teachers. They are the people that smile at us in the train on the way to work. Um, and the Children that work that play in the playgrounds down the street. Um, we need to keep that in mind when we're thinking about who we're voting for. Um, when we're thinking about the policies that we aim to support because these are humans at the end of the day. And for our TPS holders for Pierre, Pierre was a child, a young person with dreams, just like every other child. No parent wants to see their Children so afraid to go to school, so afraid to keep shooting for their dreams. Alejandro, great to meet you tonight. Thank you so much. We appreciate it. We're back after this with much. We're here on the final five. Say that there's too much hot local. Welcome back time for the third block. We have an update in the Trump White House is long running effort to gamify national politics and who better to talk about it than our own chief political video game correspondent and producer. The final five Loretto Cruz. Good evening. Good evening to you, Jim. Now, Jim, for months, the White House has been trying to gamify everything from immigration to the Iran war. Several months ago, it went back to the way sports videos they were putting out, showing means hitting golf balls and baseballs twice together with, yes, actual aerial footage of actual military strikes in Iran. You see one of them there, but there's been a wide variety. One post was in the style of Pokemon, suggesting there was a nonplayable game out there somewhere called Make America Great Again in the style of Pokemon. And to that, the actual Pokemon company responded, quote, We were not involved and went on to say they, quote, are not affiliated with any political viewpoint or agenda. Japanese government, in fact, even took notice. Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has repeatedly expressed concerns about the use of Mario, Pokemon and Naruto and asked the White House to stop. They definitely haven't. And clearly there's some millennial out there on government payroll running all this. That is, of course, based on, you know, some of their videos that they put out today and some of the councils out there. They're satirizing GameCube, Xbox 360 and PlayStation two. I think they're on PlayStation five now. I haven't quite caught up with it, but they went further back as well. That's supposed to be Sega. And this was one post from today, with each one of these posts pushing people to go to arcade dot gov, which redirects to the White House's official website and on it video games that are actually playable. So I'm here in the control room. I actually have a couple of those video games actually pulled up right now on the White House's official account. Let's take a look at him. Let's see what we got here. We got arcade again. This is the White House's official account. We got Flappy Bill. I think it's based on Flappy Bird. Build the wall, I think, based on Tetris. Clearly, clearly the Russian game. Is this the Russian game? I don't know what this one is. No, no, Tetris is Tetris is Russian, but a wide variety here. Which one should we try out? You pick. I can't see them from here. Oh, well, we'll we'll try out Flappy Bill. OK, I haven't played this yet, so I'm not sure if I'm going to be all right. We got like 20 seconds to explain what you're doing here. OK, I am trying to flap the bill, I guess, across the National Mall and see where I can get. Yeah, I grounded. OK, well, you best three. Yeah, best of three. But we're going through here. Now, hey, you tried and that's the important part. I tried. All right. But we have while we have a wide variety on the White House's website right now, I want to point out this comes just a couple of months after the group's secret handshake put out their own playable video game called Operation Epic Furious Straight to Hell. Straight spelled like straight of Hormuz, as it were. And we showed this on the show a couple of months ago and kind of went through it. But it goes through quite a different set of scenarios. And you can play as Trump here. Oh, another one of my executive orders was halted by the courts. We ordered Dietrich last time. So let's go ahead and invade Iran. OK. Yeah. All right. And this goes through it here. Obviously, when the group this is the same group that put those Epstein statues out on Capitol Hill over the past several months. And they said they were doing it to mock the gamification that the Trump administration was doing with everything this is what they call fighting fire with fire. Absolutely. And speaking of fire, we have a fireplace right there. And later on in the game, I think you're able to actually throw the Epstein files into the fireplace that is in the Oval Office. Loretto, thank you very much for bringing us that. We appreciate our chief video game correspondent here in the final five. And we're back with more after this. Back tomorrow at 11 30. Have a great day. Morning crew. Tainted illegal aliens driving semi trucks on our roads. Or if you're an American who just shares a road with somebody who isn't properly qualified, we've made the road safer. We've seen trucker wages go up by 7.5%. And that effort was obviously led by our anti-fraud task force because so many of these people were engaged in effectively fraudulent driving. They were getting these these these diplomas, these CDLs through fraudulent means. We stopped that. We're very proud of it. I want to give a special shout out to Secretary Sean Duffy at the Transportation Department for helping us in facilitating that work. And it goes into our broader effort, which is we're trying to make sure that your tax dollars and basic institutional trust is protected by your government. Whether it's a guy who gets a commercial driver's license to drive on the road, or whether it's a person applying for Medicaid or Medicare benefits, the people who get these things should be legally entitled and should qualify. And for too long, we had a government that basically just gave out your money, the American taxpayer's money, to people who didn't qualify for it. We've put a stop to that, having found, I think, north of $200 billion in fraud. And we're to keep, of course, working on that in the months and years to come. The second thing I want to talk about a little bit is the Venezuela oil deal, which I know some of you will have questions on. But I think it's just an amazing testament to what a smart foreign policy could look like.