Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News & Analysis

Episode: Weekend Edition – October 11, 2025
Host: Bill O’Reilly
Guests: Bruce Fein (Constitutional Attorney), Tim Graham (Executive Editor, NewsBusters), Dwayne Keys (Former U.S. Attorney, National Security Lawyer & AR National Guard Lt. Colonel)
Main Theme:
In this wide-ranging episode, Bill O’Reilly examines the legal and political implications of deploying the National Guard in Chicago to protect ICE agents amid federal-local tensions, and analyzes major changes at CBS News under new management. O’Reilly hosts legal and media experts to discuss the constitutional stakes, political calculations, and shifting media landscapes.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Power To Deploy the National Guard – Constitutionality and Precedents

Segment: [00:07–13:40]

Key Topics:

• Constitutionality of using military for domestic law enforcement.
• Historical precedents: Shays’ Rebellion, Reconstruction, LA Riots, New Orleans Police federal oversight.
• The Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus.

Highlights and Analysis:

• Bruce Fein: Explains the U.S. president’s statutory—rather than constitutional—authority to deploy the military to enforce federal laws during extreme situations via the Insurrection Act of 1807.

  “The power to utilize the military to enforce the law is not in the Constitution. It's in congressional statutes… There’s a statute, at least now President Trump has refrained from invoking. It's called the Insurrection Act of 1807.” (Bruce Fein, 00:47)

• Fein clarifies common misconceptions and historical context, emphasizing that most military interventions during Reconstruction or emergencies predate the Posse Comitatus Act.
• O’Reilly presses for practical distinctions, citing the use of federal power in historic crises when local authorities failed to maintain public order.
• Debate on ‘Sanctuary Cities’ and Federal vs State Roles:
  • Fein underscores that the Supreme Court prohibits the federal government from compelling state or local authorities to enforce federal (especially immigration) laws:

    "The Supreme Court held you cannot coerce state authorities to enforce federal law. Right. Immigration law is federal law. … A state may choose to cooperate. …The federal government can utilize as many ICE agents as they want." (Bruce Fein, 05:34)

  • O’Reilly challenges whether deploying National Guard to protect ICE agents blurs the line, referencing past federal interventions for public order.

Memorable Moment:

• O'Reilly: “If you have a chief of patrol sending out a message to cops, do not protect ICE agents … that seems to me to be all you need to send in National Guard to protect the ICE agents.” (09:59)
• Fein: Agrees, noting the Guard could go in to protect federal agents/buildings, but must stay within federal functions.

Summary:

Deployment authority hinges on statutes (primarily the Insurrection Act) rather than inherent executive powers; federal officials can enforce federal law, and state cooperation is not obligatory but cannot be discriminatory. There is legal gray area—and likely forthcoming Supreme Court scrutiny—about how far federal deployments can go beyond protection of federal interests.

2. Supreme Court Prospects and Political Calculations

Segment: [09:09–13:40]

Key Topics:

• Likelihood of the Supreme Court permitting/limiting President's deployment of the Guard.
• The political dynamics likely influencing the Court.

Highlights:

• O’Reilly predicts:

  “The Supreme Court will allow the Guard to go in ... I think they're going to give Trump the authority to do this because they understand that the locals and states are undermining the federal government here.” (12:44)

• Fein’s Caution:

  “Sometimes they can be very precise. … They don't have to do that. After all, they're the final word.” (12:28)

Summary:

Expectations are for a close Supreme Court decision granting broad (but not unlimited) authority for federal intervention to protect federal operations, but leaving open questions about more general law enforcement deployment.

3. Shifting Media Landscape: CBS News Under Bari Weiss

Segment: [14:00–22:45]

Key Topics:

• New editorial direction at CBS led by Bari Weiss.
• The reaction and culture shift at the network.
• Comparison with other media organizations (Disney/ABC, NBC/Comcast).

Highlights:

• Tim Graham (NewsBusters): Describes CBS newsroom anxiety over Bari Weiss’s pledge for “equal scrutiny of the political parties” and “diversity of viewpoints.”

  “Both of those are extremely opposed to what we generally see on CBS ... especially on some programs like 60 Minutes ... fiercely tilted...” (15:22)

• O’Reilly on Media Bias:

  “Jane [Pauley] looks so nice out there in her little demure outfits and all of that ... Hardcore leftist. 60 Minutes been taken over.” (16:26) “Scott Pelley hates Trump. Hates him. ... Who's going to interview him on 60 Minutes? Can't have Leslie. Can't have Pelly.” (17:57)

Media Industry Trends:

• Younger audiences not watching broadcast TV; cable news and streaming grow as network viewership wanes.
• FCC has no regulatory power over cable operations, only broadcast networks, which affects their risk calculus.

Summary:

The hiring of Bari Weiss signals a possible culture shift and commitment to viewpoint diversity at CBS, causing consternation among staff. Broader trends indicate legacy networks are struggling to remain relevant as more Americans consume news via streaming and cable, sectors less subject to federal regulation.

4. The National Guard in Chicago: Federal vs Local Conflict

Segment: [23:09–35:14]

Key Topics:

• Facts behind the federalization and deployment of the National Guard in Chicago.
• The ongoing violence and the alleged lack of local action.
• Chicago Police orders not to intervene in attacks on ICE agents.

Highlights:

• O’Reilly points out:

  “Governor Pritzker is the villain here. … During that time, 4,000, mostly African Americans, 80% have been murdered. And Pritzker has done nothing. … No one knows, okay? No one knows. 4,000 murdered. Pritzker sits there for six years, does nothing.” (23:09)

• National Guard’s mission is officially to protect ICE agents on federal raids, but also tacitly to tamp down violence in high-crime Chicago neighborhoods.
• Dramatic dispatch audio played: Dispatch orders all units to stand down and not intervene in an area where a shootout involving ICE agents and protesters occurred.

  Dispatcher: “We’re not sending anybody over to that location.” (26:37)

Legal Analysis – Dwayne Keys:

• Agrees investigation is warranted into the police stand-down, but would want more facts before recommending charges against the chief of patrol:

  “There's a mental state there that you've got to intentionally be trying to obstruct. His actions seem to indicate that. There's a few more details that I would like. But ... there might be a lawsuit here.” (28:57)

• Police have a legal duty to intervene in crimes; refusing to do so, if ordered by superiors, may be a state law violation, and grounds for civil action.

Federal Authority:

• Keys affirms:

  “The President has the absolute right under the Constitution to federalize National Guard, to send them in to protect federal property. … If the anarchy gets to the point that the President sees the need …. there's some checks ... but ultimately this has been tested, it's gone through the courts.” (33:30)

Summary:

O’Reilly argues Chicago leadership failed to address chronic violence, leaving the door open for necessary federal intervention. Police refusal (by order) to protect ICE agents heightens the stakes and raises legal and constitutional questions about municipal responsibilities.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• O’Reilly, on state/fed standoff:

  “You can't just say, well, we're not doing anything because crime's coming down a bit. No, you got dead bodies in the street.” (23:58)

• Fein, on legal limits:

  “The dividing line between ordinary law enforcement and extraordinary occasions when the president can intercede is basically when the court system has broken down.” (04:27)

• Keys, on the duty of police:

  “A police officer … actually has a duty to intervene when they see a crime happening. … To have sent them [cops], had the manpower, had the resources, they were en route and then to call them off, I mean, you're now violating state law.” (32:12)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:07–13:40: Legal debate on National Guard powers, Insurrection Act, and SCOTUS prospects (O’Reilly & Fein)
• 14:00–22:45: Bari Weiss at CBS, media bias, and legacy network decline (O’Reilly & Tim Graham)
• 23:09–26:57: Chicago violence facts, National Guard deployment rationale, dispatcher tape (O’Reilly)
• 26:57–35:14: Legality and ethics of police stand-down, federal authority, and political fallout (O’Reilly & Dwayne Keys)

Flow and Tone

O’Reilly’s tone is direct and combative, oscillating between fact-based analysis and pointed editorializing. The experts offer detailed, process-driven legal and media insights, at times pushing back against O’Reilly’s more polemical takes. The episode balances legal nuance with political commentary, aiming to clarify headline legal battles and contextualize media shakeups.

For Listeners:

This episode provides a thorough, if partisan, walk-through of the legal frameworks governing federal intervention in cities, the limits and powers of the presidency versus local authorities, the new direction at CBS News, and the interplay between legal and political maneuvering in an era of escalating federal-local clashes. The host and guests dissect both the written law and its practical, historical application—backed by first-hand audio clips and blunt assessments.