Democrats are in full damage-control mode over Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner, even as fresh allegations of unsettling behavior toward women continue to swirl. Meanwhile, CNN This Morning host Cornish is pushing an alternative to the politically-wounded Platner. Cornish sounded that theme from her opening words in Friday's Group Chat segment on the Maine race: "The question this morning for Democrats: is it too late to cut bait?" Or shuck an oyster? On Wednesday, Platner met with a number of Democratic senators to discuss the situation, and Cornish played clips of a number of them commenting after the meeting. Tina Smith of Minnesota managed to keep a straight face in response to CNN reporter Manu Raju's question as to whether they asked Platner whether there were any more shoes to drop: "No, we didn't talk about that. The main thing we talked about was, really, what his, why it is that he's been connecting so much with Maine voters."  Riiight! Forget all those scandals, Graham. Just tell us about how great you are! Smith's patently implausible denial was flatly contradicted by this report in The Wall Street Journal, "Senators Privately Ask Platner Whether New Allegations Will Emerge": "Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders asked Platner if any additional allegations would emerge against the embattled Democratic candidate, according to people familiar with the discussion. Platner said there weren’t any." Speaking of Sanders, in a clip Cornish played of his interview with Kaitlin Collins, Bernie played up Platner's military record: "This guy served four tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. He went through some very bloody and horrible situations. He has acknowledged that he came back with PTSD." Bernie Sanders, born-again military fanboy--who knew? But back to Audie and her theme o' the day: out with Platner, in with Maine Governor Janet Mills. Early in the segment, Cornish noted Mills' recent comments to the Portland Press Herald: "People have the impression that I withdrew or dropped out, but I simply suspended active campaigning. I'm still on the ballot." Underlined Cornish: "So, there is another option." Later, when panelist Noel King [like Cornish, an NPR veteran] suggested Democrats' "only option" was to stick with Platner and "keep it going," Cornish pushed back forcefully: "It's not the only option! The other option is Janet Mills. Come on. It could be!"   Dems Whistle Past Platner Graveyard as CNN's Cornish Pushes Janet Mills Option pic.twitter.com/IsCoyy6r6O — Mark Finkelstein (@markfinkelstein) June 5, 2026   The episode perfectly captures the Democrats' and friendly media's awkward position. They want to embrace Platner's "I was a bad guy who saw the light" redemption story — complete with military service and PTSD — yet can't ignore the fresh baggage threatening a key Senate race against incumbent Susan Collins.  Hence the public support for Platner mixed with private jitters and not-so-subtle floating of Mills as a Plan B. Interestingly, both New York Senators, Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, uttered the same carefully calculated line, expressing confidence that "We [Democrats] will win Maine." Missing: any mention of Platner. Sounds like they might be on Team Cornish-for-Mills! Here's the transcript. Click "expand" to read: CNN This Morning 6/5/26 6:04 am EDT AUDIE CORNISH: So the question this morning for Democrats: is it too late to cut bait? KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: I'm very optimistic we're gonna win Maine. MANU RAJU: Did you talk about any of the shoes to drop that could come out in this race? Or, or, or did he try to get ahead on any of that? TINA SMITH: No, we didn't talk about that. The main thing we talked about was, really, what his, why it is that he's been connecting so much with, with Maine voters.  PETER WELCH: He's accepting the burden that he's gotta give his explanation of that to Maine voters, and they decide. KAITLIN COLLINS: Are you worried about anything else coming out about him? BERNIE SANDERS: I don't know. All I can say is, look, I'm sure he's not a saint. And by the way, let's not forget, he has acknowledged, this guy served four tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. He went through some very bloody and horrible situations. He has acknowledged that he came back with PTSD. CORNISH: Joining me now in the group chat, Elliot Williams, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Carine Hajjar, Washington Post editorial board member, and Noel King, co-host and editorial director of the "Today, Explained" podcast. Thank you guys for being here. So one of the things I'm looking at is response, response on the left, response from Democrats. The other thing I'm looking at is, what next? Because this election is going to happen in a few days, and earlier this week, Governor Janet Mills told the Portland Press earlier that, quote, "People have the impression that I withdrew or dropped out, but I simply suspended active campaigning. I'm still on the ballot." So there is another option.  . . .  Does it matter if the problematic part is the story? Meaning, his whole entire spiel has been, "I was a bad guy, I saw the light, and you want more guys like me seeing the light, Democrats." And, you know what I mean? The, the sort of like, I could have been in the Manosphere, but look, I'm here, running as a Democrat. And what do Democrats do with that story that they've been telling? NOEL KING: Keep it going, I think, is the only option at this point. CORNISH:  It's not the only option! The other option is Janet Mills. Come on. It could be!

On Thursday night, both ABC’s World News Tonight and NBC Nightly News framed the news of former National Security Advisor John Bolton's guilty plea on charges related to mishandling classified documents as an example of successful legal retribution against President Trump’s perceived enemies. NBC even failed to mention how the investigation into Bolton began under the Biden Administration's control of the Department of Justice. ABC anchor David Muir called Bolton one of Trump’s “harshest critics” before he turned it over to chief justice correspondent Pierre Thomas, who claimed “retribution”: He was a prime target of President Trump's retribution campaign. And tonight, sources tell ABC News Trump's former National Security Adviser, John Bolton, is planning to plead guilty to mishandling classified information.   MAKE IT MAKE SENSE: @ABCWorldNews claims Bolton investigation started during the Biden admin and handled by career AUSAs is tRuMp rEtRiBuTiOn11!!11!1 DAVID MUIR: Tonight, sources now telling ABC News that President Trump's former National Security Adviser and one of his harshest… pic.twitter.com/RfhUelRTIx — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) June 5, 2026   He then gave more details on Bolton’s indictment after he played a clip of Trump calling Bolton a “sleazebag”:   Bolton was indicted on 18 counts in October of 2025, accused of sharing classified information with members of his family in the course of writing a book. His home, raided by the FBI.  Tonight, sources tell us Bolton will plead guilty to one count of illegal retention of national security information and will acknowledge he stored sensitive information in his personal diaries. He's agreed to pay a fine of $2.25 million and could face up to five years in prison. Thomas returned to note Bolton “has been an unsparing critic of the President,” and played a soundbite from 2020 where Bolton said Trump was “unfit for office.” At the end of the report, Thomas finally mentioned that the case against Bolton began during the Biden DOJ by career prosecutors, not the conservative retribution type: The investigation into Bolton began during the Biden administration. The case against him was brought by career DOJ prosecutors, not newly appointed allies of the president.   On Thursday's NBC Nightly News, John Bolton's guilty plea in his classified documents case was the lead story of the night, as the show leaned heavily into the idea of the case as retribution. However, there was no mention of the Bolton investigation's start in the Biden DOJ. pic.twitter.com/uMdhfzSVyA — Nick (@nspin310) June 5, 2026   On NBC Nightly News, the Bolton guilty plea was the lead story of the night, as the show leaned heavily into the idea of the case as retribution, with visual comparisons to cases against those like New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey: TOM LLAMAS: Good evening. Great to have you tonight. We begin with the first legal victory against one of President Trump's perceived enemies. John Bolton, one of his strongest critics, now facing up to five years in prison and a $2 million fine.  Bolton was national security adviser during Trump's first term. Then became a fierce opponent of the president. Now, sources tell NBC News he plans to plead guilty to one count of retaining national security information. For a year and a half now, the Justice Department has been pursuing cases against the people you see here. Those the president believes have wronged him. Most either failed to get an indictment, were thrown out, or stalled, until now. NBC White House reporter Garrett Haake continued the frame of the Bolton case as retribution as he called the former Trump advisor “a fierce critic,” and played a soundbite from Bolton on ABC’s This Week: “I think it is a retribution presidency.” The transcripts from ABC and NBC are below. Click "expand": ABC World News Tonight June 4, 2026 6:42:23 PM Eastern DAVID MUIR: Tonight, sources now telling ABC News that President Trump's former National Security Adviser and one of his harshest critics, John Bolton, has now agreed to plead guilty to mishandling of classified information. Here's our Chief Justice Correspondent, Pierre Thomas now. PIERRE THOMAS: He was a prime target of President Trump's retribution campaign. And tonight, sources tell ABC News Trump's former National Security Adviser, John Bolton, is planning to plead guilty to mishandling classified information. PRESIDENT TRUMP: I'm not a fan of John Bolton. I thought he was a sleazebag, actually. THOMAS: Bolton was indicted on 18 counts in October of 2025, accused of sharing classified information with members of his family in the course of writing a book. His home, raided by the FBI.  Tonight, sources tell us Bolton will plead guilty to one count of illegal retention of national security information and will acknowledge he stored sensitive information in his personal diaries. He's agreed to pay a fine of $2.25 million and could face up to five years in prison.  Bolton has been an unsparing critic of the president. JOHN BOLTON: I don't think he's fit for office. THOMAS: President Trump himself was charged with mishandling classified information when he left office. That case later dismissed.  The investigation into Bolton began during the Biden administration. The case against him was brought by career DOJ prosecutors, not newly appointed allies of the president.  Bolton is expected to enter his guilty plea on June 26th. If he had been convicted on all 18 counts, he could have faced decades in prison. David. He plans to ask for probation, which will be up a judge to decide. MUIR: Pierre Thomas, live in Washington. Pierre, thanks. (...) NBC Nightly News June 4, 2026 6:32:17 PM Eastern TOM LLAMAS: Good evening. Great to have you tonight. We begin with the first legal victory against one of President Trump's perceived enemies. John Bolton, one of his strongest critics, now facing up to five years in prison and a $2 million fine.  Bolton was national security adviser during Trump's first term. Then became a fierce opponent of the president. Now, sources tell NBC News he plans to plead guilty to one count of retaining national security information. For a year and a half now, the Justice Department has been pursuing cases against the people you see here. Those the president believes have wronged him. Most either failed to get an indictment, were thrown out, or stalled, until now.  And we have new reporting tonight on the man the president just announced he'll nominate to lead the Justice Department. His former personal attorney Todd Blanche, who in just a few weeks as acting attorney general has already jump-started investigations against the president's enemies. Garrett Haake is covering it all tonight from the White House. GARRETT HAAKE: Tonight, a major reversal for a former top Trump official charged with mishandling classified information. Two sources familiar with the matter tell NBC News, President Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton will now plead guilty to one count of retaining national security information in a deal with federal prosecutors. Bolton, a fierce critic of the president - JOHN BOLTON [On ABC’s This Week in August 2025]: I think it is a retribution presidency. HAAKE: - Will now pay more than $2 million in restitution and faces up to five years in prison. President Trump had blasted Bolton after his October indictment. PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think he's a bad guy. Yeah, he's a bad guy. Too bad. HAAKE: The plea deal marks a first legal victory in the administration's multifaceted campaign against Trump critics. And comes after President Trump announced he'll nominate acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, once his personal defense attorney, to become the permanent AG. TRUMP: Todd is very popular. He's doing great. HAAKE: That announcement meeting with stiff opposition from Democrats. SEN. PETER WELCH (D-VT): Todd Blanche should not be attorney general. He is the personal attorney of the president. HAAKE: But Republicans predicting he'll make it through a confirmation battle. SEN. RICK SCOTT (R-FL): He's honest, ethical. I think he'll do the job. HAAKE: And amid bipartisan pushback to his pick of housing chief Bill Pulte to be acting Director of National Intelligence, the President saying today that posting will be temporary. TRUMP: It's not a permanent position. We're looking at - we're interviewing people right now. LLAMAS: Garrett Haake joins us live from the white house. Garrett, President Trump is also making news on another renovation project he has going on in Washington. This one involving the Lincoln Memorial? HAAKE: Yeah, Tom, the president says he next plans to build a pedestrian bridge that would allow people to walk from the Lincoln Memorial down to the Potomac River. It would cross over those roads you see there behind the memorial. A major construction project in the heart of D.C., and it comes on the day the president has been touting the completion of a plan to rebuild, reseal, and repaint the reflecting pool on the memorial’s other side. Tom? LLAMAS: Several projects happening now. Alright, Garrett, we thank you for that. (...)

PolitiFact’s Caleb McCullough was at it again with more Senate campaign cherry-picking shenanigans on Friday. This time McCullough focused on Iowa Republican Ashley Hinson’s recent ad that accused Democrat Josh Turek of supporting sex changes for minors. McCullough called it “false,” but his actual article suggested it was not quite that simple. The controversy arose over an ad that “makes two similar but distinct claims. Its narration says Turek ‘supports kids changing gender without parental consent.’ But the on-screen text says ‘sex changes for kids,’ while video of surgeons in an operating room plays behind an image of Turek. Hinson’s social media post sharing the ad also used the phrase ‘sex changes for kids.’” If McCullough focused on the narrator, it is likely he would never have written the article because PolitiFact tends not to publish articles about Republicans being true. Instead, McCullough focused on the text: ‘Sex change’ is not a standard medical term. Gender-affirming care can include a range of approaches to support a person's gender identity including, for minors, using a different name or pronouns. According to medical best practices, gender-affirming treatments are available only to adolescents and can include puberty blockers, hormone therapy and in rare cases, surgeries for older teens. Medical intervention for minors requires parental consent. The ad distorts Turek’s position. The law cited in the ad as evidence does not mention medical interventions or ‘sex changes.’ It has to do with notifying parents when a student expresses a different gender identity at school. Which is exactly what the narrator said and McCullough even admitted was correct: The ad cites Iowa's Senate File 496, a 2023 law that regulated school library books with explicit themes and prohibited instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation. Turek voted against the bill. The Republican-led Legislature passed the bill and Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed it into law.  The law requires school districts to inform parents if a student requests "an accommodation that is intended to affirm the student's gender identity," including requests that employees "address the student using a name or pronoun" that differs from the school’s records.  McCullough also cited “Hinson campaign spokesperson Addie Lavis” as having “said the ad was not referencing gender-affirming surgeries. In an email to PolitiFact, she said the ad was using gender and sex ‘interchangeably as is the case under Iowa law and nowhere do we mention surgery.’" In that case, the ad is once again correct. Still, when it came to hormones for minors, McCullough tried to give Turek a pass, “Iowa lawmakers had already prohibited medical gender-affirming procedures for minors in 2023. Turek was not present for the vote on that bill, and the Iowa House Journal shows he was granted a leave of absence that day.” He then continued, “Citing the American Medical Association — which said in February that gender-affirming surgeries should ‘generally be reserved until adulthood’  — Turek campaign spokesperson Hannah Goss said he does not support gender-affirming surgeries for minors.” In his summary, McCullough used all that to conclude, “A separate bill the same year banned gender-affirming medical treatments for minors; Turek was absent from the vote. His campaign said he opposes such surgeries for minors.” Every single Democrat in the Iowa House of Representatives voted against the bill that banned gender-altering hormones for minors. There is no reason to believe that if Turek were present, he would have been the lone Democrat to join with Republicans.

A while back in this space - April 4th to be exact - the headline here was this:  Do 'Major Shakeups' Mean CBS News Is in Free Fall? The very first sentence was this:  It’s almost as if a mere handful of days barely goes by before yet another story about turmoil inside CBS runs somewhere in the liberal media landscape. That, as noted, was April. A mere two months ago almost to the day. And now? Now, without question, the “turmoil inside CBS” has gotten worse. Here, by way of multiple examples, are some quite recent sample headlines:  From The Financial Post: CBS’s firing of veteran journalist Scott Pelley boils down to one issue: who calls the shots? .  From The Washington Post: Read the letter firing Scott Pelley from ‘60 Minutes’ — and his response  From People: Jimmy Kimmel Has Scathing Reaction to “60 Minutes” 'Cowardly' Firing Scott Pelley  From The Deseret News: Scott Pelley fired from ‘60 Minutes’ as CBS leans into new direction  From Politico: ‘60 Minutes’ correspondent Scott Pelley fired after confrontation with new boss Nick Bilton, the show’s new top producer, said Pelley “hijacked” a staff meeting to disparage him. From USA Today: '60 Minutes' correspondent Scott Pelley fired after criticizing CBS execs  From The New York Post: ‘60 Minutes’ star Scott Pelley fired from CBS News after blasting Bari Weiss in heated showdown  One could go on - and on and on - with similar headlines about the sundering of one-time CBS anchor Pelley’s relationship with his CBS bosses, notably CBS executive Bari Weiss. Clearly, as the saying goes, all “h -e -double l” has erupted inside CBS. And as was asked in that April headline in this space - “Do 'Major Shakeups' Mean CBS News Is in Free Fall?” That answer appears to be if the network is not in free fall, at the very least it is a hotbed of internal clashing views on how the network should be run. The quite obvious question now is: Why? The answer for all the inside turmoil at CBS can be found when looking - looking and finding headlines like this one focusing on the new ownership at CBS.  Yet for whatever else that reason or reasons may be, one thing is increasingly clear. The tidal wave size of the ideological divide that has swamped the rest of America - and produced and elected President Trump- has flooded the inside of CBS News as well.  Interestingly, while there can be no doubt this is related to the rise of President Donald Trump, the rise of Trump is not all by itself what’s at cause here. Trump, it can be said, is a symptom of this cause - but he is not the cause. To more precisely finger the cause, hop in the time capsule and zip back to the stone age of….1964. That being the year Republicans gathered for their convention in San Francisco to nominate “Mr. Conservative” - Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater- for the presidency. This was a full 62 years ago.  To get a flavor of those days, see this from a September, 1964 issue of TIME magazine. The headline:  The Press: Thanks, But No Thanks The TIME story reported:  Never has the press felt more unpopular at a national political convention than at San Francisco in July, where Republican delegates booed and hissed newsmen from the floor. In contrast, never has the press felt more popular than at Atlantic City last week, where Speaker of the House John McCormack, in opening the Democrats’ conclave, went out of his way to give a cordial welcome to journalists. In short, suddenly out in the open, it was crystal clear that conservatives, the grass roots of that 1964 GOP Convention that nominated Goldwater, had nothing but disdain for the media. The reason, from the GOP perspective, was simple: the media was not, as they tried to advertise themselves, impartial. They had taken a side - the liberal Democrat side.  In the day that meant supporting Democrats John F. Kennedy and, post-JFK’s assassination, his successor Lyndon Johnson. And the media were not shy about this, either.  Simply put? 1964 may be a long 62 years ago, but in fact the disdain of liberals in the media for conservatives has not only not gone away it has grown to a considerable sized contempt. As is quite obvious, in this “Scott Pelley fired” kerfuffle it is clear that Pelley is an old-fashioned left-wing journalist. And while he will eventually pass from the scene as all of us will, the presence of left-wingers in journalism is going nowhere.  But what is particularly interesting in this situation is the new, presumed rightward tilt inside CBS, with various new execs giving a nod in the direction of President Trump - thus infuriating the liberal Pelley and doubtless other less prominent lefties inside CBS. And yes, the larger lefty media has noticed. as seen in this sample story from the liberal NPR: CBS shifts to appease the right under new owner  That story reports: CBS' new corporate owner has taken a series of concrete steps to address the concerns of the news division's sharpest critics — particularly President Trump and his allies. In recent days, the network selected a new ombudsman for CBS News with strong conservative credentials. It promised to run full, unedited interviews on a key public affairs show after receiving blowback from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. And it's in talks to bring on a top news executive who believes the mainstream press is reflexively biased. All of these decisions have come from top officials at Paramount under the new ownership of Skydance Media. And they represent a grand accommodation to Trump by CBS, known for its rich legacy of journalistic touchstones spanning back to the dawn of television news, including Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and 60 Minutes. So, in essence, there you have it. The new CBS owners “represent a grand accommodation to Trump by CBS,”.  And, safe to say and as evidenced in the Pelley kerfuffle, the liberals that populate CBS behind the cameras are not happy. Not one little bit. They-not unlike their brethren in other “mainstream” outlets like ABC, NBC, NPR and print versions like The New York Times or The Washington Post - view these networks and newspapers as the preserve of the American Left. And if a new owner has the gall to challenge that with a rightward tilt there will be that proverbial “h…e…double L” to pay.  Which, bottom line, is why all the crazy, not good PR for CBS in this Pelley episode. Something that, wittingly or not, illustrates vividly just how powerful liberals are or believe they are when it comes to running the American media. Or in other words?  We are a long way from 1964. The technology of the modern media has changed for sure. From talk radio to Fox and Newsmax TV to the rise of You Tube and conservative magazines like the late Bill Buckley’s National Review or Bob Tyrrell’s American Spectator, media in the 21st century is in a very different place. But the left-leaning tilt of the “mainstream” American media some 62 years later has not changed one bit. Nor is change in sight. The Scott Pelley-CBS kerfuffle will eventually come- and go. But the Left wing presumption of media ownership as the future arrives is going nowhere.

Friday’s edition of HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher brought out the best and worst of the eponymous host. On one hand, Maher reacted to Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner’s ever-growing list of scandals by claiming he would have thought a Nazi tattoo was a conservative thing and that in the past, sex scandals have only been disqualifying for Democrats. However, in the Overtime segment, he battled with Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy for claiming with no evidence that CBS firing Scott Pelley means 60 Minutes is about to turn into Trump TV. Maher began the Platner conversation by asking Murphy, “Is this tent big enough for this Graham Platner guy? I must say, I don't want to make any judgments, because I'm just learning who he is, and unfortunately, so is he. I mean, this is a new kind of guy, and it is not just in the Democrats, people who, like—if you look at their history, you can find things that make them look very conservative. Like a Nazi tattoo. What I would—in the past—associated with the conservatives. And then there's things like that. He has also flirted with communism, and now he's got a sex scandal. Which in the past has just been something that absolutely made somebody toxic in the Democratic Party, unlike in the Republican Party, where they don't care at all.”   It was the best of Bill Maher and it was the worst of Bill Maher. First, the worst, on Graham Platner "I mean this is a new kind of guy and it is not just in the Democrats, people who, like—if you look at their history, you can find things that make them look very conservative.… pic.twitter.com/LsSLyOUoGU — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 6, 2026   Maher says he’s “just learning,” but last October he made the same “Nazi tattoos are Republican” claim when discussing Platner. He also omits counterexamples of Republican versus Democratic sex scandals such as Roy Moore and Bill Clinton, but at least Maher is talking about Platner, which is more than you can say about Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon, and Seth Meyers. Murphy tried to paint the race between Platner and the Senate’s most liberal Republican as a morally complicated one, “Yeah, this is going to be a complicated race. He is imperfect. He has made a lot of mistakes. He has been pretty clear about it from the outset. He’s built a pretty big movement in Maine because people like his ideas. On the other side, you got Susan Collins, who just last night cast one of the deciding votes to give $70 billion to Trump's secret police.” He also claimed, “I think he is the clear choice there.” Also on the panel was former Obama national security advisor Susan Rice, who bizarrely added, “I remember when a tan suit was a scandal.” What that has to do with anything, nobody ever said. Later, during the Overtime segment, Maher disputed Murphy’s idea that 60 Minutes was trying to appease Trump: But I've seen ones that are not very favorable to the president. That’s what I’m saying. I don't know if I would have noticed any different if I hadn't been reading about it. Also, I just don't think being a 60 Minutes correspondent is that hard. I don't feel like Scott Pelley. I don't feel like Scott Pelley was a national treasure. Companies change hands all the time. I never liked him. Sorry, I just never did. Companies change hands. People bring, people bring in their own people, their new ownership, you know, just because something changes doesn't mean. I feel like we see everything through such a partisan lens. "Oh my God, 60 Minutes has a new cast. So does Saturday Night Live. Murphy tried to double down, “Yeah, but Bill, it's not just, it's not just 60 Minutes, right? I mean, they literally, they took down his chief late night critic. CBS News at 6:30 does sound and feel different. This is not just about 60 Minutes.”   Later, during the Overtime segment, Maher tells Murphy, "I don't know if I would have noticed any different if I hadn't been reading about it. Also, I just don't think being a 60 Minutes correspondent is that hard. I don't feel like Scott Pelley. I don't feel like Scott Pelley… pic.twitter.com/9a4E9kkCiZ — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) June 6, 2026   Maher was less solid on CBS as a whole but insisted on sticking with 60 Minutes, “But we're just talking about 60 Minutes now. But yes, I agree. He's a danger to media. He's a danger to freedom of speech. But just 60 Minutes. I don't know. I mean, and I'm not gonna make that decision until I see a smoking gun. Like, something like, ‘Oh, wow. You know, now we're, we're, you know, tick, tick, tick. Candace Owens and Alex Jones on 60 Minutes.’ I mean—” Murphy still kept trying, “They’re always going to maintain a veneer of objectivity, right? The good ones who are trying to carefully transition a country from democracy to autocracy, don't do it overnight, right? It is methodical that over time you feel like you don't have the space to criticize, and if you are going to put forward the administration's propaganda, you get an elevated seat at the table. So, that doesn't just turn on a dime. That is a project that authoritarians or would-be authoritarians.” Maher concluded by quipping, “Okay, when I, when I see actual evidence of that, I'll be on your side.” Unfortunately, Maher’s concession about the rest of CBS let some crucial statements go unrebutted. The Late Show’s financial struggles have been well documented, but more importantly, if Murphy thinks Tony Dokoupil’s 6:30 newscast is so much different than John Dickerson and Maurice DuBois’s then that says more about them than it does about Dokoupil. It is simply not credible to claim to watch CBS and claim they are paving the road for a Trump-run autocracy. Here is a transcript for the June 5 show: HBO Real Time with Bill Maher 6/5/2026 10:36 PM ET BILL MAHER: Is this tent big enough for this Graham Platner guy? I must say, I don't want to make any judgments, because I'm just learning who he is, and unfortunately, so is he. I mean, this is a new kind of guy, and it is not just in the Democrats, people who, like—if you look at their history, you can find things that make them look very conservative. Like a Nazi tattoo. What I would—in the past—associated with the conservatives. And then there's things like that. He has also flirted with communism, and now he's got a sex scandal. Which in the past has just been something that absolutely made somebody toxic in the Democratic Party, unlike in the Republican Party, where they don't care at all. What about this one? Have you been reading about Mr. Platner and what you think they should do? Because if he wins, they think they will get the Senate, so it is a very key seat. CHRIS MURPHY: Yeah, this is going to be a complicated race. He is imperfect. He has made a lot of mistakes. He has been pretty clear about it from the outset. He’s built a pretty big movement in Maine because people like his ideas. On the other side, you got Susan Collins, who just last night cast one of the deciding votes to give $70 billion to Trump's secret police. That’s a character issue as well. So I think you are seeing more candidates run today that don't have perfectly clean, personal histories. And the question in Maine is going to be if he is a bridge too far or if his ideas— MAHER: Well what do you say? You’re in the Senate. MURPHY: Well, I think he is the clear choice there. MAHER: Do you say, Nazi, schmazi and then texting, schmetxing? And I’m just asking, maybe that's the right answer. MURPHY: Like I said, I think it's a super complicated race. But I think the question is between the incumbent who has enabled Trump's corruption and Graham Platner: very imperfect but who has fought and put his life on the line for the country, which is not something that’s insignificant. MAHER: No, it’s not, and I just think it is a different country. It's a broken country. It is full of broken people and with that information on both sides. And I think people just go, “He's pissed. I get that.” MURPHY: Yeah, and this last set of allegations are serious allegations and he’s going to have to talk about with the people of Maine and they’re ultimately have to make that decision. But that will be their decision to make. MAHER: Okay. Graham Platner, any thoughts? SUSAN RICE: I remember when a tan suit was a scandal. MAHER: I do too. Holding the coffee. Remember that? He had a cup of coffee when he saluted. RICE: It was tea. *** HBO Real Time Overtime 6/5/2026 BILL MAHER: But I've seen ones that are not very favorable to the president. CHRIS MURPHY: Yeah. MAHER: That’s what I’m saying. I don't know if I would have noticed any different if I hadn't been reading about it. Also, I just don't think being a 60 Minutes correspondent is that hard. I don't feel like Scott Pelley. I don't feel like Scott Pelley was a national treasure. Companies change hands all the time. I never liked him. Sorry, I just never did. Companies change hands. People bring, people bring in their own people, their new ownership, you know, just because something changes doesn't mean. I feel like we see everything through such a partisan lens. "Oh my God, 60 Minutes has a new cast. So does Saturday Night Live." MURPHY: Yeah, but Bill, it's not just, it's not just 60 Minutes, right? MAHER: I agree. MURPHY: I mean, they literally, they took down his chief late night critic. CBS News at 6:30 does sound and feel different. This is not just about 60 Minutes. MAHER: Trust me. I feel it too.  MURPHY: Yeah. MAHER: Okay, so I’m part of it. I get it. But we're just talking about 60 Minutes now. But yes, I agree. He's a danger to media. He's a danger to freedom of speech. But just 60 Minutes. I don't know. I mean, and I'm not gonna make that decision until I see a smoking gun. Like, something like, “Oh, wow. You know, now we're, we're, you know, tick, tick, tick. Candace Owens and Alex Jones on 60 Minutes.” I mean— MURPHY: Yeah, but they, but they're, they're always going to maintain a veneer of objectivity, right? The good ones who are trying to carefully transition a country from democracy to autocracy, don't do it overnight, right? It is methodical that over time you feel like you don't have the space to criticize, and if you are going to put forward the administration's propaganda, you get an elevated seat at the table. So, that doesn't just turn on a dime. That is a project that authoritarians or would-be authoritarians. MAHER: Okay, when I, when I see actual evidence of that, I'll be on your side.