House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin, D-Md., is demanding answers from CBS News over edits to President Donald Trump's recent "60 Minutes" interview.
Raskin on Wednesday sent a letter to CBS News ombudsman Kenneth Weinstein urging an investigation into whether Trump "improperly influenced and coerced" editorial decisions tied to the "60 Minutes" sit-down conducted Nov. 2, 2025, with Norah O'Donnell.
Raskin claimed CBS cut portions of the interview at Trump's request, including questions about alleged "corruption and financial conflicts of interest," and he argued the edits raise First Amendment concerns because they could represent government coercion rather than independent newsroom judgment.
Deadline reported that O'Donnell's interview ran about 90 minutes, while CBS broadcast 28 minutes and later posted a transcript plus an extended online cut.
That transparency — publishing the transcript — also fueled the controversy because it allowed critics to compare what aired with what didn't.
Raskin focused on a portion involving the president's pardon of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, and another where Trump referenced a prior settlement with CBS' parent company.
People reported Trump "made it clear that the answer" about the lawsuit "didn't need to be included in the final broadcast."
Raskin's letter also pointed to broader friction between Trump and the network's corporate owner, citing Paramount's decision to settle Trump's lawsuit stemming from edits to the show's 2024 interview with then-Vice President and presidential candidate Kamala Harris.
The settlement, widely reported at $16 million, became a political flashpoint amid corporate and regulatory turbulence around Paramount's merger activity.
CBS, like every broadcast outlet, routinely edits for time, clarity, and news value. And in this case, the network's decision to post a transcript and longer video arguably made the process more transparent than usual.
That was a key point in an Associated Press media analysis describing the episode as a rare look into how a major news program shapes an interview into a broadcast segment.
AP noted that much of what didn't air were tangents, repetitive partisan attacks, or elements producers didn't deem "newsiest" — the same kinds of judgment calls made across journalism every day.
Raskin, though, argued that if CBS removed segments after the president objected, it could signal fear of retaliation or corporate pressure rather than independent editorial judgment.
Raskin's press release about the complaint also included the ranking member questioning Weinstein's independence, noting the ombudsman role was created as part of merger-related commitments.
Newsmax Wires contributed to this report.
Charlie McCarthy ✉
Charlie McCarthy, a writer/editor at Newsmax, has nearly 40 years of experience covering news, sports, and politics.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.