In yet another eyebrow-raising segment from CNN, “OutFront” host Erin Burnett is facing criticism after attempting to link a string of recent terror incidents—not to radical ideology or failed enforcement—but to bureaucratic “chaos” allegedly tied to government restructuring.
The remarks came during a discussion of several alarming attacks that unfolded over the course of a single week. Among them: an attempted assault at Old Dominion University that was stopped by ROTC students, a failed bombing attempt targeting an anti-Islamism rally in New York City, a truck attack on a synagogue, and a shooting at a bar in Austin, Texas.
Fortunately, none of the attacks resulted in mass casualties. But critics argue the incidents point to a growing threat environment—one that demands serious attention.
Instead, Burnett appeared to pivot in another direction.
Speaking after commentary from former FBI official Andrew McCabe, Burnett suggested that “chaos” stemming from the now-restructured Department of Government Efficiency—often referred to as DOGE—played a role in the uptick in threats.
“Yeah, but it’s time, of course, with so much chaos, of course, after DOGE and other things,” Burnett said, without offering specific evidence linking the agency’s restructuring to the attacks.
The claim drew swift backlash from critics, who noted that many of the suspects involved in these incidents were already known to law enforcement long before any recent administrative changes.
McCabe himself, during the segment, acknowledged that the FBI has long anticipated the possibility of increased domestic threats tied to tensions with Iran, particularly in light of military actions like Operation Epic Fury.
“It’s been considered for many years that we might come to the point of hostilities with Iran,” McCabe explained. “For that reason, the FBI developed a plan years ago of exactly how they would assess the threat climate.”
He went on to describe how the bureau is now revisiting old cases, reconnecting with known suspects, and attempting to preempt further attacks—raising an uncomfortable question for many observers: if these individuals were already on the radar, why weren’t stronger actions taken earlier?
One particularly troubling detail involved the suspect at Old Dominion University, who Burnett herself acknowledged had been known to authorities for years, with alleged ties to ISIS that reportedly concerned federal agents.
Yet that fact seemed to receive far less scrutiny than her broader claim about “chaos.”
Critics say the segment reflects a recurring pattern in legacy media coverage—downplaying ideological motivations behind attacks while shifting blame toward political narratives or bureaucratic changes.
They also point out that several of the suspects involved in recent incidents reportedly entered or reentered the United States during the previous administration, raising additional questions about border security and vetting policies.
For many Americans, the issue is straightforward: a series of attempted terror attacks—regardless of their success—should prompt a serious national conversation about security, intelligence failures, and the root causes of extremism.
Instead, they argue, the focus is too often diverted.
As tensions abroad continue to rise and domestic threats remain a concern, the debate over how to address these challenges—and who bears responsibility—appears far from settled.
