Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News and Analysis - No Spin News - TPM Edition - January 16, 2026

Episode Date: January 17, 2026

Welcome to this special edition of the No Spin News. This episode is a compilation of Bill's opening monologues from this week. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to the No Spin News, Talking Points Edition. So I want to give you a reminder, because it still is early in 2006, no spin means we don't pander, we don't propagandize, and we don't push ideology. That's what no spin means. It's like we try to analyze the news based on every possible fact we can accumulate. That separates us from almost everybody. else. Because most people have a preconceived. I'm going to say this because that's what my audience wants to hear. We don't do that. All right? And so when we're analyzing very important stories

like the rebellion what's going on now in the United States, we have to gather an enormous amount of information in order to make sense of it all. And I'll prove it again this evening, beginning with the talking points memo. So I wrote a column, posted on bill o'Reilly.com, filed it on Saturday called The Rebellion. So there are eight states that are rebelling against the federal government's immigration law. I will list them in a moment. Okay? And what does that mean?

It just means they refuse to obey the law. That's a rebellion. This is the sanctuary city movement. but it's more than that. Okay, so on Saturday you saw one of those states, Minnesota, host a demonstration against the ice shooting of last week. A couple of thousand people showed up and there's nothing wrong with people protesting.

That's what we do in America when we don't think something is wrong. But this protest was sponsored by a far-left group called the Minutes called the Minnesota Immigration Rights and Action Committee. This was an ideological protest, not an organic protest. It was organized exclusively by the far left to seek people's presence on the far left. That's what this was all about. Okay. Authorities of Minneapolis arrested 29 people, and they were throwing chunks.

of ice and other debris at the local cops. The feds had no presence here. So a local demonstration. All right. And one police officer was hurt. That's the who what, one where and why of the rally. The people who attended the rally are in one category. They are leftists who have.

The Trump administration. Roll the tape. There was another instance of someone in our city being killed, being murdered. Law enforcement, and I'm ready to be done with it. I love my community. I love my city, and I hate what's happening to it with people who, frankly, aren't from here coming in and telling us who should be here.

And when it comes on to loving my neighbor, I'm just going to love my neighbor. Here's ICE, riding through our neighborhoods, destroying families. destroying businesses, tearing our communities apart, and they're not being held accountable. And that's why we're here. We're out here to demonstrate to try to hold them accountable. Okay, fine. But that's not what really that is. That is an open border. We don't want any law enforcement to confront undocumented migrants. We don't want it. You let them in, they do what they want. That's what these people stand for,

but they're never honest about it. That shouldn't be a surprise. 75 million people voted for Kamala Harris, who supported President Biden's open border policy and didn't want any law enforcement against people foreign nationals that came into the country illegally. Calmyra's wouldn't have done anything.

But it continued on the open border and let people just wave on it. Okay? 75 million Americans voted for her. A lot of folks. Of course you're going to have that. Now, the eight states in Open Rebellion are these. California, Oregon, Washington State, Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey.

New York and Vermont are right on the edge there. I don't have them on there because there's a dialogue, at least, going on with Washington, but you can put them on there. And when you have 10 states, it's basically telling the federal government, we're not going to obey your law, you have what they had before the Civil War. It's exactly the same thing, and I make the point in the column, that from 1830 to 1860, 30 years, Southern State said, we're not going to obey whatever you say.

And we're not just talking slavery, we're talking tariffs, we're talking almost everything. Andrew Jackson slapped them down. Okay? But then we had a series of weak precedents, like Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan, who lit us out, rise in ferocity. and then we had the Civil War.

That was a rebellion against the federal government. Only other time in our history we've seen this was during a Vietnam War. But that was a populist uprising. Started out ideological. But then the war got out of control because of Lyndon Johnson's incompetency and deceit. And the American people,

and that just cut across almost every, barrier said enough of this, and the demonstrations happen. And violence happened. Tenth State, National Guard, and a lot of other areas. Now, the federal government at this point has a couple of obligations. Has to enforce the law. Has to. But they can de-escalate violent confrontations. So if ICE agents see that there's a person like Ms. Good impeding their investigation with a automobile, the vehicle, then you do escalate that. You arrest her later, which they could have done easily. All right? You don't up it because if there's a lot more violence, then the Trump administration is going to lose the country.

It's going to. You've got to de-escalate in any kind of potential violence situation. Now, that doesn't mean if the ICE agents are attacked that they can't fight back. They should fight back. I'm not saying that. But if you can lessen potential violence, you have to do that. And that's not just me saying. That's every law enforcement agency in a country has that in their manual.

If you don't have to use lethal force, you don't. Get it later. Do it later. Now that's number one. Number two, 77 million Americans voted for Donald Trump. And that vote needs to be respected. It's not respected by the left. Okay, it's not.

And it's probably a vice versa on that too. But when 77 million Americans say, we want to be respected by the left, okay, it's not. million Americans say we want immigration law enforced, you know, force it. The Trump administration is not doing anything wrong theoretically. Okay. But the ICE commanders have got to know that this evolve a situation. Because if it gets worse, the Democrats are going to win the midterms. And they're making their stand not on the economy now, because the economy is pretty good.

They're making their stand on this. This is the hill they're standing on. Illegal immigration. I think that's foolish. I believe most Americans see this Minnesota stuff for what it is. A provocation of the federal government. A rebellion against social order. I believe most of us see that.

And the Democratic Party is standing opposed to that. It's going to hurt him, particularly because it's a weak party with no leader. But if you are calling ICE Gestapo and you are supporting open borders and no supervision of foreign nationals, and you won't even cooperate in the 10 states that I mentioned with criminal migrant investigations, You wouldn't even cooperate then. America's going to walk away from you, in my opinion. Summing up, the federal government has to enforce immigration law. But it has to be done a little bit differently now.

Situation is just too volatile. We don't want dead people. But we do want people held accountable. And that's a memo. You're listening to a special edition of the No Spin News. So yesterday I just scorched 10 states who are in rebellion against the federal government. So if you are a premium or concierge member on Bill O'Reilly.com, if you watch our show and get a transcript, anytime you want. All right? And that is a very big convenience if you are a seeker of knowledge.

So we went over that this is a rebellion. And my column is up on bill O'Reilly.com that tells you which the states they are and what they're doing. And it's ironic because it happened 157 years ago, I believe it was, Andrew Jackson. Same thing with South Carolina. And Jackson took care of South Carolina.

You can't be in rebellion against the federal government. Well, anyway, I am now going to put forth to you a, I think, a pretty good solution, not a 100% solution, but something that would work. So we have a 1952 immigration law. 1952 has not been upgraded because both parties don't want to upgrade it. They both use it for political advantage. There's no drive to have a new immigration bill or laws, set of new laws, none.

So, 1952. And President Truman vetoed that bill. But his veto was overridden by Congress. The reason of Truman vetoed it was he didn't believe the bill had enough non-white opportunities for people to come to the United States. It was almost all-white people that were allowed in here. That's why Truman vetoed it. Anyway, as everybody knows, Joe Biden let everybody in.

No restraints. And according to the Migration Policy Institute, pretty good. They're pretty good. 14 million foreign nationals crashed in here under Biden. 14 million. Now, there's a lower number put forth by Pew Research, 11 million. But it's still a colossal amount of people. Out of those 14, 11, whatever number you want to take,

10 to 15 percent are criminals, people who will hurt you. And that is a colossal number two, that you add the foreign criminals to the domestic criminals, and we have a wave, and we've seen it. All right. Now, Biden didn't care. The Democratic Party doesn't care. They, in fact, the radical end of the Democratic Party continues to want an open border. That's what you're seeing in Minnesota.

These people screaming about ICE and impeding ICE, they don't want any restrictions. And they don't want to hunt down the criminals. That's who they are. It's hard to believe, but that's who they are. And you got to accept it. Okay? So you can't surrender to it. And if I was on a Hannity radio program today, you might want to listen to that.

I said, if I were the president, I'd have the FBI interviewing mayors and governors who will not have forced immigration law. By interviewing, I mean, you go in, the feds go in, sit them down, and you say, why are you not doing X? Why are you not doing Y when you know that federal law trumps your state law? The federal law, you know that in the Constitution. That's what I've been doing now. Because if you're going to rebel against the United States and you're leading the rebellion, you're in trouble.

So that has to be built. But that's not the solution. Here's the solution. So by executive order, again, Congress had never, vote. You never get it into the Senate. Okay. By executive order, President Trump signs a proclamation that says if you are in this country without proper documentation, you need to go to your post office where there will be a Homeland Security form that you have to fill out. And a form will be your name, where you live, are you employed, how many children do you have, where did you come from on and on and on?

You fill it out. You put it back into the prepaid envelope, and you send it to Washington, to Homeland Security, which then enters your questionnaire into a database. Now, you have 90 days to do it. That's fair, three months to do it. If you don't do it, then you are subject to immediate detention and deportation. That's it.

you're going. And I don't think there's a court in a law that would block that because that's national security. So then you separate the people and the thugs, the criminals, are never going to answer the questionnaire, ever. So you put them in a category, and then you have the so-called law-abiding migrants in another category, and then you adjudicate them.

So it goes into immigration courts. We'd have to hire a lot more judges to do it, but they look at it and they say, you know, there are some people who have claimed asylum. There are some people that are married to American citizens. On and on, what's your story? And then you get, the federal government sends you a conclusion. You have to appear at this point or you're okay for a year, whatever it may be. Okay? And you have to carry that card wherever you go.

So if ICE stops you, you produce the card, I'm cooperating. Ben Ice lets you go, unless you commit a crime, unless they're hunting you for a crime, of course. So that way you get an orderly basis of deportation. You get to know who's here. And again, the bad guys aren't going to cooperate, make it a lot easier to get them out. You don't have that card. You can't produce it. It's like a license. Where's your ID? You've got to produce this. It's part of your ID. So what's the downside to that? The liberals will say, privacy. Privacy? What are you talking about? You're not supposed to be here. It's a privilege to be here.

You have to go through a process to be here. Privacy? I don't believe the courts, you know, and the state courts in the rebellion of places, of course. But federal courts are going to go, this makes sense. And this allows the federal government to step away and use a less heavy hand, which is good for the nation. All right, I can't do better than that. that. I've been thinking about this for a long time. And again, bill at bill o'Reilly.com, bill at bill o'Reilly.com. I'd like to know whether you support or oppose that. You're listening to a special edition of the no-spin news. Well, here's something you think about. There's no question President Trump is governing in a non-collaborative way. All right?

That means his way or the highway. And if you don't like it, then you can take him the or try to get Congress involved or whatever. But there is a method to use a cliche to the president's madness. So he believes he has a mandate, 77 million Americans voted for him to correct what the Biden administration screwed up, which is colossal if you are any kind of fair and analyst. Just the border alone is so catastrophic. And President Trump says, look, the American people elected me. to clean this mess up, and I'm going to clean it up. In addition, I'm going to impose a new world

order on the globe. Foreign policy is going to be pro-American. I am going to create a country that is so powerful that few will defy it. But I don't need Congress to do it, and I don't need the courts because you can litigate all day long, but it just holds it up. Trump wants to go fast, than he has in his first year. He doesn't want Congress to be deliberating for five months, and he doesn't want it. So the question then becomes is he overstepping his authority, is the president overstepping?

And that will be debated this year. Okay, 2006, you're going to have a lot of definition there. But in the meantime, Donald Trump's going to do what he wants to do. Full steam ahead on immigration, on foreign policy, and if he's blocked, he's blocked. Meanwhile, Congress is so partisan, it's really hard to get any alternatives out of them as far as, well, we have a better idea.

We in the Senate have a better idea. No, you don't. If you do, it's a mystery, and I'm talking general across the board. All right, that's not my talking points. That's just setting up my talking points because we have three major stories in play here. Iran, ICE, and Denmark.

And they're all very, very different. But President Trump's future hinges upon those three stories at this moment and the economy as well. Okay, Iran. So right now, the Pentagon has worked up a number of military engagements there. It's just a matter of Mr. Trump's order. I don't know what they are, nobody does.

It's top secret, they've walled it off, there's no leaks. We don't know. I did talk to the president personally on Saturday, and I said, in my opinion, because I was asked, okay, I wouldn't use military action unless it's a tipping point. You don't need to send any more messages. You already did that with the nuke bombing. But if you can get them out of there, Mr. President, the mullahs, you can get them on that flight to Moscow by, say, wiping out the Revolutionary Guard headquarters, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

them out. And I believe it will happen. I think the mullas are done. And that'll be a tremendous victory for the USA and the world. But I could be wrong. But anyway, the actions have been drawn up. We don't know when, where we don't know. And it could happen at any time. Remember, Tehran, the capital of Iran, is eight and a half hours ahead of us. And this is not going to be a daylight action. These are going to be under the cloak of darkness. And so I, I'm going to be on it for the next whenever it takes, watching, I check it every 30 minutes because all hell could break loose at any time. But again, I do believe the mullahs are done, and I really hope that's true.

Okay, the second is ICE, which this is very interesting. The protests against ICE are not organic, as they say. It's not like everybody's running to the streets like Vietnam or anything like that. These are very well organized, far-left-generated protests. And the nexus, of course, is in Minneapolis where Ms. Good was shot dead by an ICE agent last week. But this has not caught on across the country, even though there are 10 states an act of rebellion against the federal government, which I write about in my column on Bill O'Reilly.com. This is a rebellion. It's not a protest.

There's a big difference. Okay? They are refusing to obey the law. Now, the third one is Denmark. And I'm going to just take a little time at the end of the talking points to explain the danger for Donald Trump here. This is the most dangerous story, Denmark, not ICE, not Iran, Denmark, and Greenland. That's the most dangerous for him. Now, getting back to Iran, there are, even before any military action, liberal Americans,

Democrats, who say, well, you can't keep doing this. You can't keep going into Venezuela, grabbing a dictator there, and then go and get the mullahs out of there. You need Congress to approve all this. And I debated Chris Cuomo on News Nation last night about that subject. Go. Let me ask you something else, though. Iran, I don't understand a legitimate basis in law for any president to say,

ooh, this regime, they're bad. I don't like what they're doing other people. I think I'll use the military and not have to go through Congress. How can the president do that in Iran? Under the national security banner. Because Iran, and we saw that with Soleimani, when Trump took him out with a drone, I read up at that in my book, Killing the Killers. Iran continues to fund worldwide terrorism and gives them billions of dollars, billions with a bait.

That's a national security threat to the United States. So under national security, if you can neutralize somebody like Soleimani or ISIS, as Trump did with the assistant of Barack Obama, you can do it without congressional approval. And that's what he'll use. And that's true. So the Democrats can jump up and down. It can sue. They can do this. They can do that.

The president has the authority. based upon what happened after 9-11 to take out national security threats without getting permission. And he has. All right. That's what he's doing. It's all about national security. Drug dealing into the United States, massive amounts of narcotics, national security. Mullahs funding has bula, Hamas, all the terror groups, national security.

Courts aren't going to go against that. At the higher level, the partisan courts will, but not. up in the Supreme Court or even the appeals courts. Okay. Now let's get to Greenland. So today there's a meeting, closed door, and we don't have anything yet, and I might break if it does,

I'll tweet about it at Bill O'Reilly. It's important to keep us on the ban. So we don't know yet, but we know obviously a Harley-Lev meeting, Vice President Starr, Vance, and Marco Rubio, Secretary of State of the meeting with the Danish foreign minister and his Greenland counterpart. Now, I fully expect them to work out some kind of deal

because if the United States invades Greenland with troops, which is, I can't imagine that that would ever happen. I said that to President Trump. This would fracture the NATO alliance. You can't do that. Putin would be a winner. Because all the European NATO countries have turned against the United States, every single one of them.

Maybe hungry wouldn't, but that's it. You can't. And then the United States, American people don't want the U.S. military in Greenland. Every single poll shows that. And Republicans don't want it either. And then Congress, my God, they'll go crazy. And that would tilt it against the Republicans in the midterm.

So there is a bill introduced by Lisa Murkowski, who's supposedly Republican, but she's really not. And Senator Jean Shaheen in New Hampshire that says, you can't do this. You can't invade Greenland with U.S. troops. Now, that's going to pass the Senate. That bill is going to pass, and it might pass the House of Representatives. Now, Trump could veto it, but you can see.

the unbelievable deficit that President Trump would create for himself and the Republican Party. It doesn't have to do it. You know, I'm a cocky guy. You guys all know that. I said, look, send me over to Copenhagen. I'll come back with any deal you want in 48 hours. And I would. It's not that hard to get military bases up there.

It's out of them there in the past. Denmark's not going to object to that. Mineral rights wouldn't get them. We don't need to put military boots on the ground there. So anyway, I expect the deal would be worked out. I'd be shocked if President Trump ever sends U.S. military to Greenland. This is his negotiating ploy. Huff and puff and blow the house down and then we'll get a deal.

That's what he always does. But this one is very dangerous. Thank you for listening. Remember to subscribe to the Bill O'Reilly podcast feed and consider becoming a premium or concierge member at billoreilly.com.