Politics
Why Trump’s lawsuit against CBS is transparently ridiculous

In the closing weeks of the 2024 presidential election, no issue has animated Donald Trump more than his obsession with CBS’ “60 Minutes.”
To briefly recap, Vice President Kamala Harris sat down for an interview with the news program in early October; some of her answers were edited for time — a standard practice in broadcast journalism — and the former Republican president has spent nearly every day since pretending that this is some kind of scandal.
Trump has, among other things, called for CBS to lose its broadcasting license, asked for “60 Minutes” to be pulled from the air, labeled the show and the network a “threat to democracy,” described the imaginary controversy as “the single biggest scandal in broadcast history,” and even characterized the non-story as “totally illegal.”
The network has patiently explained that the claims are baseless and that the editing process was routine and fair. Trump’s lawyers nevertheless recently wrote to CBS News, threatening litigation. Evidently, they weren’t kidding. Reuters reported:
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump sued CBS on Thursday over an interview of his Democratic rival Kamala Harris aired on its “60 Minutes” news program in early October that the lawsuit alleged was misleading, according to a court filing. The complaint, filed in federal court in the Northern District of Texas, alleges the network aired two different responses from Harris responding to a question about the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
The GOP candidate is seeking — I kid you not — $10 billion in damages.
“Former President Trump’s repeated claims against 60 Minutes are false,” a CBS News spokesperson said. “The lawsuit Trump has brought today against CBS is completely without merit and we will vigorously defend against it.”
As a legal matter, the idea that CBS News engaged in “election interference” is difficult to take seriously. The former president recently wrote on his online platform that he has “PROOF” to substantiate his bizarre claims, but to date, he hasn’t shared any such evidence.
As a political matter, the Harris campaign has invested quite a bit of time and energy telling voters that Trump is overly fixated, not on problem-solving, but on vengeance and retaliation. The Republican shifting his focus to CBS in the race’s final days seems to reinforce the Democratic framing: Trump has an enemies list, while Harris has a to-do list.
But my favorite part of this story is the fact that the lawsuit was filed in federal court in the Northern District of Texas. Why, pray tell, would the former president’s lawyers file the case there? I’m glad you asked.
CBS isn’t located in Texas. Trump doesn’t live in Texas. The Trump campaign isn’t located in Texas. The “60 Minutes” interview with Harris didn’t happen in Texas. Nothing about this story has anything to do with Texas.
But the Republican’s attorneys filed the case there anyway, and The Washington Post ran a report that helped explain the reason: “The long-shot claim was filed in the Northern District of Texas courthouse where Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, a Trump nominee, is the sole judge.”
To be sure, the official explanation for filing the litigation in the Northern District of Texas is that the “60 Minutes” interview was aired by the CBS affiliate in the area, where some Texans presumably saw it.
But there’s no reason to play games here. Trump’s lawyers wanted to get this case in front of a highly controversial Trump-appointed judge, who’s quickly become the go-to jurist for GOP plaintiffs looking for a legal ally on the bench.
It was, for example, Kacsmaryk who took it upon himself to suspend the FDA’s approval of mifepristone last year, relying in large part on highly dubious studies — which have since been retracted. (The ruling was ultimately overturned for procedural reasons.)
When a federal judge blocked the Biden administration from enforcing a new rule in Texas that would require firearms dealers to run background checks on buyers at gun shows, that was Kacsmaryk, too.
When a conservative group wanted to challenge energy efficiency standards, they figured it’d be a good idea to file the case in Kacsmaryk’s district. When a conservative group wanted to challenge the administration’s protections for LGBTQ+ students, they did the same thing.
It’s as if Trump’s lawyers decided to offer the legal and political world another case study for why reforms are necessary to curtail judge shopping.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an BLN political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
Politics
Inside the DNC’s money problems
The Democratic National Committee has fallen far behind in the cash race.
After a brutal 2024 election and several months into rebuilding efforts under new party leadership, the DNC wildly trails the Republican National Committee by nearly every fundraising metric. By the end of June, the RNC had $80 million on hand, compared to $15 million for the DNC.
And the gap — nearly twice as large as it was at this stage in Trump’s first presidency — has only grown in recent months, a Blue Light News analysis of campaign finance data found, fueled by several distinct factors.
Major Democratic donors have withheld money this year amid skepticism about the party’s direction, while the small-dollar donors who have long been a source of strength are not growing nearly enough to make up the gap. And the party has quickly churned through what money it has raised in the first half of the year, including spending more than $15 million this year to pay off lingering expenses from Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign.
The DNC has less cash this summer than it did at any point in the last five years.
“I understand that donors want some kind of a reckoning,” said Steve Schale, a Florida-based Democratic strategist. “But I also think that the kind of state party building that I think [DNC Chair] Ken [Martin] wants to do at the DNC is really vital to our success. And so I hope people kind of get over themselves pretty quick.”
The fundraising troubles reflect ongoing questions about the DNC’s direction under Martin, who was elected earlier this year, and comes as the DNC has faced months of bitter infighting. Continued cash shortages could limit the party’s ability to rebuild for a new cycle. And the DNC’s money woes stand in particularly stark contrast to Republicans, who have leveraged President Donald Trump’s fundraising prowess to raise record sums.
“Chair Martin and the DNC have raised more than twice what he had raised at this point in 2017, and our success in cycles thereafter is well documented. Under Ken, grassroots support is strong,” DNC Executive Director Sam Cornale said in a statement. “It’s now time for everyone to get off the sidelines and join the fight. Rebuilding a party is hard — rebuilding relationships and programs take time and will require all hands on deck to meet this moment.”
The DNC’s money woes stand out among major Democratic groups, Blue Light News’s analysis found: Democrats’ House and Senate campaign arms are near financial parity with their Republican counterparts, and several major donors who have withheld funds from the DNC are still giving to those groups.
“Donors see the DNC as rudderless, off message and leaderless. Those are the buzzwords I keep hearing over and over again,” said one Democratic donor adviser, granted anonymity to speak candidly about donors’ approach.
The DNC, on the other hand, touts Democrats’ success in state and local elections this year as proof the party’s investments are paying off. The group also began transferring more funds to state parties this year, and argues it is better-positioned financially than it was at this time in 2017, when it also significantly trailed the Trump-powered RNC.
Some Democrats attribute the slowdown among donors primarily to the need for a break after 2024, and the challenges of being the party out of power. Large donors would rather bump elbows with high-profile figures like a president or House speaker; Democrats cannot put on those kinds of fundraising events right now. The DNC also struggled for cash during Trump’s first presidential term, and that did not stop Democrats from taking back the House in 2018, or winning the presidency in 2020.
Still, the longer the DNC struggles to build up cash, the harder it will be to close that gap heading into the 2026 midterms and beyond. And the fact that other party committees are not seeing the same financial struggles puts more responsibility on Martin and his team to figure out a way to right the ship.
“Obviously, the sooner the DNC and other Democratic-aligned groups can get investment, the better. It’s better for long-term programs on the ground, it’s better to communicate our message early on,” said Maria Cardona, a DNC member and Democratic strategist. “However, I think you’re going to see donors coming into those things because they are starting to see Democrats fighting back, and that’s what they want.”
Just 47 donors gave the maximum contribution to the DNC in the first half of the year, according to the Blue Light News analysis of the party’s filings with the Federal Election Commission. Over the same period in 2021, more than 130 donors gave a maximum contribution. (In 2017, when the party was similarly struggling with large donors, the figure was 37.)
That means dozens of the DNC’s biggest donors from early last cycle have not yet given to it this year — accounting for several million dollars the party group has missed out on this time.
Many of those biggest donors have continued to contribute to other Democratic groups and candidates, indicating they are still aligned with the party and willing to dole out cash — though often not as much, and not to the DNC.
In the run-up to the DNC chair election earlier this year, several large donors publicly preferred Ben Wikler, the Wisconsin Democratic Party chair, to Martin, who long served as the leader of Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party and also led the Association of State Democratic Parties.
“If Ken [Martin] really wanted to impress donors, he’d go do 20 or 30 salon events with donors and let them yell at him,” said the Democratic donor adviser. “If you take that on the chin, make some changes, then I think we could see some movement. But [he’s] not going to do that.”
With large donors lagging, the DNC has touted record grassroots fundraising from online donors. On ActBlue, the primary Democratic online fundraising platform, the group raised $33.8 million over the first six months of the year, up from $27 million over the same time in 2021.
But the total number of online donors was roughly the same in both periods — suggesting online donors are giving more than they were four years ago, but the group’s donor base has not expanded substantially.
Most DNC donors this year were contributors to Harris’ campaign or the DNC last cycle, according to the Blue Light News analysis. Another 14 percent of donors had no record of donations on ActBlue last cycle, suggesting the DNC is finding new small donors — but not nearly fast enough to make up for the drop-off among large donors.
In fact, the rate of online giving to the DNC has slowed in recent months. The party’s best online fundraising month was March, when it raised $8.6 million on ActBlue from 254,000 donors; in June, the party raised $4.1 million on the platform from 157,000 donors.
And reaching those online donors comes at a cost: The DNC has spent $5.7 million on online fundraising this year, according to its FEC filings. On Meta, which includes Facebook and Instagram, it is one of the largest political spenders this year, according to the platform’s data. The total spent on fundraising expenses so far is nearly as much as the DNC has sent to state parties this year.
Another set of major expenses also stands out for draining the DNC’s coffers: continuing to pay off expenses from Harris’ failed 2024 presidential bid.
Her campaign ended last year’s election with roughly $20 million in unpaid expenses, according to people familiar with its finances, although none of Harris’ campaign committees or affiliates ever officially reported debt. The DNC has spent $15.8 million total on coordinated expenses with the Harris campaign this year, including $1.3 million in June. A party spokesperson declined to comment on future campaign-related payments.
Elena Schneider contributed to this report.
Politics
Conservatives mock Comey over Taylor Swift video

Conservatives are mocking former FBI Director James Comey over a post he made on his Substack on Sunday in which he discussed his admiration for pop superstar Taylor Swift. The post features a video of Comey calling Swift “a truly inspirational public figure” and noting her recent appearance on NFL stars’ Jason and Travis Kelce’s…
Read More
Politics
Trump criticizes ‘fake news,’ Democrat, Zelensky in series of posts

President Trump late Sunday in a pair of posts on Truth Social ripped the media and a prominent Democrat for criticisms of his summit on Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump met with Putin in Alaska, and will meet Monday with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky as he seeks to find a way to end…
Read More
-
Uncategorized9 months ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show9 months ago
DOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics9 months ago
What 7 political experts will be watching at Tuesday’s debate
-
Politics9 months ago
How Republicans could foil Harris’ Supreme Court plans if she’s elected
-
Economy9 months ago
Fed moves to protect weakening job market with bold rate cut
-
Politics6 months ago
Former ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Politics9 months ago
RFK Jr.’s bid to take himself off swing state ballots may scramble mail-in voting
-
The Dictatorship6 months ago
Pete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse