‘People are sick of the same old thing’: Maxine Waters faces primary from Democrat 34 years her junior

Myla Rahman is aiming to use Rep. Maxine Waters' 35 years in Congress as political ammunition as she challenges the longtime Democratic congresswoman.

The nonprofit executive, Los Angeles native and cancer survivor, who is 34 years younger than the 87-year-old lawmaker, is highlighting generational change as she launches a primary challenge against Waters.

"People are sick and tired of the same old thing," Rahman told the California Post in an interview this week.

Waters, who has been in Congress since 1991, hasn't faced a serious primary challenge in over a decade in California's solidly-blue 43rd District, which is anchored in South Los Angeles.

HEADED FOR THE EXITS: WHY 3-DOZEN HOUSE MEMBERS AREN'T RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION

But that's not deterring Rahman, who is hoping to get a ballot box boost from Democrats' discontent with their party's aging politicians, which was amplified by then-President Joe Biden's decision to run for re-election in 2024 before dropping out of the race amid serious questions about his physical and mental acuity after a disastrous debate with now-President Donald Trump.

Fox News Digital reached out to Waters' re-election campaign for reaction to Rahman's primary challenge but did not receive a response at the time this story published.

Waters isn't the only long-serving House Democrat from California facing challenges from younger rivals. So are Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman and Mike Thompson.

RAHM EMANUEL CALLS FOR MANDATORY RETIREMENT AGE OF 75 FOR PEOPLE IN PUBLIC OFFICE

And it's not just California.

In Massachusetts, Rep. Seth Moulton is spotlighting the generational argument as he tries to oust Sen. Ed Markey in the Democratic primary.

Rahman says, "Time is of the essence" and asks, "Why wait when you can make an impactful change now?" 

While Republicans don't have any realistic chance of flipping the district, Rahman's primary challenge gives the GOP some ammunition.

"Democrats built a party run by career politicians like Maxine Waters who has been cashing taxpayer funded paychecks since the Cold War. After decades clinging to power, these political fossils are getting tossed aside by the same radical activists they helped empower," National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Christian Martinez charged in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Waters was often in the spotlight during Trump's first term in the White House, as one of his most vocal critics.

Waters remains a loud critic, questioning the president's fitness for office after Trump's push to remove Lisa Cook as a Federal Reserve governor.

Waters remains influential, as the powerful House Financial Services Committee's ranking Democrat.  And last week, in a fiery exchange with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent at a congressional hearing, she asked, "Can you shut him up?"

Rahman, who filed her paperwork with the Federal Election Commission a week ago, said she's making affordable healthcare a focus of her campaign after surviving two bouts with breast cancer.

"My mission is to help with preventative care and people not even getting sick, and that includes mental, physical and mental well-being," Rahman said.

And looking ahead to her uphill challenge against Waters, she told the California Post, "We’re getting momentum, momentum is getting strong, and we think that we will have what’s necessary to be competitive and to win this race."

Fox News Digital reached out to Rahman and Waters.

source https://www.foxnews.com/politics/people-sick-same-old-thing-maxine-waters-faces-primary-from-democrat-34-years-her-junior

Meta, Google face massive liability as ‘addicted kids’ trial continues in LA

Meta and Google returned to Los Angeles Superior Court on Tuesday for the second day of a landmark trial over claims their platforms were designed to addict young users — a closely watched case that could carry major consequences for hundreds of similar lawsuits nationwide.

The outcome could put the social media giants on the hook for significant damages in this case and others should a Los Angeles jury side with the plaintiffs. The lawsuit is widely viewed as a bellwether for roughly 1,600 related cases across the country, underscoring the potential legal and financial ripple effects.

Still, much remains uncertain. Attorneys told the court the trial could stretch six to eight weeks, offering little early indication of how jurors might ultimately rule.

As day two nears a close, here's an overview of where things stand.

SUPREME COURT APPEARS SKEPTICAL OF BLOCKING US BAN ON TIKTOK: WHAT TO KNOW
 

The lead attorney for the plaintiff, identified only as K.G.M, and for Meta presented dueling opening statements to jurors this week, offering an early preview of their most compelling arguments and points they are likely to revisit for the duration of the trial.

Mark Lanier, the attorney for the plaintiffs, told jurors that deciding in favor of his client, K.G.M., would be "as easy as ABC," which he told the court stands for "addicting the brains of children."

Lanier's opening statement was neither short nor lacking in props, including a toy Ferrari, a bicycle hand brake, and eggs — introduced to the jury, one-by-one, over the course of his two-hour remarks.

He argued the selective tactics used by tech giants were the same tactics embraced by casinos, "borrowing heavily" from slot machines and tobacco companies in an attempt to "deliberately" develop design features that maximize youth engagement, target younger users — and make it difficult for them to disengage from the platforms compared to older users and adults.

"For a teenager, social validation is survival," Lanier said, noting that Meta, Google, and others "engineered a feature that caters to a minor’s craving for social validation." 

TRUMP SAYS FATE OF TIKTOK SHOULD BE IN HIS HANDS WHEN HE RETURNS TO WHITE HOUSE

Meta lawyer Paul Schmidt, for his part, starkly contrasted Lanier's tactics in his own remarks to the jury. His presentation was more formal and buttoned-up as he ticked carefully through the points denoted in a PowerPoint presentation. 

Schmidt argued that K.G.M.'s struggles existed largely independently of the platform, telling jurors that their responsibility is to determine only whether Meta played a "substantial factor" in her mental health struggles.

He cited excerpts from the plaintiff's medical history, therapy sessions and childhood to argue that the struggles she encountered appear to stem from other issues, including family problems, bullying, and issues with body image.

Schmidt also cited a 2025 interview in which K.G.M. said she continues to use Instagram, YouTube and TikTok, which he said undercut the claim of substantial harm.

The outcome of the case could have a profound impact on hundreds of other cases in the U.S., including some that are slated to begin as early as this year.

It comes as parents, school districts, and other regulators have cited concerns about phone use among young people, including social media use.

Plaintiffs in the cases have argued that the companies themselves should be held liable for knowingly embracing design features that they say aim to keep children online.

The majority of lawsuits filed to date against the companies have alleged similar harm, including addiction, depression, anxiety or self-harm behaviors. 

Because the case is being heard in civil court, it is unclear how much a jury might award to the plaintiff, should they find in favor of K.G.M. 

But experts say these outcomes could have far-reaching consequences beyond simply financial exposure, impacting the design and regulation standards for social media giants for years to come. 

source https://www.foxnews.com/politics/landmark-trial-accuses-meta-google-addicting-children-what-know

Tori Spelling living in a 'borderline hoarder' home as living conditions worsen

Tori Spelling's living conditions seem to be getting worse. 

During Friday's episode of her "misSPELLING" podcast, the "Beverly Hills, 90210" alum, 52, and her co-host Amy Sugarman openly discussed how the current state of her home could have possibly led to her recent ailment that took Spelling "down for eight weeks."

"I know I have had a past of getting sick a lot and frequently, but this one took me down eight weeks," she said. "I couldn't work… I mean it started with the five petri dishes that live in my house, but they bring things home, that's normal. And, you know, you work through it, you get sick."

'BEVERLY HILLS, 90210' ALUM BRIAN AUSTIN GREEN LACKED 'CONFIDENCE' TO FIX 18-YEAR-LONG RIFT WITH TORI SPELLING

Sugarman alluded to another possible factor: Spelling's "lifestyle."

After asking Spelling to send a picture of the state of the house, Sugarman gasped and said, "It's not good."

"And I don’t want to be mean, but the Christmas tree is up," she added. 

"You can see the bones in here, like the shelves could be really pretty, the living room could be really pretty. You have beautiful things," Sugarman said. "You can’t even sit in there… It’s borderline hoarder, I’m not gonna lie." 

After Sugarman asked Spelling if she'd be comfortable inviting the president of iHeart over to her house for a hypothetical meeting, Spelling said, "I would have to pass." 

"I’d be like, ‘Where, I’ll come to you wherever you are.’ I would change everything… I stopped having people over."

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

The actress admitted that her home wasn't always a mess during her marriage to ex-husband Dean McDermott.

"When Dean and I were together and lived together, I was able to have a house that was presentable because he wouldn’t live like that," Spelling said. "We were working at different times, so I had downtime when he’d work."

Though Sugarman voiced her concerns, Spelling noted her life isn't going to change anytime soon. 

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

"My busy, chaotic work and children lifestyle is not gonna change," she said. "In fact, in the next year, there’s gonna be things coming up, it’s gonna be escalated. So I need to be on my A game and once someone comes in and does all this, yes, I can maintain it if I have someone helping me."

In a 2023 interview, McDermott told the Daily Mail that he insisted on separate sleeping arrangements in 2017 because Spelling had animals, including a pig, sleeping in their shared bedroom.

During an episode of her "misSPELLING" podcast in 2024, Spelling said it was McDermott's "choice" that the former couple sleep in "different bedrooms" for "three years," but insisted the decision was not due to their pet pig.

"He gave an interview saying he stopped sleeping in the bed because of a pig. That is not true," she said.

While Spelling admitted that there was a pig in their bed in 2017, she claimed that the animal only spent one night sleeping with them.

TORI SPELLING FILES FOR DIVORCE FROM DEAN MCDERMOTT AFTER 18-YEAR MARRIAGE

The California native explained that the couple adopted the baby pig while she was pregnant with their fifth child, and she was told that the animal needed to sleep in a bed.

"I was just following orders that it was used to snuggling, and it needed that for a few nights," Spelling said. 

She continued, "But then when it peed between us in the bed, he was like, 'The pig's leaving the bed.' And I was like, 'Understood.' And that was it. That was the only night the pig was in the bed."

"The animals and kids didn't come between us in the bed," Spelling added.

source https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/tori-spelling-living-borderline-hoarder-home-living-conditions-worsen

Reporter's Notebook: Clintons call for open Epstein files hearing after months of defying subpoenas

Since there was such a tempest over Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show, perhaps there’s a solution at hand. This compromise would satisfy both red and blue America. And the exhibition would transfix the country: Have former President Bill Clinton and President Donald Trump testify at halftime about the Epstein files.

Republicans believe former President Clinton has something to hide about Jeffrey Epstein. Democrats think the same about President Trump. The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the former president and Hillary Clinton to testify about the Epstein files. After a lot of wrangling, the Clintons are due to appear for closed-door depositions later this month.

But both Bill and Hillary Clinton are now calling for open sessions. And Democrats believe that such an appearance at a public session — by a former president — would establish a precedent to lug in President Trump to answer questions about what he knew about Epstein.

GHISLAINE MAXWELL TO APPEAR BEFORE HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE LAWMAKERS FOR EPSTEIN PROBE DEPOSITION

One architect of the law compelling the release of the Epstein files, applauded demands last week by the former first couple to testify at a televised open hearing. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said the former president is an important witness.

"As long as [the hearing is] focused on Epstein, and it's not a wild goose chase — it's not trying to score political points or embarrass either President Clinton or President Trump, it is asking legitimate questions about what they knew took place and who they knew were participating in heinous acts," said Khanna. "That should be a legitimate point of inquiry."

After agreeing to a closed-door deposition later this month, Hillary Clinton took to X. She wrote to Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., saying, "If you want this fight let’s have it in public." 

Former President Clinton echoed his wife the next day on X, also calling for a public session. The former commander in chief declared that he won’t be used "as a prop in a closed door Kangaroo Court." 

A spokeswoman for Comer accused the former first couple of "moving the goalposts." Comer was always open to a hearing. But after a closed-door deposition.

"Depositions have historically been much more substantive than hearings," said Comer. "Hearings unfortunately, have become more of an entertainment thing."

It’s hard to track exactly what the Clintons wanted.

The House Oversight Committee voted on a bipartisan basis last August to subpoena both Bill and Hillary Clinton for depositions — along with a host of other prominent figures like former Attorney General Bill Barr. After a lot of haggling, the committee subpoenaed them to appear at dates in October. The Clintons defied those. Then the committee assigned them dates just before Christmas. But neither showed then because of a funeral. The committee requested that the Clintons give them dates for January appearances. They didn’t. The committee then assigned them additional dates for January testimony. They skipped out on those. That’s when Comer threatened to hold the Clintons in contempt of Congress if they didn’t appear in January. The Oversight Committee voted — in bipartisan fashion — for contempt. The House Rules Committee planned last week to prep a measure to force the entire House to vote on contempt — and send criminal referrals for the Clintons to the Justice Department for prosecution after they defied the subpoenas.

REVEALED: TRUMP CALLED POLICE CHIEF TO SUPPORT EPSTEIN PROBE, AND LAWMAKERS NAMED 6 MEN SHIELDED FROM EXPOSURE

But the Clintons finally agreed to depositions at the end of this month. And once that was on the calendar, the duo began calling for public hearings.

There is a method behind this madness. There isn’t a loyalty among younger congressional Democrats to the Clintons. In fact, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was steamed at some Democrats for wanting the Clintons to appear. Younger Democrats don’t have the same reverence for the Clintons as older Democrats. Hillary Clinton ran for president a decade ago. She hasn’t been a senator since 2009. She last served as secretary of state in early 2013. President Clinton left the Oval Office more than a quarter-century ago.

However, this is the Democrats’ gambit:

If former President Clinton appears about the Epstein files, it may be tough to make the case that President Trump shouldn’t appear.

"Certainly it does set the precedent. President Trump was subpoenaed during the January 6th investigations and didn't come in. He cited some form of executive privilege. And so we're kind of forcing the Clintons to come in with the threat of criminal contempt. Then that is a precedent that we are setting," said Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va. "In other countries, like the U.K., the prime minister regularly comes before the Parliament. And so it's not like it's unprecedented around the world."

Granted, that’s a parliamentary system where the prime minister is a member of Parliament in the United Kingdom. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer appears for "Prime Minister’s Questions" every Wednesday at noon in London. Members of Parliament usually pepper the prime minister with questions and scoff in a scene which resembles something out of Monty Python.

But the American and British systems are fundamentally different.

Getting a sitting or former president — and even first lady — before Congress is rare but not unheard of.

BONDI TO FACE GRILLING IN HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OVER EPSTEIN FILES, WEAPONIZATION ALLEGATIONS

There are several prominent examples of sitting presidents appearing before Congress. President Abraham Lincoln testified voluntarily before the House Judiciary Committee in 1862. The New York Herald published his "State of the Union" message to Congress just before it was sent to Capitol Hill. Presidents sent written "reports" in those days. They did not give speeches to Congress. Lawmakers probed the leak of the message to Congress. It was speculated that Herald reporter Henry Wikoff got the message ahead of time thanks to his friendship with Mary Todd Lincoln. The House Sergeant-at-Arms briefly held Wikoff — and released him after the president spoke to the Judiciary Committee.

President Woodrow Wilson appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1919 to discuss a treaty with Germany and establishing the League of Nations. Wilson’s push for the League of Nations failed. The Senate rejected the Treaty of Versailles.

President Gerald Ford had been in office two-and-a-half months before he appeared voluntarily before the House Judiciary Committee in the fall of 1974. Ford told lawmakers that his pardon of former President Richard Nixon wasn’t something they bargained about. Ford told the committee that he pardoned Nixon because his physical and mental health fell into a steep decline.

Former President Harry Truman appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1955 to testify about the United Nations charter.

Ford came back as a former president in 1983 for a Senate hearing on the bicentennial of the Constitution.

And there are examples of both sitting and former first ladies testifying, too.

Eleanor Roosevelt testified twice as first lady. Once about labor issues. Then, about the organization of volunteers for the civilian defense agency before World War II.

Rosalynn Carter testified about mental health as first lady.

Hillary Clinton famously testified about her husband’s healthcare plan — even though it was dubbed (often derisively) "Hillarycare" in the fall of 1993. She testified multiple times as secretary of state. Most notably in early 2013 regarding Benghazi. 

And, first lady Laura Bush was en route to Capitol Hill to testify before a Senate panel about early childhood education on 9/11. The committee canceled the hearing after the attacks in New York and at the Pentagon. 

So, many Republicans are game to hear from the Clintons about the Epstein files. Frankly, some were more interested in just holding them in contempt than actually gleaning anything about Epstein. But it looks like the Clintons will at least sit for depositions in a few weeks. Whether there’s a hearing or not is unclear. Some Republicans may even push for that. But caveat emptor. An open session for the Clintons will only intensify the push by Democrats — and some GOPers — to hear from President Trump. 

Their testimony might not come during the Super Bowl halftime show. But open testimony by a former president and a sitting president would be a political Super Bowl.

source https://www.foxnews.com/politics/reporters-notebook-clintons-want-epstein-testimony-political-super-bowl-spectacle-public-viewing

Pat McAfee says San Francisco wasn't the 's---hole' he thought it may be during Super Bowl week

It's no secret that San Francisco has been rife with homelessness and crime in recent years, but that was tough to imagine during Super Bowl week, according to Pat McAfee.

Granted, the big game was about an hour southeast in Santa Clara, but the Super Bowl fan experience and media row were right in the city at the Moscone Center, and McAfee was impressed with his surroundings.

"I would like to reiterate the fact that San Francisco was good to us out there. It's a nice city. We've been walking around here miles and miles," McAfee said on his show Monday, adding the city was "good to us."

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM 

McAfee admitted he heard from the critics about his rather upscale amenities, from five-star hotels to private security through "the backstage of a convention center," which could lead to a positive perception automatically.

"I understand that could be my life, and it sounds pretty sick, actually. But…we walked that s--t," McAfee said. "We were all over that place."

"Granted, it was just our area. I assume there are s----y areas. I mean, it is a city. I think that kind of happens in most cities. But the part we were at was very nice," he continued.

McAfee admitted that he actually expected San Francisco to be a "s---hole," as he had heard it was once a "dump."

"I was actually planning on leading off the show… 'Can't wait to have to tell the truth about San Francisco if it is not great,'" McAfee added.

49ers stars Christian McCaffrey, Brock Purdy, and Fred Warner praised the city to Fox News Digital during media week.

"It's a historic city with so much character. The food, the hills, the homes, the water, the bridge, the whole thing. It's just such a great city, too, and it's really cool to see it come to life even more than it already is," McCaffrey said.

49ERS' KEION WHITE SUFFERS NON-LIFE-THREATENING ANKLE WOUND IN SAN FRANCISCO SHOOTING AFTER SUPER BOWL LX

"Man, I think San Francisco has so much to offer," the quarterback Purdy added. "Just, obviously, with the restaurants, the experiences, just how pretty it is out here with the Golden Gate Bridge and the ocean. It's a great city, great people. So to have the Super Bowl out here is really cool."

Warner revelled in the fact that the city is a "melting pot."

Just all the different cultures mixing, all the diversity and mixing together," Warner said. "You can get a little bit of everything that you're looking for out here, and of course, playing in the greatest stadium in the entire NFL, Levi's Stadium, you can't beat it, and so I think it's gonna be a great Super Bowl Sunday and a great week as well with all the different activities that they got planned for everybody."

Back in 2023, Buster Posey, the hometown Giants' president of baseball operations and former catcher, said players and their wives have a negative perception of San Francisco.

"Something I think is noteworthy, something that unfortunately keeps popping up from players and even the players’ wives is there’s a bit of an uneasiness with the city itself, as far as the state of the city, with crime, with drugs," Posey said to The Athletic in 2023, adding that it affected their pursuit of Shohei Ohtani.

"Whether that’s all completely fair or not, perception is reality. It’s a frustrating cycle, I think, and not just with baseball. Baseball is secondary to life and the important things in life. But as far as a free-agent pursuit goes, I have seen that it does affect things."

The estimated population of San Francisco is roughly 827,000 people, the 13th-most populous city in the United States. It's estimated, however, that over 8,000 people are homeless in the city.

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

source https://www.foxnews.com/sports/pat-mcafee-says-san-francisco-wasnt-s-hole-he-thought-may-during-super-bowl-week

Israeli officials reportedly warn Iran's ballistic missiles could trigger solo military action against Tehran

As U.S.-Iran diplomacy remains primarily focused on Tehran’s nuclear program, Israeli officials and analysts warn that ballistic missiles remain a central red line for Jerusalem and could shape any decision on unilateral action.

Before departing for his trip to Washington, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he plans to press Israel’s priorities in the talks. "I will present to the president our views regarding the principles of the negotiations — the important principles — and, in my view, they are important not only for Israel, but for anyone in the world who wants peace and security in the Middle East."

Those priorities, Israeli officials say, extend beyond the nuclear file and include Iran’s missile capabilities. Israeli defense officials have recently warned U.S. counterparts that Iran’s ballistic missile program constitutes an existential threat to Israel and that Jerusalem is prepared to act alone if necessary, according to reporting by The Jerusalem Post.

‘ISRAEL IS ONLY THE APPETIZER’: HUCKABEE WARNS IRAN THREAT LOOMS AS NETANYAHU EYES TRUMP TALKS

The outlet reported that Israeli security officials conveyed in recent weeks their intent to dismantle Iran’s missile capabilities and production infrastructure through a series of high-level exchanges with Washington. Military planners outlined potential operational concepts aimed at degrading the program, including strikes on key manufacturing and development sites.

A spokesperson for Israel’s defense minister declined to comment on the issue.

Sima Shine, a former senior Israeli intelligence official and current senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies, told Fox News Digital that limiting talks to the nuclear issue risks missing what Israel considers the broader threat.

IRAN REPORTEDLY DEVELOPING CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL MISSILE WARHEADS AS PROTESTS SPREAD OVER COLLAPSING ECONOMY

"If negotiations deal only with the nuclear file and ignore the missiles, Israel will remain exposed," Shine said. "Iran treats its ballistic missile program as its main deterrence and will not give it up." She stressed that Tehran views them as a defensive and deterrent capability dictated by the supreme leader. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said his country would not negotiate on its ballistic missile program, rejecting a core U.S. demand and further dimming prospects for a breakthrough deal. Shine described that stance as a fundamental red line for Israel. 

She also warned that Tehran may be stalling diplomatically while assessing whether Washington will limit the talks to nuclear constraints alone.

"They have room to show flexibility on enrichment," she said, noting that activity slowed after strikes on facilities, "but missiles are different. That they would not discuss."

Israeli concerns extend beyond the negotiating table. A former intelligence official familiar with strategic planning said Israel retains the capability to strike independently if necessary.

TRUMP WARNS IRAN, DELAYS STRIKES AS RED LINE DEBATE ECHOES OBAMA’S SYRIA MOMENT

"Israel can act by itself if there is no choice," the former official said, adding that missile expansion and regional threats would be key triggers.

Shine says the optics of Israeli pressure on Washington could complicate matters.

"If missiles become the central public demand, it may look as if Israel is pushing the U.S. toward military action," she said. "If that fails, Israel could be blamed."

She added that Iran’s missile arsenal is not aimed solely at Israel but forms part of a broader deterrence strategy against the United States and regional adversaries.

For Israel, the implication is clear. A nuclear agreement that leaves Iran’s missile infrastructure untouched could be seen in Jerusalem as stabilizing the regime while leaving the most immediate threat in place. That calculation, Israeli analysts say, defines the red line.

source https://www.foxnews.com/world/israeli-officials-reportedly-warn-irans-ballistic-missiles-could-trigger-solo-military-action-against-tehran

Stephen A Smith says it 'would have been nice' if Bad Bunny performed in English

All things considered, there may be no one with a truthfully honest review of the Super Bowl halftime show, its critics, and its praise more than Stephen A. Smith.

The ESPN mogul, who has been critical of President Donald Trump, said up front that he would not give an assessment of Bad Bunny solely to oppose conservatives like "anti-Trump and anti-right" folks.

"That ain’t me, I don’t give a damn. I’m fair-minded, down the middle," Smith said on his self-titled show.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM 

Smith said Bad Bunny's performance was "a damn good show," and "the vibe was fly." However, he did agree with Trump and other conservatives about how the show was almost entirely in Spanish.

"Here’s my only reticence: You’re in the United States of America and you perform damn-near an entire performance in Spanish …" Smith said, adding that Trump made a "legitimate point" about the lack of English. "If you didn’t understand Spanish, you were lost."

"Would have been nice to see a few people celebrating the Hispanic heritage, no doubt," Smith continued, name-dropping Shakira and Jennifer Lopez. "But it also would have been nice if some of the songs were in English. That’s all. But it was still a good show."

ICE ARRESTS MURDERERS, PEDOPHILES DURING SUPER BOWL WEEKEND AS AGENTS SAY HALFTIME SHOW ‘DEMONIZED’ THEM

Smith teased a reaction to Bad Bunny when he posted a screenshot of Trump's Truth Social post where he blasted Bad Bunny's performance as "one of the worst, EVER!"

"The Super Bowl Halftime Show is absolutely terrible, one of the worst, EVER! It makes no sense, is an affront to the Greatness of America, and doesn’t represent our standards of Success, Creativity, or Excellence. Nobody understands a word this guy is saying, and the dancing is disgusting, especially for young children that are watching from throughout the U.S.A., and all over the World," Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

"This ‘Show’ is just a ‘slap in the face’ to our Country, which is setting new standards and records every single day — including the Best Stock Market and 401(k)s in History! There is nothing inspirational about this mess of a Halftime Show and watch, it will get great reviews from the Fake News Media, because they haven’t got a clue of what is going on in the REAL WORLD — And, by the way, the NFL should immediately replace its ridiculous new Kickoff Rule. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president would be watching Turning Point USA's "All-American" halftime show.

Bad Bunny's performance is speculated to be the most-watched halftime performance ever with more than 135 million viewers, but an official number has not yet been posted.

The show concluded with a message on the Levi’s Stadium video board that read, "The Only Thing More Powerful Than Hate Is Love." NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Bad Bunny shared an embrace in the bowels of Levi’s Stadium after the performance.

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

source https://www.foxnews.com/sports/stephen-a-smith-says-would-have-been-nice-bad-bunny-performed-english