Stephanie Grace: Noem questioning was old school Kennedy | Columnist Stephanie Grace
Noem defended the ad contract and clarified that she—not Stephen Miller—had described two Americans killed by immigration officers as domestic terrorists.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYNOLA.com is an established regional news organization with an identifiable columnist and a recognizable opinion section. The article is clearly presented as commentary, so its judgments should be distinguished from straight reporting.
- Source type — Established local news publisher with a regional reporting operation.
- Author attribution — The column is attributed to Stephanie Grace.
- Editorial standards — The piece is labeled as a columnist’s opinion, making its viewpoint clear.
The column gives concrete details and quotes from the hearing, including Kennedy’s questions and Noem’s response. It offers little independent sourcing or response beyond the hearing exchange and is principally an interpretation of Kennedy’s motives and performance.
HOW WE SCORE ↗This is a column that argues Kennedy’s questioning was a welcome change and characterizes Noem’s record negatively. It includes Noem’s stated defense of the contract and Kennedy’s possible strategic motives, but does not develop a substantial counterargument.
- Opinion vs reporting — The piece is an openly evaluative column, not a neutral report.
- Counterarguments presented — Noem’s claim that the contract was competitively awarded is included, but not explored at length.
- Source diversity — The argument is based largely on the columnist’s account of the hearing and interpretation of Kennedy’s motives.
- Loaded language — The article uses pointed judgments about Kennedy, Noem, and the administration.
The column is strongly critical of Kennedy’s alignment with Republicans and of Noem’s conduct, while praising Kennedy’s questioning as a departure from that record. Its framing is opinionated and largely critical of the Trump administration.
- Language tone — Uses sharply evaluative phrases, including “fawning loyalty,” “deeply embattled,” and “obvious bad behavior.”
- Framing — Presents Kennedy’s questioning as a welcome exception to his usual partisan conduct and treats Noem’s record negatively.
- Source selection — The column relies mainly on the hearing exchange and the columnist’s interpretation, with no countervailing perspective.
Columnist Stephanie Grace says Sen. John Kennedy’s recent questioning of Kristi Noem over a $220 million ad campaign and her description of two Americans killed by immigration officers showed a return to his former independence. Grace praises the questioning but questions whether Kennedy was also trying to influence President Trump.
Grace contrasts Kennedy’s current partisan image with his past reputation as an independent watchdog, then describes his questioning of Noem at a Judiciary Committee hearing. Kennedy challenged the reported $220 million cost and emergency award of an ad contract, noting that it went to a newly formed company that hired Noem’s former ad man, who was married to her spokesperson. Noem maintained that the contract was competitively awarded. Kennedy also pressed Noem about calling two Americans killed by immigration officers domestic terrorists; she said that description was hers, not Stephen Miller’s.
Grace calls the questioning refreshing and says it helped bring Noem’s tenure to an end, while allowing that Kennedy may have been acting strategically to help Trump or prompt Noem’s firing. She notes that Kennedy said Trump had been ill-served by the ad campaign, which featured the president prominently.
Community verdict
12 VOTESPeople in this story
SWIPE →Former Homeland Security secretary questioned by Kennedy
Louisiana senator who questioned Kristi Noem at a Judiciary Committee hearing
Kennedy's version of this story ↗President discussed as a possible beneficiary of Kennedy’s questioning
Part of a bigger story
6 OUTLETSSen. John Kennedy questioned Kristi Noem at a Senate hearing about a $220 million DHS ad campaign. President Trump later said he had not approved the spending, and Noem left the department for another government role. Center outlets connect the hearing and conflicting accounts about Trump’s approval to Noem’s departure. Right-leaning outlets foreground Kennedy’s account of Trump’s response and the departure that followed.
- ARTICLES
- 8
- OUTLETS
- 6
- AVG CRED
- 64
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…



