On Monday, CBS’s Stephen Colbert alleged that the network forbade him from airing an interview with Texas Senate candidate James Talarico over concerns about a potential FCC equal time rule violation. On Tuesday, CBS denied the allegation and said The Late Show was not prohibited from airing the interview but gave Colbert advice on how equal time could be fulfilled, but The Late Show balked at the suggestions and opted to put the interview on YouTube instead. Later on Tuesday, Colbert declared that CBS’s lawyers know “damn well” that they approved every word he said. Colbert claimed, “We obeyed our network and put the interview on YouTube, where it's gotten millions of views. And I can see why. Talarico is an interesting guy. I don't know if he should be the senator, but it was a good discussion. I wish we should have put it on the show where no one would've watched it.”   In the latest round of Stephen Colbert vs. CBS on the Talarico interview, Colbert alleges "They [the lawyers] know damn well that every word of my script last night was approved by CBS's lawyers, who, for the record, approve every script that goes on the air, whether it's about… pic.twitter.com/IY0tknMEkf — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) February 18, 2026   Of course Colbert thought it was a good discussion. The whole point was to smear conservatives as bad Christians. Regardless, Colbert also huffed, “But here's where I do want to tell the lawyers how to do their jobs. They know damn well that every word of my script last night was approved by CBS's lawyers, who, for the record, approve every script that goes on the air, whether it's about equal time or this image of frogs having sex.” He also claimed, “In fact, between the monologue I did last night and before I did the second act talking about this issue, I had to go backstage, I got called back to stage to get more notes from these lawyers, something that had never, ever happened before. They told me the language they wanted me to use to describe the equal time exception, and I used that language. So, I don't know what this is about.” Finally, Colbert insisted, “For the record, I'm not even mad. I really don't want an adversarial relationship with the network. I’ve never had one. As I said last night in my interview with James Talarico—check it out, it's on YouTube, it's pretty good—I said to him I'm grateful to have worked at CBS for the last 11 years and worked with George and David and Amy and everyone at the network… I'm just so surprised that this giant global corporation would not stand up to these bullies. Come on, you're Paramount! No. No! No, you're more than that! You're Paramount+.” Later, Colbert asked CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, “As a journalist, what do you make of Trump's apparent weaponizing of the FCC?” Collins replied, “Yeah, ever since Brendan Carr, I mean, was in this position, I don't think anything he's done is really that surprising if you are covering Trump and paying attention. And so, I think the question is how far he goes on his threats. Does he follow through? Does he need to follow through, or does making the threat cause the action?”   Later, CNN's Kaitlan Collins muses "I think the question is how far he goes on his threats. Does he follow through? Does he need to follow through or does making the threat cause the action?" as Colbert alludes to CBS again, "For instance, if you threaten the network and they… pic.twitter.com/UDRVEASYEM — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) February 18, 2026   Alluding to his own network, Colbert added, “For instance, if you threaten the network and they might just do it for you without actually making a ruling of any kind.” Collins agreed and argued conservatives should be careful what they wish for: And I think it's actually a really, really slippery slope because I think you've seen some people on the right cheering this and saying that's what we want Brendan Carr to do. I think they don't want a Democratic administration saying that right-wing talk radio must give equal time to Democrats or to see that moment… I don't think anyone wants the federal government telling people who they should book on their show and who the guests should be on their show.  In non-FCC news, earlier, Colbert showered Collins’s employer with praise, “During Trump's first administration, one of the sort of positions that CNN marked out for themselves was just acknowledging reality… There was an epistemological crisis and government where–what is real? What is not? What is known? Can things be known? And there were things like ‘This is an apple’ ads that CNN ran. Which is like, ‘This is an apple. People might say it's a banana, but it's an apple.’”   In non-FCC related news, earlier, Colbert praised CNN, "During Trump's first administration, one of the sort of positions that CNN marked out for themselves was just acknowledging reality. Because there was this expression–there was an epistemological crisis and government where… pic.twitter.com/TkfNO1GOwn — Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) February 18, 2026   Ultimately, he asked, “How are things over there? What's the attitude over there at CNN about the renewed challenge of keeping your feet on the dry land of what really is?" Collins eventually replied, “I think the mission, though, is the same. I think it's holding people, powerful people, taxpayer-funded officials to account. It’s asking tough questions, it’s covering the stories, it’s making people comfortable. And I think that should happen whether it's a Republican in the White House or a Democrat. I think anyone in that position should face tough questions. And so I think the mission is the same for my colleagues and for myself, certainly.” This is the same network that thinks it is a slur to say identifying as a girl doesn’t mean that you are one. Collins herself has gone along with colleagues who think EPA regulations are typos, and she herself got upset when Sen. Ted Cruz correctly claimed Charlie Kirk’s assassin was motivated by politics. An apple might not be a banana, but CNN often thinks an apple is an orange. Here is a transcript for the February 17 show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 2/17/2026 11:58 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: So, we obeyed our network and put the interview on YouTube, where it's gotten millions of views. And I can see why. Talarico is an interesting guy. I don't know if he should be the senator, but it was a good discussion. I wish we should have put it on the show where no one would've watched it.  But here's where I do want to tell the lawyers how to do their jobs. They know damn well that every word of my script last night was approved by CBS's lawyers, who, for the record, approve every script that goes on the air, whether it's about equal time or this image of frogs having sex. That's a true story. But for another time. Very specifically, in fact, between the monologue I did last night and before I did the second act talking about this issue, I had to go backstage, I got called back to stage to get more notes from these lawyers, something that had never, ever happened before. They told me the language they wanted me to use to describe the equal time exception, and I used that language. So, I don't know what this is about. For the record, I'm not even mad. I really don't want an adversarial relationship with the network. I’ve never had one. As I said last night in my interview with James Talarico—check it out, it's on YouTube, it's pretty good—I said to him I'm grateful to have worked at CBS for the last 11 years and worked with George and David and Amy and everyone at the network, the Sheldons of every age, the Matlocks of every sex. I'm just so surprised that this giant global corporation would not stand up to these bullies. Come on, you're Paramount! No. No! No, you're more than that! You're Paramount+. Plus what? I guess we’re all going to find out pretty soon. … COLBERT: During Trump's first administration, one of the sort of positions that CNN marked out for themselves was just acknowledging reality. Because there was this expression– KAITLAN COLLINS: Which is important. COLBERT: –part of the expression–there was an epistemological crisis and government where–what is real? What is not? What is known? Can things be known? And there were things like, “This is an apple” ads that CNN ran. COLLINS: Yeah. COLBERT: Which is like “This is an apple. People might say it's a banana, but it's an apple.” How are things over there? What's the attitude over there at CNN about the renewed challenge of keeping your feet on the dry land of what really is? COLLINS: Well, and those ads came out when we were in an era of alternative facts and, you know, people were adjusting the statements like that coming from some of the highest ranking officials in the White House. Kellyanne Conway when she said that and I the mission is still the same though, which is– COLBERT: Because the alternative facts haven't changed, have they? They’re still— COLLINS: They are still just facts and— COLBERT: Alternative facts. COLLINS: But there aren't alternative facts. There's facts and that's it. COLBERT: Well, that’s a fact. COLLINS: So, I think the mission, though, is the same. I think it's holding people, powerful people, taxpayer-funded officials to account. It’s asking tough questions, it’s covering the stories, it’s making people comfortable. And I think that should happen whether it's a Republican in the White House or a Democrat. I think anyone in that position should face tough questions. And so I think the mission is the same for my colleagues and for myself, certainly. … COLBERT: Back in November the president suggested that FCC Chair Brendan Carr look into ABC’s broadcast license after Mary Bruce asked questions he didn't like. COLLINS: Yeah. COLBERT: And as a journalist, what do you make of Trump's apparent weaponizing of the FCC? COLLINS: It's something that the president, we didn't see him do as much of the first term. It's a way he's wielding his power so differently in the second term. COLBERT: Yeah, I think that, sort of, the chains are off. COLLINS: Yeah, ever since Brendan Carr, I mean, was in this position, I don't think anything he's done is really that surprising if you are covering Trump and paying attention. And so, I think the question is how far he goes on his threats. Does he follow through? Does he need to follow through, or does making the threat cause the action? COLBERT: For instance, if you threaten the network and they might just do it for you without actually making a ruling of any kind. COLLINS: And I think it's actually a really, really slippery slope because I think you've seen some people on the right cheering this and saying that's what we want Brendan Carr to do. I think they don't want a Democratic administration saying that right-wing talk radio must give equal time to Democrats or to see that moment. And so, for me personally on our show I have Democrats and Republicans on. I want to know what everyone is saying. I want my viewers to know what the debate is that's in Washington. I don't think anyone wants the federal government telling people who they should book on their show and who the guests should be on their show.