The PBS News Hour’s eternal devotion to the Palestinian cause and anti-Israeli hostility post October 7 massacre was all too apparent on Friday night’s edition, as the News Hour found a new angle to promote the corrosive lie of Israeli forces as vengeful child-maimers. Reporting from Gaza, Nick Schifrin, who has contributed many of those Israel-hostile stories, had the gall to hail the country and World Cup team of Egypt without mentioning inconvenient facts about how the Egyptian government truly feels about the Palestinian cause.Co-anchor Geoff Bennett: ….we have a look at how the world's most popular sporting event is being marked in a place where celebration has become rare. As Nick Schifrin reports with producer Shams Odeh, the tournament has helped Palestinians in Gaza find moments of connection and hope.Schifrin tugged heartstrings from the start.Nick Schifrin: Thousands of miles from soccer's biggest stage is a landscape of crushed concrete, where children play on the remnants of war, and one child's dream is to sit atop the soccer world and one day win the World Cup. Ten-year-old Mohammed Shaaban might have lost both legs and his right hand in an Israeli airstrike, but not his ability to dribble or love for soccer. Inside the family's canvas home, his mom is his teammate, every pass proof the war has not claimed everything.Then he noted how Palestinians were getting hope through Egypt’s performance, and the country’s supposed support for the Palestinian cause.PBS's Nick Schifrin in Gaza: "...the beautiful game offered a brief escape...especially when their Arab neighbor Egypt played....a shared celebration, a reminder there is still a wide world beyond the rubble...Egypt publicly dedicated its victories to Palestinians." pic.twitter.com/Hg7MLjo9tA— Clay Waters

ABC via SnapStream No one on the cast of ABC News’s The View had ever served in the military, nor were they experts in hormone therapy. Nevertheless, that didn’t stop them from spouting off and decrying Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s plan to aid the health of some male solders with testosterone treatments. Co-host Sara Haines was particularly aggrieved as she suggested the testosterone would turn solders into blind raging beasts. But her cognitive dissonance was exposed when she demanded that transgenders be allowed in the military.Flaunting how shallow her knowledge pool was on the issue, Haines opened her comments with a penis joke:All this made me think about in testing T-levels is, what are they doing next? Measuring penis size? Like, this feels like the man-o-sphere is in charge of the military. It’s the stupidest thing I've ever heard.Haines seemed to be under the impression - or perhaps she just wanted to leave their gullible audience with the impression - that Hegseth’s plan was to just go around and slap syringes of testosterone into solders willy-nilly.According to her, she was fearful that the soldiers would be getting massive “busts of testosterone” randomly and would be a grave danger to the people around them. Her evidence? A viral video of a bison charging a man and tossing him in the air (Click “expand”):HAINES: And by the way, bursts of testosterone don't end well for anyone. I'm going to show you a little video that I don't know if you saw. Take a look.[Cuts to video of angry bison charging old man and tossing him into the air]ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Oh, no.HAINES: So this poor man, by the way, is okay. He's --FARAH GRIFFIN: Oh, my god.HAINES: He was hospitalized, he is recovering but literally they link it to mating season and a burst in testosterone. The View's Sara Haines decries Hegseth's plan for increasing testosterone in the military.She suggests they're going to get massive one-dose shots that will make them rage and hurt people. She later advocates for transgenders in the military... who take testosterone. pic.twitter.com/OXMcP8Kd5r— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) July 17, 2026 “The bison had a burst of testosterone. Like, the idea that you’re going to go from level - T-levels to it works out great, I think this guy begs to differ,” she argued.Obviously, such hormone treatment would be carefully administered through Tricare, the military’s healthcare system or other medical professionals and it would only be for service members who needed it.While the cast was whining about the military focusing on trivial things like the “weight” of solders, Haines exposed her cognitive dissonance.According to her, those confused about their “gender identity” shouldn’t be barred from serving:I think if people are willing to put their lives on the line. That is the ultimate sacrifice that I will admit that I could not do. If someone comes in and says I will fight for this country, we should be letting them fight for this country.How would that work for the women who think they’re men and take testosterone, Sara? Wouldn’t they be getting “bursts of testosterone” and attacking everyone around them?And Sara, anyone should be allowed in the military? Because there’s a law banning people with mental disabilities from enlisting because it’s exploitative. Should people in wheelchairs be allowed to be fighter pilots? (HINT: pilots control flight some movements with their feet)With further ridiculousness, the show’s purported Republicans whined about Hegseth caring about service members’ weight and making sure they’re in literal fighting shape:NAVARRO: And in the middle of this war, you've got the Secretary of Defense focused on who's chubby in the military, the facial hair, who's got a beard in the military, and now testosterone levels.(…)FARAH GRIFFIN: Like, we should not deduce people to their height, weight, their T-level…Again, none of them have served in anything more than themselves at either a buffet or with this show.The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read:ABC’s The ViewJuly 17, 202611:05:19 a.m. Eastern(…)SARA HAINES: All this made me think about in testing T-levels is, what are they doing next? Measuring penis size? Like, this feels like the man-o-sphere is in charge of the military. It’s the stupidest thing I've ever heard.And by the way, bursts of testosterone don't end well for anyone. I'm going to show you a little video that I don't know if you saw. Take a look.[Cuts to video of angry bison charging old man and tossing him into the air]ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: Oh, no.HAINES: So this poor man, by the way, is okay. He's --JOY BEHAR: That's my ex-husband!FARAH GRIFFIN: Oh, my god.HAINES: He was hospitalized, he is recovering but literally they link it to mating season and a burst in testosterone.ANA NAVARRO: The bison or the man?HAINES: The bison.[Laughter]The bison had a burst of testosterone. Like, the idea that you’re going to go from level - T-levels to it works out great, I think this guy begs to differ.(…)11:08:04 a.m. EasternANA NAVARRO: And in the middle of this war, you've got the Secretary of Defense focused on who's chubby in the military, the facial hair, who's got a beard in the military, and now testosterone levels.(…)11:08:57 a.m. EasternFARAH GRIFFIN: Like, we should not deduce people to their height, weight, their T-level, some of the most valiant brave warriors --HAINES: Their gender identity!FARAH GRIFFIN: Their gender.[Crosstalk]HAINES: I think if people are willing to put their lives on the line. That is the ultimate sacrifice that I will admit that I could not do. If someone comes in and says I will fight for this country, we should be letting them fight for this country.(…)

CBS’s Margaret Brennan brought Border Czar Tom Homan on to Face the Nation to discuss the recent ICE shootings, among other matters. And as is often the case, Brennan got schooled.Watch as Homan shuts Brennan down over vehicle markings, lights, and agent identification: WATCH: Tom Homan shuts down Margaret Brennan over ICE vehicle stopsTOM HOMAN: My concern is I think a lot of the rhetoric that you see every day, especially in sanctuary cities and at these protests that resist. Members of Congress saying ICE isn't a real law enforcement… pic.twitter.com/yfzLleZMAK— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 19, 2026 TOM HOMAN: My concern is I think a lot of the rhetoric that you see every day, especially in sanctuary cities and at these protests that resist. Members of Congress saying ICE isn't a real law enforcement agency. I think that – I actually think that emboldens some people to say, I'm not going to comply with ICE. And I think no matter what people think of ICE, right, no matter what you think of immigration law, you should always comply with law enforcement.MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes. Yes. But in the shootings in both Houston and Maine, the people who were killed were not the intended targets. Have you caught the people you were actually looking for?HOMAN: One of them I believe we did. But, you know, that happens in law enforcement all the time. I mean we're working, you know, you get leads on individuals and you say, OK, well this subject lives at this house, he drives this car. And when that subject leaves the house, you know, 6:00 in the morning, and someone gets in that car from that house, you know, they assume, OK, this guys and they'll do a vehicle stop. And depending on when they make that stop and that person complies, either they're going to be arrested or released. That's the way it's supposed to be.So, you know, law enforcement deals with misidentity every day across the country, not just ICE, every law enforcement agency. I was a cop. I know – I know that happens.BRENNAN: Yes. But these were fatal shootings, of course, in Houston and in Maine. And in Houston, it was an unmarked car. So, when you're saying, don't resist, these individuals who were chasing the man who died, they didn't have markings on that vehicle that would allow for him to know that they were ICE. It just looked like a car coming after them in the videos.HOMAN: No. They have emergency lights. Officers have insignia. So, when they get out of that car and approach the car, you can clearly see they're law enforcement officers.Brennan attempted to build a narrative of agent violence beforehand by lumping the illegal alien getting run over by a truck while fleeing ICE detention with the shootings in Texas and Maine. Brennan then tries to impugn the agency by mentioning that the deceased were not the initial targets of the agents in question. Homan responds by noting that, contrary to narrative, ICE is legitimate law enforcement. And when Brennan goes in on lights and agent identification, Homan calmly points out that this is clearly not the case. Brennan presses on but Homan locks in.Brennan presses with body-worn cameras, and is reminded by Homan that they were held up by the Democrat-led DHS shutdown. Finally, Brennan tries to get Homan on ICE at voting centers, with Homan deferring to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin. There appears to be little rhyme or reason to this interview except to cast border enforcement, any border enforcement, in a negative light. The interview is proof evident that all the talk of CBS suddenly being Newsmax is just that. Talk.Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview as aired on CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday, July 19th, 2026:MARGARET BRENNAN: And we're back with President Trump's border czar, Tom Homan. Welcome back to Face the Nation.TOM HOMAN: Thanks for having me.BRENNAN: Mr. Homan, we saw that two immigrants were shot in the span of a week. There was that one in Maine that was fatal just days after another one in Houston. We also saw that man fleeing agents in Florida, who then was struck and killed by a tractor-trailer.I know you've been trying to keep the department out of the headlines ever since that streak in Minnesota that was deadly. How do you respond to those who say, what's happening now looks like very little has changed?HOMAN: Well, you know, first of all, we'll wait and see what the investigations – how they play out, right. Because, you know, I don't want to get ahead of an investigation on who's at fault, what exactly happened because we all know, when these investigations happen, there's going to be cell phone video, there may be city cameras, and, of course, then you got witness statements and affidavits from the officer and witnesses. So, we've got to let the investigations play out. So I don't really want to comment on the investigations themselves.But, you know, I think, you know, Markwayne Mullin, you know, took some action in concern of the safety of the agents and how we do operations and that's why he did that, you know, that pause on enforcement on vehicle stops.But, you know, I – my concern is – I've never – I've done this since 1984. My concern is I think a lot of the rhetoric that you see every day, especially in sanctuary cities and at these protests that resist. Members of Congress saying ICE isn't a real law enforcement agency. I think that – I actually think that emboldens some people to say, I'm not going to comply with ICE. And I think no matter what people think of ICE, right, no matter what you think of immigration law, you should always comply with law enforcement.BRENNAN: Yes. Yes. But in the shootings in both Houston and Maine, the people who were killed were not the intended targets. Have you caught the people you were actually looking for?HOMAN: One of them I believe we did. But, you know, that happens in law enforcement all the time. I mean we're working, you know, you get leads on individuals and you say, OK, well this subject lives at this house, he drives this car. And when that subject leaves the house, you know, 6:00 in the morning, and someone gets in that car from that house, you know, they assume, OK, this guys and they'll do a vehicle stop. And depending on when they make that stop and that person complies, either they're going to be arrested or released. That's the way it's supposed to be. So, you know, law enforcement deals with misidentity every day across the country, not just ICE, every law enforcement agency. I was a cop. I know – I know that happens.BRENNAN: Yes. But these were fatal shootings, of course, in Houston and in Maine. And in Houston, it was an unmarked car. So, when you're saying, don't resist, these individuals who were chasing the man who died, they didn't have markings on that vehicle that would allow for him to know that they were ICE. It just looked like a car coming after them in the videos.HOMAN: No. They have emergency lights. Officers have insignia. So, when they get out of that car and approach the car, you can clearly see they're law enforcement officers. They can't – this is – these people –BRENNAN: Well, in the video that has been public, it's not a marked car.HOMAN: These people – I'm not saying it's a marked car, but they have emergency lights and sirens. So, when they pull someone over, they're going to activate their emergency lights. A lot of – a lot of police departments – I'm in New York City right now. A lot of NYPD officers are driving unmarked vehicles. And that helps them find people that don't want to be found, right?So, you know, but bottom line is, we'll see when the investigation plays out, but they'd be alive today if they simply complied with a vehicle stopped by federal law enforcement. Just comply.BRENNAN: Yes.HOMAN: You can – if you don't think you're being treated right and had no reason to stop you, then there's avenues to take them to court. Just sue. Get a lawyer and argue in court.BRENNAN: Well, the family of the man in Houston said they – he thought he was being robbed because it was an unmarked vehicle. Not that it was law enforcement at all.HOMAN: They had emergency lights. They activate emergency lights. Blue lights. You know – you know, in my vehicle I drive where I'm with my security detail we have emergency lights.BRENNAN: You've seen that on video because we haven't?HOMAN: Seen what on video, ma'am?BRENNAN: That there were lights. Because in the videos that we've seen, there aren't. And because there weren't body cameras, it is hard to substantiate some of what you are saying.HOMAN: OK. OK. Well, I have not seen the videos.BRENNAN: OK.HOMAN: But I'm saying, our vehicles are equipped with emergency lights. Now, if they didn't activate the lights, again, I haven't seen that video. If they didn't activate the lights, then there's an issue there, right?BRENNAN: OK.HOMAN: But I'm saying, they are equipped with lights. So, let me just caveat that. They should have been equipped with lights and sirens. So, I do not know specifically if they activated those lights.BRENNAN: OK.HOMAN: But as far as the cameras, Margaret, you know, everybody in ICE would have a camera now if the government wasn't shut down by Democratic members of Congress. There was money in that bill that they held up.BRENNAN: Yes.HOMAN: I think it was $120 million to equip all ICE officers with cameras. But because the government shut down we're behind on that.BRENNAN: But they got $20 million in April.HOMAN: But the cameras have been purchased.BRENNAN: Uh-huh.HOMAN: But it wasn't enough. $20 million may have bought some cameras, but it doesn't buy the storage. It doesn't buy the resources we need for the thousands of FOIA requests we're going to get. There has to be storage capability to hold these videos for a long time.BRENNAN: Y Es.HOMAN: So, it didn't fund everything. But now we have the funding after reconciliation. The cameras have been purchased. Right now they're training the trainer and deploying the cameras nationwide.BRENNAN: Do you think it was a mistake for the Trump administration to have proposed the body cam expansion at the beginning of the term? Because I know you have advocated for body cameras and now you're playing catch-up, right?HOMAN: I think body – yes, I think body cameras are the way to go. I think body cameras let the American people know what that officer sees when he takes that action.BRENNAN: When will everyone get one?HOMAN: You know, you can have a cell phone camera from a witness on the side, you can have, you know, city cameras or whatever, but I want the American people to see what that officer sees when he makes – when he takes – when he makes the decision and takes action.BRENNAN: Yes.HOMAN: I think the American people need to see what that officer sees and hears.BRENNAN: Yes.HOMAN: I think it's important.BRENNAN: Yes.HOMAN: And if you look at the data, body cameras actually exonerate agents more than they, you know, provide evidence of wrongdoing.BRENNAN: Yes. And it would certainly help with reporting and public knowledge. Let me ask you about something else. The DHS secretary has said they went through public records and identified 250,000 non-citizens in four states, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Nevada. I know those states don't share their voter rolls, so it looks like they're just pulling this from public information. For those states, are you planning operations before November and you do acknowledge that it would be illegal to have federal agents at election locations?HOMAN: You know – you know that's a question of DHS. I'm not in the loop on that. I'm not familiar with the information that DHS just released.BRENNAN: OK.HOMAN: I'm not in the loop on that. I'm the White House border czar. So, they'd be a question for Markwayne Mullin. I'm not in the loop on that.BRENNAN: OK. All right. Mr. Homan, thank you for your time this morning. We'll leave it there.HOMAN: Good seeing you, Margaret.BRENNAN: We'll be back in a moment.

On Thursday night President Trump addressed the Nation from The White House, focusing on election interference and announcing the release of documents that speak to the matter, and as has been pointed out, the major broadcast networks along with CNN, did not carry the speech. That led to an interesting situation on Friday's edition of CNN's The Situation Room, where Democrat strategist James Carville ripped those, including CNN, who chose not to carry the speech, although he had an ulterior motive for speaking out. Host Wolf Blitzer began the segment with a clip from California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose astute analysis of Trump's speech was, "He wants to rig the election in 2026. He knows he's going to lose. He needs to rig the election before one vote was cast. That's what that whole thing was about."Blitzer then brough on Carville, who may have shocked viewers at first. BLITZER: How would you advise members of your Democratic Party to handle President Trump's speech last night and rebut the work of his administration as we get into the full swing of the midterm election season, the midterm elections coming up in November?CARVILLE: I would advise them to attack CNN, attack ABC, attack NBC, attack MS NOW, because they didn't air the speech.What? Was this James Carville? His next sentence proved it was indeed.CARVILLE: And I think the President of the United States acting loonier than a tune is newsworthy. I don't think we should have hidden that from the American people. I think there should have been blanket coverage of it. He's literally off his rocker. And there's no other way to describe this.Several questions come to mind, that veteran journalist Blitzer could have followed up with, but the best he could come up with, was this softball.BLITZER: So, you think we should have given him more publicity? Is that what you're saying?CARVILLE: I'm absolutely saying that. I think the decision not to air that speech by CNN and other networks is not being what's really newsworthy. And this guy, he's gone. He was advised by his own staff in a story that I read, I think it was in Daily Beast and Politico, that don't be crazy. Carville took out of context what the Politico story actually addressed. In talking about trying to get Trump not to dwell on the 2020 election, and quoting an unnamed source, the story noted, “It was as on the rails as possible,” said a White House official, granted anonymity to discuss internal thinking. “The senior team just talked and prepped him. I think they explained the way to be taken seriously is not to be crazy.”Far from noting the misrepresentation, Blitzer's two word response, before attempting to defend CNN's edited coverage of the speech was simply pathetic.BLITZER: Interesting analysis. We did air a lot of the newsy excerpts from the speech, and then we had full analysis and fact-checking going on.In fact CNN aired The Source with Kaitlin Collins while Trump spoke, and brought on John King to trash the speech when it was over. Carville wasn't finished. Blitzer asked him to respond to a clip from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), speaking prior to the speech, about the speech, but he went right back on the attack against Trump.  BLITZER: So, now post-speech, James, what's your view of the leader Schumer's assessment?CARVILLE: I think he knows he's going to lose.... And, of course, he knows he's going to lose, but he couldn't execute. What he was trying to do, he couldn't execute it....He's literally crazy. Carville then took aim at the networks who did not air the full speech.CARVILLE: I think the mistake was made by the networks to not show it in its entirety so people could see him in full and understand just how far this man has gone down the road to insanity. I would say there was nothing normal about that. And you can do it with clips and you can get people on, but there's nothing like people sitting there watching the whole thing to tell them what's really going on.James Carville is James Carville, we know what political side he's on. The more disturbing aspect of this interview is that long time veteran journalist Wolf Blitzer just sat there, with no pushback on any of Carville's outrageous claims. It certainly looked like we know what side Blitzer is on as well. This is CNN! 

ABC’s Jon Karl interviewed Real Time host Bill Maher on occasion of his winning the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. The chat was convivial and even gleeful when Maher was critical of President Donald Trump. But things shifted when it came to the subject of ascendant socialism within the Democratic Party and the 2028 election.The interview kicked off with the prize itself, and with astonishment that attendance to the event was bipartisan. The subject quickly shifted to Karl’s favorite, Trump: reaction to Maher winning the Twain Prize, and to Maher’s dinner at The White House. Karl then moves to Maher’s interview with Vice President JD Vance wherein they discussed election integrity. Watch as Maher credits Vance for coming on, and then denounces the ascendancy of the socialist wing of the Democratic Party: WATCH: Bill Maher repeatedly denounces the rising socialist wing of the Democrat Party as ABC's Jon Karl tries to change the subject. In this case, Karl shifts to the Jay Clayton hearing and the 2020 electionBILL MAHER: No, that's what I love about those Republicans. The first… pic.twitter.com/p4iVjWJivn— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 19, 2026 BILL MAHER: No, that's what I love about those Republicans. The first thing I said to him is, it's so odd, isn't it, that I didn't vote for you, and yet you guys come to the show and take your beating like a man. The Democrats don't come, and yet they got my vote. It's just odd, isn't it?JON KARL: Yeah, why is that? So what is that all about? I mean, by the way, you get some Democrats, but...MAHER: Democrats are cowardly, they're cowardly. Their party is being taken over now by, you know, every day I hear about a new very radical- I feel very good about, like, 10-whenever years ago, like, I did lose fans because, you know, I wasn't gonna go along with some of this crazy stuff on the left, too. I didn't change really on what I thought about the right, but just, I can't sit and just not notice stuff, which people seem to wanna do because it's all about my team or your team. But yeah, there's some crazy stuff, you know, when we're cheering for the Intifada, I gotta cut, I'm out.KARL: Well, I don't know if you saw it, Jay Clayton is nominated to be the head Director of National Intelligence…Karl didn’t just try to move Maher a bit on his criticism of Democrats. He changed the subject entirely- pivoting to DNI nominee Jay Clayton and the 2020 presidential election. Karl then engages Maher on his openness to Vance. Instead of engaging Maher, Karl shifts again: WATCH: Bill Maher states he'd vote for JD Vance over a socialist Democrat in 2028, Jon Karl diverts the conversation back to TrumpJON KARL: You told JD Vance you're open, your vote is up for grabs.BILL MAHER: Yes, my vote is in play because it can't be Trump running, so. I'm… pic.twitter.com/vYCwDG8oy1— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 19, 2026 KARL: You told JD Vance you're open, your vote is up for grabs.MAHER: Yes, my vote is in play because it can't be Trump running, so. I'm not living in communist America. I mean, I know that the talking point is, it's not communism, it's socialism. Okay. I've read the quotes from the DSA.KARL: Yeah.MAHER: -- platform from their own mouths. Don't tell me I'm now seeing what I am seeing. And DSA, again, they say things like, you know, takeover of key industries, government take -- that's communism. You know, there is a definition.KARL: By the way, Trump's doing that, too.Karl didn’t show any interest in exploring why Maher is so repelled by the Democrat socialists- whether their hostility to the Constitution, to private property rights, free speech, or Israel. Karl simply nodded and took the easiest offramp: “But Trump.”After consoling themselves with more Trump criticism, Karl asks about the midterms. And although Maher expressed support for the Democrats, he pivoted back to Vance in 2028: WATCH: Despite generally backing the Democrats in the midterms, Bill Maher reiterates he'd back JD Vance over a DSA Dem in 2028. KARL: So you want to see Democrats win in the midterms?MAHER: Absolutely, and they will, because it will still be a referendum on Trump. So I think… pic.twitter.com/OYTrhp81CX— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) July 19, 2026 JON KARL: So you want to see Democrats win in the midterms?BILL MAHER: Absolutely, and they will, because it will still be a referendum on Trump. So I think the Democrats will do very well in the midterms. 2028 is a different story because by then, this wing of the party, this new wing with all the energy, and it's not just a few people anymore. I read, every day I read about a new person in some Colorado and Wisconsin, somebody who is saying some variation of not defund the police- abolish the police. No prisons, no police, like what world do they think we could possibly live in under these conditions? It's just a level of nutty that I'm so glad that whenever it was I was like no, I'm not going along because this is where it ends.KARL: Could you see yourself voting for JD Vance?MAHER: Yes. if this is the Democratic side, yes.Here again, Karl shows no interest in exploring the why behind Maher’s response. In this case, he pivots to whether Maher has interviewed any of the potential 2028 candidates and whether he prefers any particular one. Maher demurs, and the on-air portion of the interview comes to an end.Throughout the interview Maher, a reliable liberal, sounded the alarm on the dangers of the socialist ascendancy with the Democratic Party. Unfortunately for Maher, Karl was only interested in retreating to the safe space of Trump-bashing. I hope I’m wrong, but this sure looks like a foreshadowing of what 2028 coverage will look like. Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview as aired on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, July 19th, 2026:JONATHAN KARL: Comedian and talk show host Bill Maher has shown a willingness to call out hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle. He was recently awarded the nation's highest honor for comedy, the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor, from The Kennedy Center. I talked with Maher this week at his home in Los Angeles. Well, congratulations on winning the Mark Twain Award.BILL MAHER: Thank you.KARL: It seems like it's like the Nobel Prize for comedy.MAHER: There aren't a lot of awards for comedy and it's pretty overlooked, like in movies. But for- for what I do it's yes, the award, I think, to get. And again, there's not many for this particular brand of show business, so I was very grateful.KARL: Now, the White House reaction to the news that you were getting this award was really something. I mean -- I want to read it exactly. Karoline Levitt, the Press Secretary, "This is fake news. Bill Maher is not getting this reward." Steve Cheung, the Comms Director, "literally fake news." What was going on with that?MAHER: I don't know, but it was lovely to see him at the awards.KARL: I mean, it's not the first time --MAHER: Actually, there were a lot of Trump people at, you know, people in the administration. Pam Bondi came, you know, and I'm glad. But it was not a conservative crowd. It was- it was a mixed crowd. And they both liked me. So to me, that was like, there, boom. That's what I've been doing.KARL: But what do you think was going on? Because he controlled -- he's the chairman of the Kennedy Center, it was the board that chose you --MAHER: He was just mad at me because I went to his house for dinner with no guarantee that I would leave -- guarantee? It was never in the cards that I was ever going to come over to their -- his side. But you know, it was set up as rather than just screaming at each other, all these insults... You know, the first thing I did that you saw on the special, the page that he signed with the 56 different things he's called me. I love stuff like that. You know, it's better to just talk and go through this. But, you know, I mean, those people, they really have no argument for not doing it.KARL: Maher faced backlash after he talked about that March 2025 dinner at The White House on His HBO Show Real Time. MAHER: So meet up in person. Maybe it'll be different. Spoiler alert, it was.MAHER: I reported honestly that it- no, it wasn't a terrible experience at all. From a guy who has done some terrible things.KARL: Right, right. And he -- and then you kept on doing what you do on your show. You didn't change, you didn't become, you didn't become MAGA.MAHER: Thank you for noticing, Jon, because that's what the haters pretend didn't happen.KARL: I mean it did and then he starts, I think that some of his attacks on you after the dinner are harsher than the ones that were before the dinner.MAHER: Yes, because now he feels betrayed, which is silly because there was never a deal. It was only set up as, instead of shouting at each other, talk to each other.KARL: In Maher’s Club Random podcast studio, he has a framed list of all the ways Trump has insulted him, a list that he had the president sign. MAHER: Just the idea -- this many different ways, off the top of his head, over years!...KARL: And that list of 56, or whatever it is, insults. It would have to be longer now.MAHER: Exactly. There's an addendum. And it's available for $9.99. BillMaher.com. It’s on my website.KARL: Maher recently had Vice President JD Vance as a guest on Real Time. MAHER: Here's my deal breaker for your side, okay?JD VANCE: Okay.MAHER: Under Trump, you guys have two outcomes than an election can be. Either we win or they cheated…MAHER: This stuff that's going on now, as I said to the vice president, this [BLEEP] has to stop.KARL: Yeah. Yeah, you were specifically talking about this, like the sore loser syndrome. It's, the election is only, I won or you cheated, which is -- perfectly summarizes the way Trump is, has done this.MAHER: Thank you. Exactly, there's only two outcomes. I won, you cheated.KARL: And you, you, you pushed JD Vance on this, he did not ...MAHER: No, that's what I love about those Republicans. The first thing I said to him is, it's so odd, isn't it, that I didn't vote for you, and yet you guys come to the show and take your beating like a man. The Democrats don't come, and yet they got my vote. It's just odd, isn't it?KARL: Yeah, why is that? So what is that all about? I mean, by the way, you get some Democrats, but...MAHER: Democrats are cowardly, they're cowardly. Their party is being taken over now by, you know, every day I hear about a new very radical- I feel very good about, like, 10-whenever years ago, like, I did lose fans because, you know, I wasn't gonna go along with some of this crazy stuff on the left, too. I didn't change really on what I thought about the right, but just, I can't sit and just not notice stuff, which people seem to wanna do because it's all about my team or your team. But yeah, there's some crazy stuff, you know, when we're cheering for the Intifada, I gotta cut, I'm out.KARL: Well, I don't know if you saw it, Jay Clayton is nominated to be the head Director of National Intelligence, had a hearing, just had a hearing --MAHER: No, I’m on vacation…KARL: And he was asked, who won the 2020 election? Did Joe Biden win the 2020 election? And he can not answer. Now, Jay Clayton is a very serious guy with serious credentials, serious lawyer, former prosecutor, and he can't say who won the 2020 election.MAHER: Neither could Vice President Vance...KARL: On your show.MAHER: Yeah. They can't because they know he's watching. They know where their bread is buttered. What's important to JD Vance who, by the way, we had a good time. I had a good time with him, too. You know, these are people. I always say it. You know, everybody's a monster until you talk to them. You can disagree with them a lot. But, you know, he has to do that. Trump is watching. And there's a kind of a winking thing with those kind of guys. You know, it's like, you know he's crazy. I know he is crazy. I know you're saying this because you have to because he's watching. You know I know.KARL: Yeah, yeah.MAHER: And let's just not, like, pretend this is the end of the world because this is just what the world is. Now let's move on to something substantive.KARL: But it is a problem if you have an entire political party, an entire movement that doesn't recognize the legitimacy of elections.MAHER: Of course, it's been my big issue. From the beginning, before he was elected even the first time.KARL: You told JD Vance you're open, your vote is up for grabs.MAHER: Yes, my vote is in play because it can't be Trump running, so. I'm not living in communist America. I mean, I know that the talking point is, it's not communism, it's socialism. Okay. I've read the quotes from the DSA.KARL: Yeah.MAHER: -- platform from their own mouths. Don't tell me I'm now seeing what I am seeing. And DSA, again, they say things like, you know, takeover of key industries, government take -- that's communism. You know, there is a definition.KARL: By the way, Trump's doing that, too.MAHER: Of course. Yes.KARL: And, and, and, and to a degree that we haven't seen any other president, Democrat or Republican, do.MAHER: No -- that's crazy, too.KARL: He's got a piece of Intel.MAHER: Right.[CROSSTALK]KARL: -- a piece of the AI companies.MAHER: He treats everything like it's a real estate deal, or, I don't know, he's an agent or something and he always wants 10 or 15 percent.KARL: So you want to see Democrats win in the midterms?MAHER: Absolutely, and they will, because it will still be a referendum on Trump. So I think the Democrats will do very well in the midterms. 2028 is a different story because by then, this wing of the party, this new wing with all the energy, and it's not just a few people anymore. I read, every day I read about a new person in some Colorado and Wisconsin, somebody who is saying some variation of not defund the police- abolish the police. No prisons, no police, like what world do they think we could possibly live in under these conditions? It's just a level of nutty that I'm so glad that whenever it was I was like no, I'm not going along because this is where it ends.KARL: Could you see yourself voting for JD Vance?MAHER: Yes. if this is the Democratic side, yes.KARL: Now, you have interviewed several of the possible Democratic candidates for 2028. How do you assess? Who do you like?MAHER: Oh, I'm not going to... ruin future guests by telling you that, Jon? How ridiculous. They're all great.KARL: Especially the ones you haven't talked to yet. See, they got to come on the show.MAHER: I hope we can have an eight-person presidency next time because I can't pick between this crop of geniuses.No, there's some very talented people. And my problem is, like I told you, the people, a lot of people on the left won't come. Everybody on the right comes.KARL: All right. Our thanks to Bill Maher.