Several tech CEOs get grilled on Capitol Hill over their alleged failures to protect children on their social media platforms. I'm so tired of this. It's been 28 years since the internet, we haven't passed any of these bills. The reason they haven't passed is because of the power of your companies.

We break down the contentious testimony from the Senate's child online safety hearing.

I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief, John Bickley. It's Thursday February first, and this is Morning Wire. A House Committee approved two articles of impeachment against DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for his failure to secure the border.

He's making it virtually impossible. They say in their own words, and they told us down on the border at Eagle Pass, it's impossible to do the job that they were trained to do.

And Harvard is hit with yet another plagiarism accusation, this time involving its chief diversity and inclusion officer.

Thanks for waking up with MorningWire. Stay tuned. We have the news you need to know.

Good footwear is about more than just fashion, and GDefy shoes are anything but ordinary. They aim to foster healthy body movements, alleviate pain, and prevent further wear and tear. I tried my first pair of GDefy shoes, and I actually didn't want to take them off. They were so comfortable even when I was just doing chores around the house. Try them for yourself. Use CodeWire for $30 off orders of $150 or more at gdefy. Com. That's G-D-E-F-Y. Com with promo code Wire for $30 off your order. Experience the miracle that is GDefy, where comfort meets innovation.

A dramatic hearing on Capitol Hill Wednesday as tech CEOs faced questions about the effects of social media on children. Families impacted by youth suicides and sexual exploitation cheered as Senate Judiciary Committee members grilled the chief executives of Metta, TikTok, X, Snap, and Discord.

Here with more is Daily Wire Culture reporter, Megan Basham. So, Megan, this may have been one of the most emotional Senate hearings I've seen. What did they address and what were some of the standout moments?

Well, this was a very wide-ranging hearing, and among the issues covered were child sexual exploitation, child pornography, also the question of material that promotes harmful life-threatening behavior. Things like children purchasing drugs like fentanyl on apps like Snapchat, anxiety and general mental health impact, especially on teen and pre-teen girls. And it even returned to the issue that we've seen in previous tech hearings of data privacy and Chinese ownership of TikTok. And I'll say that one of the most noteworthy factors may be the level of bipartisan that we saw. So Republican senators Lindsay Graham and Josh Holly were especially aggressive in drilling these CEOs. And Graham actually said that they have blood on their hands. But, Democrat senators, Amy Klobuchar and Dick Durban were also aggressive. I really can't think of another issue in recent memory where we saw both sides being so aligned. And then the other significant factor was The fact that families who blame social media for their children's deaths by suicide and overdose were in fact present in the chamber, and they openly cheered at some points. This gave rise to the most dramatic moment of the hearing when Senator Holly asked to Zuckerberg if he wanted to apologize to the families.

You're on national television. Would you like now to apologize to the victims who have been harmed by your products? Show them the pictures. Would you like to apologize for what you've done to these good people?

I'm sorry. I Why, Mr.

Zuckerberg, why should your company not be sued for this? You hide behind a liability You can't be held accountable. Shouldn't you be held accountable personally? Will you take personal responsibility?

Senator, I think I've already answered this.

So it may have been difficult to hear Zuckerberg there as he was facing away from the microphones, but what he did was turn and address the parents sitting behind him and he said, I'm sorry for everything you have all been through. So very dramatic moment in a hearing that had no shortage of emotional moments, as you said, Georgia. And some have questioned how Zuckerberg's apology there could now be used in lawsuits against Metta.

Now, did he and or other CEOs push back at all against claims that they were actually responsible for that harm?

To some degree, they did. What they did was they highlighted proactive steps that they say they've taken to protect kids online. So Zuckerberg said Metta has plans to hide content that isn't appropriate for minors. And he said that his company is unrolling 30 new tools that will give parents more ability to protect kids when they are on these apps. But he also pushed back against the idea that the mental health crisis in teens and preteens is the fault of social media.

Now, we sometimes see these explosive hearings, but they don't always translate into any actual legislative outcomes. Are there any concrete solutions being floated?

Well, I think the most likely legislative result would be seeing more support for the Kids Online Safety Act. That's a bipartisan bill that requires social media apps to take what they call reasonable measures to prevent bullying, sexual exploitation, exposure to harmful materials, things like videos promoting anorexia or cutting. And the platforms would need to protect children's private information. They would need to offer monitoring tools to parents, and they'd also need to offer more disclosure on targeted advertising and marketing. So Evan Spiegel, who is the chief executive of Snap, and Linda Yaccarino, who leads X, both pledge to back that legislation. And that's noteworthy because lobbying groups for the tech companies have very much been working against that bill and against state-level legislation that imposes similar age and time restrictions on social media use. But Zuckerberg and the CEOs of TikTok and Discord did not join that pledge. Tiktok CEO said that they support the spirit of these bills, but they have concerns about implementation. And that is fairly telling, perhaps indicating that Metta, TikTok, and Discord, at least, plan to continue lobbying to block these bills.

Well, I'd be interested to know how much revenue they anticipate losing if kids did limit their time on the apps.

Yeah, that's a good question.

Megan, thanks for reporting.

Anytime.

Netsuite turns 25 this year. That's 25 years of helping businesses do more with less, close their books in days, not weeks, and drive down costs. Manage risk, get reliable forecast, and improve margins. Everything you need all in one place. 36,000 businesses upgraded to NetSuite by Oracle. Download NetSuite's popular KPI checklist designed to give you consistently excellent performance absolutely free at netsuite. Com/morningwire. That's netsuite. Com/morningwire.

House Republicans have now taken a crucial step in their efforts to impeach Embattled Homeland Security Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas.

Here to discuss is Daily Wire Senior Editor, Kabbit Phillips. Hey, Kabbit. So GOP lawmakers have long vowed to impeach Mayorkas, and now they're one step closer. First, what happened yesterday?

So the House Homeland Security Committee voted 18 to 15 along party lines to advance articles of impeachment against Secretary Mayorkas. As we've documented here, the US has experienced an unprecedented surge in illegal immigration, with 7.5 million people crossing the border under the Biden administration. For context, if all of those migrants formed their own state, it would be the 13th largest state in the country. The impeachment charges say Mayorkas has knowingly made false statements to Congress and obstructed Congressional oversight of his Department. Here's House Speaker Mike Johnson speaking on Mayorkas from the House floor Wednesday.

He's handicapping law enforcement. He's limiting their ability to catch narcotics like fentanyl. We will be moving forward swiftly on those articles. It's long overdue. But Secretary Mayorkas is only part of the problem, because earlier this month, I released a memo documenting 64 specific actions that the Biden administration has taken to undermine border security and to promote the mass release of illegals and dangerous persons into our country.

All right, so the committee has now moved the impeachment effort forward. What comes next?

Well, the articles will now head to the House floor where they'll likely be voted on at some point next week. Now, given their slim majority, Republicans can only afford to lose two votes in the House. If it does pass, it'll head to the Senate where a formal trial would be held. At that point, it will come down to whether the GOP can prove Mayorkas is guilty of committing high crimes and misdemeanors. That is the key bar set for impeachment, and it's a difficult one to reach. Not only do Democrats control the Senate, making the odds of conviction relatively slim, but there's little historical precedent to go on as well. A sitting cabinet member has only been impeached and convicted once. It was all the way back in 1876.

What is the Secretary, Mayorkas, saying in response to this impeachment effort?

Yeah, he sent a letter to the House calling the impeachment a Sham based on, baseless and false claims. He went on to tell Republican members that, Your false accusations do not rattle me and do not divert me from the law enforcement and broader public service mission to which I've devoted most of my career. Democrats in the House released a statement of their own, Defending Mayorkas. To that point, here's Representative Benny Thompson, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee.

The Committee on Homeland Security has distinguished itself through serious legislative and oversight work under the leadership of both parties. Republicans partisan rush to consider house Resolution 863 today is a betrayal of that hard earned record.

Look, it is worth noting here. There have been voices on the right who are urging House Republicans to drop the effort. Alan Dershowitz, for example, who represented former President Trump in his first impeachment trial, claimed the GOP was using, quote, double standards and called the charges vague. We heard a similar sentiment from legal expert Jonathan Turley, who it's worth noting has been called as a Republican witness in numerous congressional hearings. He He said, there's, quote, no evidence my work has committed impeachable offense, and said, Republicans have no cognizable basis for conviction. But for their part, House Republicans say that they have a duty to remove him given the chaos at the border. Here's a closing argument we heard from Tennessee rep Mark Green, who really led the charge in the Homeland Security Committee.

He has willfully and systematically refused to comply with the laws passed by Congress and breached the trust of Congress and the American people. The results have been catastrophic and have endangered the lives livelihoods of all Americans.

Now we wait and see if the House votes to impeach next week. After that, how the Senate trial proceeds.

All right, more to come. Kaba, thanks for reporting.

Anytime.

In the wake With the scandal involving now former Harvard President Claudine Gay, the university is facing more plagiarism allegations.

Harvard University's Chief Diversity Officer appears to have plagiarized large portions of her academic work, too, according to a complaint filed with the school. Daily Wire investigative reporter, Mairead Alorty, is here with the details. Mairead, tell us about these allegations.

Hi, Georgia. While these allegations appeared in a complaint filed Monday with Harvard, Sherry Ann Charleston, Harvard's first ever Chief Diversity and inclusion officer allegedly plagiarized parts of every publication she wrote. That's at least 40 times total, according to this anonymous complaint filed with the university, which was first reported by the Washington Free Beacon. The complaint says Charleston quoted or paraphrased raised nearly a dozen other academics without proper attribution in her 2009 dissertation submitted to the University of Michigan. Also, Charleston's only peer-reviewed journal article written in 2014 with her husband, lifted parts from a 2012 study her husband published, presenting it as new research. We should note, her husband, Lavar Charleston, is the Deputy Vice Chancellor for Diversity and Inclusion at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Charleston herself was previously Assistant Vice Provost for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and Chief Affirmative Action Officer at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

So she presented her husband's study and then passed it off as new?

Yes, at least parts of it, if the complaints allegations are true. In the 2014 article they authored, which was published in the Journal of Negro Education publication, even interviews with Black computer science students from the 2012 study showed up word for word. The 2014 article also listed the same methods, findings, and descriptions of survey subjects as the older study. That's according to the Beacons analysis. This is a big problem because not only are you not supposed to recycle old research, especially data and conclusions, but the 2014 publication also added two new authors, Sherry Ann Charleston and Jirlando Jackson, who had nothing to do with the original study. Peter Wood, the head of the National Association of Scholars, told The Beacon, the 2014 paper, quote, appears to be entirely counterfeit, and called it research fraud pure and simple.

So what's Harvard's response been?

A Harvard spokesperson told the school's newspaper that Harvard has processes for handling research misconduct allegations, but they, do not comment on individual cases or on the existence of investigations related to research misconduct allegations. The spokesperson also praised the Chief Diversity Officer and said she advanced the school's, belief that everyone who comes to Harvard belongs at Harvard and whether a student, faculty, staff member, or researcher should have the opportunity to succeed. A spokesperson for UW Madison, where Charleston used to work, said the school has initiated an assessment in to the allegations. It said it takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously.

Now, this comes shortly on the heels of allegations against Claudine Gay, the former university president. So it sounds like more bad press for Harvard.

That's right. As we mentioned earlier, these allegations do echo those against Claudine Gay, who stepped down as Harvard's President earlier this month. Gay was accused last year of dozens of instances of plagiarism in her published works. However, Gay still collects a $900,000 annual salary as a tenured a faculty member at Harvard. Here's an interesting tidbit, too. As Chief Diversity Officer, Charleston served on the presidential search committee that ultimately named Claudine Gay as President. So overall, more PR woes for Harvard as it figures out how to respond to this situation. Absolutely.

Mairead, thanks for reporting.

Thanks, Georgia.

Thanks for waking up with us. We'll be back this afternoon with more news you need to know.