The NPR Politics Podcast - Which Democrats could be on the presidential ballot in 2028?

Episode Date: May 29, 2026

It was another busy week in politics. For our weekly news roundup, we discuss the Justice Department’s investigation into E. Jean Carroll, a writer who won two lawsuits against President Trump. We also discuss former First Lady Jill Biden’s comments about former President Joe Biden’s 2024 debate performance, as well as which Democrats might be on the 2028 presidential ballot.This episode: political correspondent Ashley Lopez, justice correspondent Ryan Lucas, White House correspondent Deepa Shivaram, and senior political correspondent Tamara Keith.This podcast was produced by Casey Morell and Bria Suggs, and edited by Rachel Baye.Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

Hey there, it's the NPR Politics podcast. I'm Ashley Lopez. I cover politics. I'm Ryan Lucas. I cover the Justice Department. And I'm Tamara Keith, senior political correspondent. And welcome to our weekly news roundup. We're going to start the show off today at the Department of Justice, where there are reports of a new investigation into the writer E. Jean Carroll. Ryan, for those of us who don't remember, who is E. Jean Carroll? So she is a writer and journalist, advice columnist, author, wore many hats in the journalistic realm. But she's probably best known in the past several years for suing Donald Trump twice. These are civil lawsuits. She accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in a Manhattan department store in the mid-1990s. Trump denied those allegations, but after she made them, he also lashed out at her, called her a lot of names. she then sued him for defamation as well.

Ultimately, she won both of those lawsuits. She was awarded combined judgments of nearly $90 million against Trump. Trump is still fighting these, still challenging them, still litigating them. So at this point, Carol still has not seen a dime of that money. Wow. So what is this investigation about, though? So this gets a little complicated, but bear with me here. The investigation is being handled by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Northern District

of Illinois, so in Chicago, it centers around a deposition that Carol gave in connection with one of those two lawsuits that I mentioned. And in that deposition, Carol said, no outside folks were helping pay her legal bills. It later came out that a nonprofit backed by a big-ticket Democratic donor, Reid Hoffman, actually was helping pay some of those bills. Trump and his legal team accused Carol of lying about this. Now, as for the investigation sources tell me that it is focused right now on Hoffman's nonprofit, the funding that it provided. I'm told investigators are looking into potential money laundering and obstruction. There is conflicting information on whether Carol herself is currently under investigation. There were media reports that came out

this week that she was. The U.S. Attorney's Office in Chicago put out a statement last night saying reports that it had opened an investigation into Carol were false. But one source, who I spoke with told me that prosecutors are indeed examining whether Carol committed perjury, while another source told me that Carol is not currently under investigation, but could be as this probe moved forward. I will add that neither Carol nor her attorney were commenting on this, and Hoffman, I couldn't reach Hoffman for comment. Tam, I feel like this is a familiar story, right? Another example of the president using the levers of power to seek retribution. against perceived enemies here. What do you make of this? Yeah, I mean, there are a long list of people

who have one way or another gotten on the wrong side of President Trump who have now experienced the joy of being investigated by the U.S. Justice Department. And joy is not the word. It is painful. And just the act of being investigated, having to hire lawyers, having to go through that stress, that is a punishment in a way in itself. And expensive. And expensive. But I actually, in this sort of broad universe of President Trump's retribution campaign against his perceived political enemies, there are different categories. And obviously, E. Jean Carroll has come into much verbal abuse in recent years from President Trump.

and certainly if she is in fact being investigated, that would fit into that category along with James Comey and other people who President Trump considers to be enemies. The other bucket is President Trump and his administration going after groups who he sees as working against him. And so he signed a memorandum to the Treasury Secretary, the Attorney General, the Council of the president calling for an investigation of unlawful straw donor and foreign contributions in American elections. That was aimed at Act Blue, the Democratic fundraising platform. You mentioned James Comey for the former FBI director. There's the New York State Attorney General

Letitia James. She was indicted. That case was tossed out. The first case against Comey was tossed out as well. Worth reminding people that Comey has been indicted the second time on a separate issue, which involves a photo of seashells on a beach. You have the former Fed chairman, Jerome Powell, who was under investigation. Ultimately, the Justice Department stepped away from that. You have former CIA director, John Brennan. That is not a complete list. There is a long list of people who the president considers political enemies who this Justice Department has gone after. Yeah, a long list, but not a really long track record of wins, it would seem. Like, these don't seem to be being successful for the administration, at least not yet, right?

This Justice Department has certainly flamed out with a lot of these efforts. And we have also seen, I mean, there's the case of the six Democratic lawmakers who filmed the video urging members of the military not to follow unlawful orders. Trump lashed out at them. The Justice Department opened an investigation. And we saw a grand jury here in Washington, D.C., reject prosecutors' efforts to indict those members of Congress. So we have seen both judges toss out cases and we've also seen grand juries reject prosecutors' efforts. And I think what Ryan is pointing out here is a

really important point. There is a breakdown. There had been a time when there was a presumption that the United States Justice Department was bringing cases that had merit, that they wouldn't bring cases without merit. And now you have grand juries. and you have judges, and you have the American public just deeply skeptical of how the Department of Justice is conducting itself. And that is incredibly toxic to the rule of law and the trust in American institutions. And I will add to that that the U.S. attorney in the Northern District of Illinois, this office was just slapped down by a judge there for misconduct before a grand jury, stuff that is. just almost unheard of. And the judge took them to task over it. Wow. Well, I do want to go back to E. Jean Carroll for a second, Tamp, because, I mean, from my vantage point, this was a story that went away a little while ago. I can't remember the last time I saw E. Gene Carroll in the news. I mean, doesn't this, like, putting the legal part of this aside from a PR perspective, like, isn't there a risk of like digging this up and putting this back in the news, potentially backfiring on Trump?

You know, the funny thing is I hadn't thought about E. Jean Carroll for a really long time. Until about a week ago when the documentary film that was made about her that had been having a lot of difficulty getting distribution, that film is now in theaters a limited release. But that film is in theaters right now at this very moment that we are hearing about this Justice Department investigation. So E. Jean Carroll was actually bubbling up again as a story as part of the discourse. there was a piece in the New York Times, for instance. Timing could be completely, probably is completely coincidental, but this story was coming back. Yeah. And why is it that Todd Blanche is recusing himself, Ryan?

Like, what's this story there? So Blanche was involved in some of the litigation with E. Jean Carroll in these lawsuits. And the proper thing to do would be to recuse oneself. But, look, I mean, Blanche for. several years served as President Trump's personal attorney. And he has continued to speak out on Trump's behalf as first deputy attorney general and now acting attorney general and has repeated the same sort of thing that we've heard from the president arguing that Trump was targeted by politicized investigations when he was out of office. but we have seen now since early April when he came into the acting role what appears to be a kind of increased cadence from the Justice Department of investigations or prosecutions of either entities or people who the president has made clear he does not like. So one example would be the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has long been a target of conservatives who have complaints about how the SPLC operates.

The SPLC has been indicted in connection with how it paid confidential informants who are infiltrating hate groups. You've had the second indictment that I mentioned of James Comey has happened in the past couple months. And we now have this investigation surrounding Eugene Carroll and Reed Hoffman. And the one thing that I didn't mention, which is back in the news now, is that $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund that the Justice Department set up as part of a settlement with President Trump. so that he would drop his lawsuit against the IRS over his leaked tax documents. And that all culminated under Todd Blanche once he was elevated. It sure did. And it's his signature on some of those papers. There was actually a development in that today. There has been legal challenges to that fund.

A judge in the Eastern District of Virginia has temporarily blocked the fund from moving forward. has basically said the Justice Department cannot take in any claims. It cannot put any money in the fund, cannot disperse any money to claimants. While that litigation is moving forward, a lawsuit challenging the fund, there's a hearing set for June 12th, but everything with that fund is on hold for now. Yeah, Tam, I want to go back to this point about this all getting sort of ramped up under Todd Blanche. I mean, it looks like he's not really trying to beat the allegations that the Justice Department is basically acting on behalf of the Trump administration and not on behalf of the American people. He is full steam ahead. He is full steam ahead on many agenda items that President Trump has

voiced as mattering to him. And as we know, President Trump is very focused in this second term on retribution. I will add that Blanche is currently in an acting capacity. He would like this job full time. And there are things, there are actions that he has taken that would appeal to the president and perhaps earn a nomination from the president. But at the same point in time, those are the things that are alienating the very people whose votes he would need in order to get confirmed. Blanche is from New York. He is not a D.C. creature. And I think there are questions of whether he can read kind of the politics of D.C. and what he would need to do in order to get confirmed. And as we've talked about on this podcast, that anti-weaponization fund

landed in the Republican Senate caucus like a skunk in a garden party. They did not want to have to deal with that. And in fact, Senator Ted Cruz has a podcast and he talked on that podcast about the very difficult private meeting that Senate Republicans had with Todd Blanche where they just gave it to him. Yeah. All right. Lots to watch there. Okay, Ryan, thanks for your reporting as always. Thank you. And we're back. And with us now is White House correspondent Deepa Shvram. Hi, Deepa. Hello there. Okay, so let's take some time to talk about the last president, Joe Biden. His wife, former first lady, Jill Biden, has a memoir coming out, detailing her experience in the White House. Deepa, one of the things that's getting a lot of attention right now is Jill Biden's reaction to that, like, infamous debate her husband had with Donald Trump. What did she say about it? Why is this getting a lot of attention? Well, I would say first off, this is maybe the first time that we've significantly heard from former First Lady Jill Biden. After everything that happened in 2024, we know she's someone who plays a very critical role in Joe Biden's decision making and in that team's decision making. And basically what she says is that on this debate night, it was late June of 2024.

This was the first debate that we were watching between Trump and Joe Biden. And if you guys recall, it was a crazy night because very quickly it was clear that Joe Biden was not doing great. He was not all right. Yeah, I mean, he was not okay. Unwell, as the kids say. I mean, Biden's voice was really hoarse. It sounded like he was maybe sick. He was tripping over his words.

And if he wasn't speaking, he kind of had this like blank stare and then his mouth was sort of gaping open. And he's had moments kind of like that before on a public stage where he's sort of stumbling. over what he's trying to say, but this was on a different level. I mean, it was very clear that something was different. And I would think I was on the live special that night. Like, I was in the studio. We were all kind of looking each other being like, what's going on? And, you know, immediately staffers are trying to text and say, oh, he's sick. He's not doing great today. And like, it just was like a really crazy night, as you guys remember. And what Jill Biden has said is that she was really alarmed. She saw her husband's debate performance and got scared.

And she did an interview recently with CBS News Sunday morning. She's talking to Rita Braver, and this is what she said. Were you horrified as you saw it unfold? I wasn't horrified. I was frightened because I had never, ever seen Joe like that before or since. Never. Yes. You've never seen him like that.

Never, no. What happened? I don't know what happened. I mean, as I watched it, I thought, oh, my God, he's having a stroke. And it scared me to death. That framing that she has there, where it is a discrete event, where she had never seen it before and never seen it since, really lets her and Biden and the White House and everyone else off the hook for what happened that night in that debate. I'm not sure that the American people would have bought it back then. And I definitely don't think that they're going to buy it now. In March of 2023, there was a poll that found that 68% of Americans believe that President Biden was too old for another term.

The American people spoke in every way that they possibly could, including Democratic voters. Also like to point out just a few weeks before that debate, Joe Biden traveled and came back and immediately did that fundraiser in L.A. Yes. And he was on stage with former president, Barack Obama. That was when a lot of L.A. celebrities kind of tapped in and were like, he's not okay. And I was in that theater in L.A. And granted, you know, we had flown halfway across the world.

Everyone was really tired, including the president. But it was definitely a kind of Joe Biden that no one had really seen before then. So for former First Lady Jill Biden to say, this has never really happened. Sure, maybe not to that degree. but there had certainly been several moments leading up to that where people were like, oh, Joe Biden's looking not that great today. So I guess we should say, like, we have heard from President Trump on this, not surprisingly, earlier today. He commented about the anecdote saying, deal Biden, quote, failed to mention how well he was doing prior to the total collapse. Pretty, I mean, I guess like not super surprising here, but I mean, I still surprised that he still has so much to say about like his vanquished enemies at this point.

I mean, we really did just talk for several minutes about President Trump going after people who are his enemies. President Trump has no bottom to his willingness to punch people while they are down. There is a gallery of photos along the wall near the Rose Garden at the White House where there are portraits of every single president. And then when you get to Joe Biden's portrait, it is a photo of an auto pin, a framed photo of an auto pin because Trump has nicknamed him auto pin implying that he was too checked out to actually sign legislation or executive orders and didn't even know what he was doing as president. Also, we should keep in mind that things aren't going so well for President Trump right now, right? War's not going well. Economy's not doing well. Poll number is not going well.

And like when he feels like he's getting beaten down, he turns to whoever he can punch down on. We have midterms right now. And then another presidential election in 2028 and a big question is like, what are going to be the like litmus test for Democrats? What are going to be the things that are important for Democrats as they look to elect a potential nominee for 2020? Do we think this is going to be part of the conversation? I mean, how are you seeing that potential race stack up, guys? Deepa can speak to this more. but there is a very strong desire that you hear from voters that they want someone younger.

And if you look at the potential Republican field, which we did in a previous pod, or you look at the potential Democratic field, literally everyone is decades younger. Yeah. Yeah. I would just say I think there's also an, I don't know if emotional is the right word, but sort of this anxiety that I think that has come from a post-2020 world for Democrats. where there was so much uncertainty about Joe Biden's health, whether he was going to stay in the race or not, there was so much lack of, you know, voters making their own decisions about, you know, who was going to succeed Joe Biden. It ended up being obviously former Vice President Kamala Harris. There wasn't a primary to figure that out. I think there's just like a general sense of like, oh my God, we really, we really got to get it right. And I feel like it's a little bit of a repeat of how a lot of Democrats

were feeling even like the 2019 primary. Coming off of the 2016 election, it was such a to so many Democratic voters. Like I have this one very critical memory of covering the 2019 primaries. I was in New Hampshire shortly before voters started casting their ballots there. And I like passed by this woman who was having this really emotional conversation with someone on the phone. And she was like, I'm just so worried I'm going to make the wrong choice. And people were just so anxious about making sure that they could beat Trump.

That's obviously not the case in what's coming up in 2028, right? theoretically, Donald Trump is not going to be on the ballot. Obviously, that's against the law, but he keeps teasing the idea of running for a third term. So I'll just point that out. But there is a sense, I think, from Democratic candidates and definitely Democratic voters that it's just like, we got to get this one right. You can't do a repeat of 2024. Everyone's got to be, you know, open, transparent, young like Tam pointed out. And that partly comes to, you know, how they're sort of treating the lead up into announcing their candidacies. I've kind of observed that there's just a little bit more. transparency and the way that a lot of candidates are sort of teasing their potential candidacies, usually we see a lot of coy remarks that are like, oh, I don't know, like, I really like the job I have right now. And not that that's entirely gone away, but you definitely are seeing some Democrats saying, like, yeah, I'm interested. Like, I have, you know, potential here to be a presidential candidate. And I think that might be a little bit new. Yeah. It's so interesting when I'm thinking about, like, all the Senate candidates that are getting a lot of attention right now and getting a lot of

money, you know, because usually that's like an indicator of like who might be in the running for presidential election. It's like James Talariko in Texas, John Ossoff in Georgia. Like, they're getting a lot of money. Grand Platner in Maine. Like, these are significantly younger candidates than I've seen in a long time. I think it's pretty interesting. We are though, and I will say like, I don't think any of these people have raised their hands for running for president. I think they, you know, this is a hypothetical. I'm just saying, who's making money right now. They are the ones who act or acting like they're running for president. There are a lot of those.

Yeah, yeah. But I will say there are people who are saying, hey, not me. I'm not raising my hand for this. You can count me out. That includes Michigan's outgoing governor Gretchen Whitmer. There's been chatted about her for a long time. She was asked by Fox 2 Detroit about this. This is what she said. I think there will be a robust group of people running for president. I will not be one of them in 2028. I could tell you that. Yeah, I don't know. Do we buy this?

It's so early and yet at the same time. time, like, I think transparency is going to be a lot more important for candidates in this upcoming presidential. And I wonder if, like, just saying outright, I'm in or I'm out is going to hold more weight. So I'm curious to see in this day and age, like, if she's saying that now, I think it would be a lot more rockier for her to go back months down the line. But we'll see. Yeah. She seemed far more conclusive than politicians usually are. And she's She's well trained as a politician. She could have given a wiggle answer if she wanted to. Totally. I was going to say like, I think you hear a lot of candidates sometimes saying like, yeah, I'm in. And then later on, they're like, oh, you know, for family reasons or I like the job I have. You can kind of backtrack it that way. It's definitely not as common for someone to rule it out entirely and then change their mind. Yeah. I mean, and I wonder how much of this is like the electability calculus that a lot of Democrats are doing. Do they want to put another woman? You know, like, do they feel like that's viable? Yeah. I wonder how much that gets in there too. All right. Well, I do. I do want to talk about folks who are telegraphing that they're interested in 2028. Tam, who are you seeing

like sort of stepping into this early? And Deepa, feel free to jump in if I run out of air. I got you. Gavin Newsom, California governor, has a podcast, also has an ex-account that is just like trolling Trump every day and getting a lot of attention from Democrats. Pete Buttigieg, who ran for president before, former Transportation Secretary in the Biden administration, He is out campaigning with literally like any Democrat with a pulse in any state, but especially early voting states. J.B. Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, very clearly making all the motions of someone who is probably running for president. Also, he's lost a lot of weight. I'm not saying this is a thing, but it's definitely a thing. A lot of candidates lose weight before a presidential run. I can't say I fully understand it, but he made a joke.

at the gridiron dinner. Giving a speech at the gridiron dinner in Washington, D.C. is another sign you're probably running for president. And he joked, I'm the Gov who put Gov in Wagovi. Chris Murphy, Senator from Connecticut, has a bookout. Josh Shapiro, Westmore, and former Vice President Kamala Harris isn't ruling anything out. Oh, and I also forgot about Rahm Emanuel, Roe Kana, and Ruben Gallego, who are all all. also doing the things. What an overwhelming list already. I think debate nights are going to be like three. It's going to take like five days straight of debates, like 20 people on each stage. It's debate week in America. It's debate week in America. I will also just say, you know, to Ashley's earlier point. You had a long list there, Tam, and there was only one woman on it. Yep. Yep. That's a good place to leave it. Let's take a quick break. And then it's time for Can't Let It Go. And we're back and it's time for Can't Let It Go. That's the part of the show where we talk about things from the week that we just can't. stop thinking about politics or otherwise. I'm going to start. So the thing that I can't let go of this week has probably been, I don't know if it's been over everyone's news feeds as much as mine,

but like. It may just be your algorithm. Yeah, you know, lots of knitting stuff, people with pet rats. And then also for me this week, it was the Pope's encyclical on AI. Like, I think the robots have figured out that I was raised Catholic. So it's interesting to me. And the reason why I can't let this go is like, you know, I was, I'm a confirmed Catholic, but I'm like not a religious person, but I'm like culturally Catholic, right? And so I haven't not really cared about what the Catholic Church has been up to much until this week. I am, I just cannot get over this like 42,000 word treatise from Pope Leo about how concerned he is about AI. I'm with you, Pope Leo. I am also a Luddai. I have concerns. But the thing that stood out to me is just like how many cultural

references were sort of like baked into this like I don't it's not even a speech anyways isn't a cyclical you could look up what that is and um it's like a letter I guess a very long letter and uh he quoted Gandalf from Lord of the Rings in there uh he mentioned the movie shinler's list oh NBC News also mentioned Beethoven symphony number nine uh he talked about Picasso anyways it was just like a real love letter to like human made art that I thought was really interesting and I I just cannot believe that I've been so locked into something the pope has been doing, but I can't get over it. Well, here's the thing. He's an American Pope. Yeah. He makes references that Americans understand. He speaks like a guy from Chicago.

And I think that he is tapping into something that politicians would be smart to pay attention to. Yeah. I'm glad you guys are joining me on this. Anyways, okay, Tam, what can't you let go of this week? What I cannot let go of is the Great American State Fair for Freedom 250. They announced a series of concerts on the National Mall to celebrate what is great about America, or maybe just to celebrate what was great about a certain period of time in the 1990s, because it included Young MC, Vanilla Ice, and Brett Michaels, among others. Oh, my gosh. So, as with many things in the Trump era, once this lineup was announced, there was backlash, not to mention the mocking about all of the artists from a certain period.

But then as sometimes happens in this time that we live in, many of the artists pulled out. They said they didn't realize that what they were doing could be perceived as political. And so artist after artist after artist has pulled out. of this concert. And so it is now just basically... What a mess. A mess. It's a dumpster fire.

And it's, you know, it's a bummer because I was hoping to see Brett Michaels on the National Mall. Yeah, break out those acid-washed jeans. Well, are they doing like state fair related things otherwise? Because my mind, as you guys know, from covering many elections, like, are there going to be like the butter cow? Are we going to see the butter cow on the National Mall? I mean, the butter cow would definitely melt. I think that there's supposed to be a Ferris wheel.

I think that the conception is sort of an almost like a world's fair type celebration. And, you know, President Trump has used Freedom 250 as a reason to need to make dramatic changes to Washington, D.C., and fix all the fountains and refinish the reflecting pool. And, you know, it goes on and on and on. But, yeah, I mean, the lineup was more like county fair than state fair. Fair enough. Yeah. If nothing else, Tam, this is a reminder that about a month from now this town is going to be nuts. Yes.

I have to make a plan for that. Yes, absolutely. All right. Okay, Deepa, what can't you let go of this week? So the thing I can't let go of this week is a speech that was given at the news Emmys earlier this week in New York. There was a high school senior. He's graduating this year. His name is Santiago Campos, and he was invited on stage because he won a scholarship from CBS News, which is really great. He can put that towards college. He said his plan was. But what was so interesting is that he took his time on stage to accept the word and thank people for the scholarship that he's getting. But he was also really critical of the direction of the network that he got the award from and just basically took his time on stage to talk about how concerned he. was about the direction of, you know, these corporate organizations and their decision-making

and their editorial strategies leaking into news and the truth and what we share to our audiences as journalists. And I, you know, go listen to the speech if you want to, you know, don't have time to read every comment that he made here. But I will just say it was like an enormous amount of courage that he showed up on stage in front of a lot of very significant journalists who were in the room. And he basically said that Mike Wallace is the former CBS journalist who the award is named after. And he essentially said that Mike Wallace wouldn't be happy with the direction that that network is going in. And it was just a really, you know, important speech that he gave. And also just, I thought, really courageous. And it's getting a lot of attention online.

He gave an interview with The Guardian where he was like, I'm actually not on social media. He's not on X. So I don't know how much of that feedback he's seeing, which is maybe for the best, or the worst, since there's a lot of folks who are singing. his praises. But yeah, pretty cool to see, you know, another generation and someone who's, you know, just finishing up high school really paying attention and really clocked into the information flow that we see going on in this country. And I just thought it was really cool. So, shout up to that guy. And then in the same week, 60 Minutes, which is the most popular news show in America, actually, 60 Minutes fired two of its correspondents who said that they were facing

pressure to change their stories in a way that they thought introduced bias, political bias, and announced a new executive producer of that program, someone who does not have broadcast journalism experience, though he does have some journalism experience and has made documentary films. But this is a really, this has been a rough, rough week. American journalism in general is in a weird spot right now, but I'm glad to hear that there are some young people with somebody. who are essentially throwing us under the bus and being like, why am I the one speaking up about this? And you know what? Tushay, man.

Like, yeah, I agree. Don't become a lawyer. Follow through on that journalism scholarship and come join us. Definitely. Okay, that's all for today. Before we go, if you love the NPR Politics Podcast, you need to hang out with us on the NPR app. It's the best way to catch every episode. And if you turn on notifications, we'll let you know the second a new conversation drops.

Download the NPR app today. Our executive producer is Mithoni Maturi. Our producers are Casey Morel and Brea Suggs. Our editor is Rachel Bay. Special thanks to Krishnative Kalimer. I'm Ashley Lopez. I cover politics. I'm Deepa Shiverum.

I cover the White House. And I'm Tamara Keith, senior political correspondent. And thank you for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.