Connect with us

Politics

FCC and CBS release unedited '60 Minutes' Kamala Harris interview amid Trump lawsuit

Published

on

FCC and CBS release unedited '60 Minutes' Kamala Harris interview amid Trump lawsuit

The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday took the unusual step of releasing raw transcripts and video footage of CBS News’ “60 Minutes” interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, which has sparked heated debate over the network’s credibility and press freedoms.

Paramount Global-owned CBS followed FCC Chairman Brendan Carr’s move by separately publishing its interview transcripts and footage from the October interview. CBS turned over the same material to the government Monday night, following a demand by Carr, who was appointed to the post by President Trump.

Carr said that publishing the previously unreleased footage and opening up a case file would “serve the public interest.” The FCC now plans to accept public comment.

“The people will have a chance to weigh in,” Carr wrote on social media site X.

The FCC inquiry has raised the stakes in a separate dispute between Trump and CBS and has also tested the limits of journalists’ 1st Amendment rights.

Advertisement

Trump backed out of a scheduled sit-down with “60 Minutes,” but the network went forward with an interview of Harris in the closing weeks of the presidential campaign. CBS broadcast a clip from the Harris interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” public affairs program. The following night, a longer version of the Harris interview ran as part of a special “60 Minutes” episode.

Trump and his supporters cried foul, pointing to discrepancies between Harris’ answers in the two interview segments. Trump sued CBS for $10 billion, alleging that the network had engaged in deceptive editing practices in an effort to tip the scales in Harris’ favor by casting her in a more favorable light with viewers.

CBS has denied the allegation, and that court case is pending in Texas.

Carr’s separate inquiry was sparked by a complaint lodged with the FCC last fall by a conservative legal nonprofit group, Center for American Rights, that also accused CBS of news distortion and political bias. Carr’s predecessor had dismissed the complaint, along with three others filed against TV stations owned by major broadcast news organizations. However, in his first week, Carr reopened the CBS “60 Minutes” case and two other election season bias complaints.

Trump’s complaint and the FCC action have stoked fears by some journalists and 1st Amendment experts that Trump and his team could use levers of power to try to chill news coverage unflattering to the president.

Advertisement

The FCC’s release of CBS’ raw transcript and interview drew a sharp rebuke by one of the two Democrats serving on the commission.

“It is unprecedented and reckless for the FCC to disclose the status of an active investigation and publicly share materials before its conclusion and before they’ve been shared with other members of this independent body,” FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez said in a statement. “This action sets a dangerous precedent that threatens to undermine trust in the FCC’s role as an impartial regulator.”

In a separate online statement, CBS said it was taking the rare step of publishing “the same transcripts and videos of our interview with Vice President Kamala Harris that we provided to the FCC.”

The unedited portions of the interview proved that the edited version broadcast in October was “consistent with 60 Minutes’ repeated assurances to the public — that the 60 Minutes broadcast was not doctored or deceitful,” producers of the CBS program said.

“In reporting the news, journalists regularly edit interviews — for time, space or clarity,” the CBS News producers said. “In making these edits, 60 Minutes is always guided by the truth and what we believe will be most informative to the viewing public — all while working within the constraints of broadcast television.”

Advertisement

As part of the newly released footage, CBS cameras show CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker greeting and engaging in polite banter with Harris at her residence. The four-minute segment was part of a “walk and talk” visual to accompany the interview.

“This must feel to you like an especially perilous time for the U.S. and for the world,” Whitaker says to open the interview.

“I think the stakes couldn’t be higher in this election cycle,” Harris said, ticking off political tensions around the world, including in Ukraine.

The portion of the “60 Minutes” interview that drew controversy came during Harris’ answer to a question about the Israel-Hamas war. Whitaker asked the Democratic nominee for president whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been listening to the Biden-Harris administration during the war in Gaza.

During the “Face the Nation” clip, Harris gave a wordy response.

Advertisement

In the “60 Minutes” broadcast, her answer was more succinct: “We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States, to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.”

CBS has defended its edits.

“We broadcast a longer portion of the vice president’s answer on Face the Nation and broadcast a shorter excerpt from the same answer on 60 Minutes the next day,” the “60 Minutes” producers wrote.

“Each excerpt reflects the substance of the vice president’s answer,” they wrote. “As the full transcript shows, we edited the interview to ensure that as much of the vice president’s answers to 60 Minutes’ many questions were included in our original broadcast while fairly representing those answers.”

The network also said the transcripts show that CBS did not pull any punches in the Harris interview.

Advertisement

The network’s “hard-hitting questions of the vice president speak for themselves,” the CBS News producers said in the statement.

Gomez, the Democratic FCC commissioner, chastised her colleagues for digging into the issue. The transcripts, Gomez said, provided “no evidence that CBS and its affiliated broadcast stations violated FCC rules.”

“The FCC should stop trying to keep up with this administration’s focus on partisan culture wars and return to its core focus of protecting consumers, promoting competition, and securing our communications networks,” Gomez said.

Daniel Suhr, president of the Center for American Rights, which filed the complaint with the FCC last fall, applauded Carr’s move to release the raw footage and transcripts.

“Transparency is the key to restoring public trust in the media,” Suhr said in a statement. “We look forward to seeing the American people have their say through the FCC’s public comment file.”

Advertisement

Vice President Kamala Harris talks to “60 Minutes” correspondent Bill Whitaker.

(CBS News)

As part of its inquiry, the FCC set a March 7 deadline for public comments.

For weeks, Paramount’s controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, had been agitating for her team to settle Trump’s lawsuit to facilitate her family’s sale of Paramount to David Ellison’s Skydance Media.

Advertisement

That deal needs the approval of the FCC because of the transfer of CBS station licenses to the Ellison family.

The debate over whether the company would defend “60 Minutes” revealed deep divisions within CBS, a division of Paramount Global. Journalists decried the potential move, which they said seemed designed to placate Trump at the expense of the reputation and legacy of “60 Minutes.”

The issue put Redstone and some high-level Paramount executives at odds with journalists, who expressed dismay that the company did not appear willing to go to bat for one of the network’s premier brands.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats

Published

on

Video: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats

new video loaded: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats

Virginia voters approved a new map that could flip four House seats away from Republicans going into the 2026 midterm elections. It was the latest fight in the national redistricting war.

By Shawn Paik

April 22, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

WATCH: Sen Warren unloads on Trump’s Fed nominee Kevin Warsh in explosive hearing showdown

Published

on

WATCH: Sen Warren unloads on Trump’s Fed nominee Kevin Warsh in explosive hearing showdown

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Sparks flew on Capitol Hill as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., accused Federal Reserve nominee Kevin Warsh of being a potential “sock puppet” for President Donald Trump.

Warsh, tapped by Trump in January to lead the Federal Reserve, faced a two-and-a-half-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.

If confirmed, he would take the helm of the world’s most powerful central bank, shaping interest rates, borrowing costs and the financial outlook for millions of American households for the next four years.

WHO IS KEVIN WARSH, TRUMP’S PICK TO SUCCEED JEROME POWELL AS FED CHAIR?

Advertisement

Kevin Warsh, nominee for chairman of the Federal Reserve, listens to ranking member Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., make an opening statement during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

In her opening remarks, Warren sharply criticized Warsh’s record and questioned his independence, arguing he is “uniquely ill-suited for the job as Fed chair” and warning he could give Trump influence over the central bank.

She accused Warsh of enabling Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis, which fell during his tenure as a Federal Reserve governor when he served from 2006 to 2011.

“In our meeting last week, we discussed the 2008 financial crash, where 8 million people lost their jobs, 10 million people lost their homes and millions more lost their life savings,” Warren said. “Giant banks, however, got hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts… and he said to me that he has no regrets about anything he did.”

She added that Warsh “worked tirelessly to arrange multibillion-dollar bailouts” for Wall Street CEOs, with nothing for American families.

Advertisement

The hearing grew more tense as Warren pivoted to ethics concerns, pressing Warsh over his undisclosed financial holdings and questioning him over links to business dealings connected to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The two spoke over each other and raised their voices in a heated exchange on Capitol Hill.

WARSH’S $226 MILLION FORTUNE UNDER SCRUTINY AS FED NOMINEE FACES SENATE CONFIRMATION

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The Fed has been plagued by deeply disturbing ethics scandals in recent years. It’s critical that the next chair have no financial conflicts — none. You have more than $100 million in investments that you have refused to disclose. So let me ask: do the Juggernaut Fund or THSDFS LLC invest in companies affiliated with President Trump or his family, companies tied to money laundering, Chinese-controlled firms, or financing vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein?

Kevin Warsh: Senator, I’ve worked closely with the Office of Government Ethics and agreed to divest all of my financial assets.

Advertisement

Warren: Could you answer my question, please? You have more than $100 million in undisclosed assets. Are any of those investments tied to the entities I just mentioned? It’s a yes-or-no question.

Warsh: I have worked tirelessly with ethics officials and agreed to sell all of my assets before taking the oath of office.

Warren: Are you refusing to tell us if you have investments in vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein? You just won’t say?

Warsh: What I’m telling you is those assets will be sold if I’m confirmed.

Warren: Will you disclose how you plan to divest these assets? The public might question your motives if, for example, someone who profits from predicting Fed policy cuts you a $100 million check as you take office.

Advertisement

Sen. Elizabeth Warren questions Kevin Warsh during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Warsh: I’ve reached a full agreement with the Office of Government Ethics and will divest those assets before taking the oath.

Warren: I’m asking a very straightforward question. Will you disclose how you divest those assets?

Warsh: As I’ve said, I’ve worked with ethics officials.

Warren: I’ll take that as a no.

Advertisement

In a separate exchange, Warren invoked Trump’s past statements about the Fed and challenged Warsh to prove his independence in real time.

She insisted that Warsh answer whether he believes Trump won the 2020 presidential election and if he would name policies of the president with which he disagrees. The hopeful future Fed chair dodged the question and said he would remain apolitical, if confirmed.

THE ONE LINE IN WARSH’S TESTIMONY SIGNALING A BREAK FROM THE FED’S STATUS QUO

Warren: Donald Trump has made clear he does not want an independent Fed. He has said, “Anybody that disagrees with me will never be Fed chairman.” He’s also said interest rates will drop “when Kevin gets in.” Let’s check out your independence and your courage. We’ll start easy. Mr. Warsh, did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?

Warsh: Senator, we should keep politics out of the Federal Reserve.

Advertisement

Warren: I’m asking a factual question.

Warsh: This body certified the election.

Warren: That’s not what I asked. Did Donald Trump lose in 2020?

Warsh: The Fed should stay out of politics.

Warren: In our meeting, you said you’re a “tough guy” who can stand up to President Trump. So name one aspect of his economic agenda you disagree with.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Kevin Warsh listens to a question during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Warsh: That’s not something I’m prepared to do. The Fed should stay in its lane.

Warren: Just one place where you disagree.

Warsh: I do have one disagreement — he said I looked like I was out of central casting. I think I’d look older and grayer.

Advertisement

Warren: That’s adorable. But we need a Fed chair who is independent. If you can’t answer these questions, you don’t have the courage or the independence.

Continue Reading

Politics

Commentary: He honked to support a ‘No Kings’ rally. A cop busted him

Published

on

Commentary: He honked to support a ‘No Kings’ rally. A cop busted him

On March 28, a sunny Saturday in southwestern Utah, Jack Hoopes and his wife, Lorna, brought their homemade signs to the local “No Kings” rally.

The couple joined a crowd of 1,500 or so marching through the main picnic area of a park in downtown St. George. Their signs — cut-out words on a black background — chided lawmakers for failing to stand up to President Trump and urged America to “make lying wrong again.”

After about an hour, the two were ready to go home. They got in their silver Volvo SUV, but before pulling away, Jack Hoopes decided to swing past the demonstration, which was still going strong. He tooted his horn, twice, in a show of solidarity.

That’s when things took a curious turn.

A police officer parked in the middle of the street warned Hoopes not to honk; at least that’s what he thinks the officer said as Hoopes drove past the chanting crowd. When he spotted two familiar faces, Hoopes hit the horn a third time — a friendly, howdy sort of honk. “It wasn’t like I was being obnoxious,” he said, “or laying on the horn.”

Advertisement

Hoopes turned a corner and the cop, lights flashing, pulled him over. He asked Hoopes for his license and registration. He returned a few moments later. A passing car sounded its horn. “Are you going to stop him, too?” Hoopes asked.

That did not sit well. The officer said he’d planned to let Hoopes off with a warning. Instead, he charged the 71-year-old retired potato farmer with violating Utah’s law on horns and warning devices. He issued a citation, with a fine punishable up to $50.

Hoopes — a law school graduate and prosecutor in the days before he took up potato farming — is fighting back, even though he estimates the legal skirmishing could cost him considerably more than the maximum fine. The ticket might have resulted from pique on the officer’s part. But Hoopes doesn’t think so. He sees politics at play.

“I’ve beeped my horn for [the pro-law enforcement] Back the Blue. I’ve beeped my horn for Black Lives Matter,” Hoopes said. “I’ve seen a lot of people honk for Trump and for MAGA.”

He’s also seen plenty of times when people honked their horns to celebrate high school championships and the like.

Advertisement

But Hoopes has never heard of anyone being pulled over, much less ticketed, for excessive or unlawful honking. “I think it’s freedom of expression,” he said.

Or should be.

Jack and Lorna Hoopes made their own protest signs to bring to the “No Kings” rally in St. George, Utah.

(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)

Advertisement

St. George is a fast-growing community of about 100,000 residents set amid the jagged red-rock peaks of the Mojave Desert. It’s a jumping-off point for Zion National Park, about 40 miles east, and a mecca for golf, hiking and mountain-bike riding.

It’s also Trump Country.

Washington County, where St. George is located, gave Trump 75% of its vote in 2024, with Kamala Harris winning a scant 23%. That emphatic showing compares with Trump’s 59% performance statewide.

St. George is where Hoopes and his wife live most of the time. When summer and its 100-degree temperatures hit, they retreat to southeast Idaho. The couple get along well with their neighbors in both places, Hoopes said, even though they’re Democrats living in ruby-red country. It’s not as though they just tolerate folks, or hold their noses to get by.

“Most of my friends are conservative,” Hoopes said. “Some of the Trump people are very good people. We just have a difference of opinion where our country is going.”

Advertisement

He was speaking from a hotel parking lot in Arizona near Lake Havasu while embarked on an annual motorcycle ride through the Southwest: four days, a dozen riders, 1,200 miles. Most of his companions are Trump supporters, Hoopes said, and, just like back home, everyone gets on fine.

“Right?” he called out.

“No!” a voice hollered back.

Actually, Hoopes joked, his charitable road mates let him ride along because they consider him handicapped — his disability being his political ideology.

Hoopes is not exactly a hellion. In 2014, he and his wife traveled to Africa to participate in humanitarian work and promote sustainable agriculture in Kenya and Uganda. In 2020, they worked as Red Cross volunteers helping wildfire victims in Northern California.

Advertisement

Virtually his entire life has been spent on the right side of the law, though Hoopes allowed as how he has racked up a few speeding tickets over the years. (His career as a prosecutor lasted four years and involved three murder cases in the first 12 months before he left the legal profession behind and took up farming.)

He’s never had any problems with the police in St. George. “They seem to be decent,” Hoopes said.

A department spokesperson, Tiffany Mitchell, said illicit honking is not a widespread problem in the placid, retiree-heavy community, but there are some who have been cited for violations. She denied any political motivation in Hoopes’ case.

“He must’ve felt justified,” Mitchell said of the officer who issued the citation. “I can’t imagine that politics had anything to do with it.”

And yes, she said, honking a horn can be a political statement protected by the 1st Amendment. “But, just like anything else, it can turn criminal,” Mitchell said, and apparently that’s how the officer felt on March 28 “and that’s the direction he took it.”

Advertisement

The matter now rests before a judge, residing in a legal system that has lately been tested and twisted in remarkable ways.

A pair of hands resting on a traffic citation given for alleged excessive honking

Jack Hoopes’ case is now before a judge in St. George, Utah.

(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)

As he left an initial hearing earlier this month, Hoopes said his phone pinged with a fresh headline out of Washington. Trump’s Justice Department, it was reported, was asking a federal appeals court to throw out the convictions of 12 people found guilty of seditious conspiracy for their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

“We have a president that pardons people that broke into the Capitol and defecated” in the hallways and congressional offices, Hoopes said. “Police officers died because of it, and yet I get picked up for honking my horn?”

Advertisement

Hoopes’ next court appearance, a pretrial conference, is set for July 15.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending