Weekend Edition: Ongoing U-S and Israeli Combat Operations Against Iran, Campaign 2026 Primaries, and Video Depositions of Fmr. President Bill Clinton and Hilary Clinton

In this weekend's episode, three segments from this past week's Washington Journal.

First, a conversation with journalist Avi Mayer, founder of the Jerusalem Journal, discusses

ongoing U.S. and Israeli combat operations against Iran.

Then, the first primaries of campaign 2026 kicked off this week.

We read the T-Leaves with National Journal's hotline editor Kirk Beto.

Plus, the video depositions of former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton went public

this week.

We'll discuss the fallout and what's next in the Epstein Files investigation with Ken

Thomas of the Wall Street Journal.

Ready, set, co-kate your Toyota today with great deals on your favorite SUVs at your local

Toyota dealer, like the all-new 2026 RAV4 or Spacious Grand Islander.

Visit toyota.com for more Toyota.

Let's go places.

Rinse knows that greatness takes time, but soda's laundry.

So Rinse will take your laundry and hand-deliver it to your door, expertly cleaned.

And you can take the time pursuing your passions.

Time one spent sorting and waiting, folding and queuing, now spent challenging and innovating

and pushing your way to greatness.

So pick up the Irish flute or those calligraphy pens or that daunting beef Wellington recipe

card and leave the laundry to us.

Rinse, it's time to be great.

We begin with Jerusalem Journal founder Avi Mayer.

On the ongoing U.S.-Israeli combat operations against Iran and how the conflict is impacting

Israelis.

I would like to begin with the latest from the ground in the conflict with U.S.-Israel

against Iran.

Oh, great.

A good morning.

We understand that the operation against Iran continues in full force.

There have been numerous sorties over the course of the night, targeting various installations

in Iran, including in the capital Tehran.

We know that an underground bunker that was employed by the late Supreme Leader Hamani

was targeted this morning by Israeli planes.

It has been destroyed.

And both U.S. and Israeli forces continue to target missile installations in order to

prevent Iran from firing missiles at U.S. allies in the region.

As of now, the death count on the Iranian side is estimated to be in the thousands, almost

overwhelmingly military personnel and regime operatives.

There have been 11 people killed here in Israel, and unfortunately, six U.S. service members

have been killed as well.

The overwhelming majority of the missile fired up until this point has actually been

targeted at U.S. allies in the Gulf.

Israel has, of course, received quite a few missiles as well, but those numbers have been

declining over the past few days, and that is interpreted by military experts as a combination

of Iran simply running out of missiles to fire.

Israel and the U.S. did quite a job on them back in June, as well as the very methodical

targeting of missile launchers over the past few days that have simply restricted Iran's

ability to fire missiles at this point.

What is the Israeli government's understanding of Iran's weaponry and their resources?

Well, look, Iran still does retain a certain military power.

We understand that there are still significant military missile reserves that are being

employed against both Israel and other U.S. allies in the region.

We've seen that on an ongoing basis, but I'll tell you, you're in Jerusalem.

We've not actually had a siren since some time yesterday.

We had a quiet night for the first time this week, which is an indication to us that Iran,

quite frankly, is running out of its ability to target Israel and to target other allies

in the region.

It does not mean that it won't be able to replenish its ability to target Israel and other

allies, as we know it has done since the June war, which is why both Israeli-United

States are targeting installations that enable Iran to both manufacture and fire those weapons

during a war like this one.

Describe what it means to be in Israel, in Jerusalem, the sirens that you referenced.

Well, it's been fairly discomforting over the past few days.

The first few days of this war were quite unsettling.

We were in and out of bomb shelters fairly constantly.

As noted, the frequency of the missile attacks has decreased over the past few days.

We in Jerusalem have been actually fairly lucky that very few of the missiles have actually

hit our area.

Most of the missiles have been targeting the Tel Aviv area and areas in Israel's north

and south.

We should note that there are also missiles being fired by Hezbollah, which of course

is Iran's proxy in southern Lebanon, targeting communities in northern Israel and well beyond.

That has been ongoing over the past few days.

But I have to tell you, I was walking around Jerusalem earlier, doing my preshabat shopping.

It felt pretty normal.

Most shops are open, public transit is operating, the sun is out.

You would barely know that there was a war on, but for the fact that children are out of

school, schools are not operating.

Of course, anything can change at a moment's notice.

Outline Israel's military operations in this campaign.

We understand that there is a multi-stage plan of foot.

First and foremost, there is this effort to degrade Iran's missile capabilities to prevent

it from targeting Israel and other U.S. allies in the region, as well as from targeting

U.S. and Israeli planes in the air.

That has been very successful.

We understand that U.S. and Israeli forces are operating with what they call aerial supremacy,

essentially unchallenged in the skies of Iran.

The next stage, of course, is targeting regime officials, targets those who are at the center

of the terror apparatus of the Iranian regime.

Chief among them, of course, the Supreme Leader Hamani, who was taken out in the first minutes

of this operation.

I think what we see happening now is a steady degrading of Iran's military capabilities,

targeting of regime figures and installations.

The thought is that this will create the circumstances on the ground for the protests that had swept

through Iranian streets just a few weeks ago to resume and for the Iranian people to

see to their own future.

What is left of the Iranian regime?

Well, we don't really know.

They've been keeping things fairly under wraps.

There have been reports a few days ago that the council that selects the Supreme Leader

was convening to select the successor to the late Hamani, but they were conflicting reports

as to whether or not that actually happened.

We understand that there was an effort to target that council as it was gathering, and

there's been a great deal of secrecy over whether or not that gathering actually took place

and whether a determination was made.

We know that there are certainly certain senior figures who are still alive.

We don't know exactly who is and who is not, and that is intentional.

Because they know that the minute they pop up their head, they too could be targeted.

Axios this morning with an exclusive president Trump says he must be involved in picking

Iran's next leader.

What do you think the Israeli government would say about that?

Well, I don't know that Israel has a particular figure or individual in mind, and I don't

really think it's up to the United States or Israel to select Iran's next leader.

I think that's for the Iranian people to decide.

The Iranian people have been living under a totalitarian regime for decades now.

They have not, in fact, enjoyed the democratic privileges that we enjoy in the United States

Israel and throughout the West.

They are devoid of human and civil rights, women and LGBT people are oppressed.

I think our hope here in Israel, and I think to be the hope that shared by others around

the world, is that what emerges in Iran is a democratic leadership, a democratic government

that represents the will and the desires of the Iranian people that affords them.

It's a basic human and civil rights, and it sees to live at peace with its neighbors

in the region and around the world.

From Jerusalem this morning, we're talking with Avi Mer, who is the sub-stack founder

of Jerusalem Journal, and he'll take your questions, comments about the U.S. Israel combat

operations against Iran.

You can start dialing in now, and we'll get to your thoughts here in just a minute.

What is the Jerusalem Journal?

What is your editorial point of view?

Jerusalem Journal is a fairly new publication, and the idea is to offer a deeper look at

the events in Israel, the Middle East, and across the Jewish world, and then is currently

available on other platforms.

It's a fairly new publication, but we've been very privileged to feature some of the leading

minds on these issues, and I think it offers a bit of a more nuanced look at the developments

on the ground.

You were the editor-in-chief at the Jerusalem Post, and you've had roles with Jewish organizations

like the American Jewish Committee and APAC.

How did those experiences shape what you do now, and does it lead to an editorial point

of view for your sub-stack?

Well, I think our sub-stack, our publication Jerusalem Journal, is very centrist.

We try to ensure that we represent a broad range of views.

If we represent a Democrat, we're going to bring on to a Republican as well.

We have a right-wing Israeli, we're going to ensure that there's a left-wing Israeli

represented as well.

I think that is the responsibility of any editor to do that's certainly something that guided

me in my work at the Jerusalem Post, and I think that ultimately, that is what it falls

for any editorial team to do, and ensure that all relevant perspectives are presented,

even if they make us uncomfortable.

That's ultimately what the news media is all about, and I think those of us who are interested

in our real and substantive conversation should be open to hearing various different perspectives

and we try to reflect those in Jerusalem Journal as well.

That was Journalist Avi Mayer, founder of the Jerusalem Journal, who joined us from Jerusalem.

America leads the world in medicine development.

It matters.

We get new medicines first, nearly three years faster, five million Americans go to work

because we make medicines here at home, and not relying on other countries keeps us safe.

But China is racing to overtake us.

Will we let them, or will we choose to stay ahead?

When America leads, America cures.

Let's go to Washington to keep us in the lead.

Learn how at AmericaCures.com, paid for by Pharma.

Spring styles are at Nordstrom Rack stores now, and there are up to 60% off.

Stock up and save on rag and bone, made well, vince, all saints, and more of your favorites.

How did I not know Rack as a deed is?

Why do we rock for the hottest stills?

For so many good brands, join the Nordy Club to unlock exclusive discounts, shop new arrivals first, and more.

Plus, buy online and pick up at your favorite Rack store for free.

Great brands, great prices.

That's why you rack.

Score more with the college branded Venmo debit card and earn up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash.

Got paid back?

With the Venmo debit card, you can instantly access your balance and spend on what you want,

like game day snacks, gear, tickets, and more.

The more you do, the more cash back you can earn.

Plus, there's no monthly fear minimum balance.

Sign up now at Venmo.com slash college card.

The Venmo master card is issued by the bank court bank NA, select schools available.

Venmo stash terms and exclusions apply at Venmo.me slash stash terms.

Max $100 cash back per month.

During lows, pro savings days, save more on what goes into the job.

Add power to your lineup, with a free to walk 20 volt max 5 amp hour battery.

When you buy a select to walk 20 volt max tool.

Plus, get up to 35% off, select major appliances for whirlpool, maytag, and more.

Get the job done right.

Keep more in your pocket.

That's pro savings days.

Our best lineup is here at Lowe's.

Valor through 327 selection varies by location, raw supplies last.

Next, a conversation with Kirk Beto, editor of National Journal's Hotline, about this

past week's primary elections, especially in the hotly contested Texas Senate primary.

I think the first big picture take away I have from this tonight is that it was a bad

night to be in incumbent.

Not only in the five races with endangered incumbents we were watching, the top of the

marquee was the Senate race with Senator John Cornyn.

All five of those are going to a runoff.

If they're not going to a runoff, they lost like Dan Crenshaw.

He's the first incumbent to lose renomination so far in this cycle.

And if this trend continues, he won't be the last.

Why did John Cornyn want to go to a runoff?

Was that race setting up to look like he's trying to hold on to that seat against Ken

Paxson?

Yeah, I think you know, it's kind of like in the NCAA tournament where you're a lower

seat against a higher seat here almost that you're playing for overtime here.

That's what John Cornyn was doing.

Now it's going to be a longer overtime.

It's a 12 week runoff that the runoff happens on May 26th the day after Memorial Day.

Coming into this, not many polls had cornet up.

In fact, almost every poll that I saw leading up to this had taxed in leading him.

So playing for overtime here, keeping Paxson under 50% and actually posting a stronger

than it's expected showing.

I think there's only about a three percentage point difference between the two of them

as we're sitting here the morning after.

You've got to feel not great if you're cornyn, but you did better than you had expected here.

And then switch over to the Democratic Senate primary, James Tallerico, has been declared

the winner by the Associated Press and they called the race.

But Jasmine Crocket has not conceded, explained what her concerns are, especially in the

Dallas voting precincts.

So her big concern, Jasmine Crocket's base of support was in black voters.

She ran up the score there.

And the problem that she sees right now is a controversy over voting precincts and voting

centers in Dallas County, which is sprawling district where the city of Dallas is and it's

a predominantly black district.

Now the controversy is last night there was a series of, there was confusion over where

about a couple hundred voters could actually cast their votes in a break from previous

election cycles.

Republicans had pushed a rule change that voters couldn't go and vote at these giant voting

centers.

They had to go to assign precincts that caused a lot of confusion with voters who were coming

out on election day.

Now there was an order that said that polls are going to remain open in extra two hours.

And if you were in that two hour window, you could do a vote.

Then the Tetsis Supreme Court intervened and said that those votes don't count or they're

going to be provisional ballots.

So it's a real messy situation right now, and one of the biggest population centers

in the state.

So does Jasmine Crockett have any recourse for her concerns or is this essentially over

at this point?

She's promised legal action again, an AP call is not binding, it's not a legal certification

here.

So she could go in and challenge the result, these results she probably will.

But Tau Rico's lead right now is I believe at about maybe six percentage points or so

as we're sitting here.

So the couple hundred votes that might be added to her total won't be enough to overcome

James Tau Rico, run it up the score in Hispanic communities, more rural communities, independence

who crossed over.

He really had a kind of an overwhelming victory here.

The AP has at over seven percentage points at this point.

If you're James Tau Rico and let's say he does end up winning this when all is said

and done in the official results are in, who does James Tau Rico want to run against

in Texas, come the fall, John Kornin or Ken Paxson.

He wants Ken Paxson.

He absolutely wants Ken Paxson.

Ken Paxson is the controversial attorney general there who has a lot of professional

and personal values that Tau Rico can run against, plus Republicans are doing the dirty

work for him right now.

This is the most expensive primary on record, $122 million were spent on advertisements

alone on the Democratic and Republican side, and a lion share of those that money was

spent against Ken Paxson, about $70 million worth was spent opposing Ken Paxson.

He's already got this little bit of a softer image right now amongst voters, and Tau Rico

is going to raise money and overfist here if Paxson's an nominee.

Does Donald Trump finally get involved in this race on the Republican side on the primary

as it goes to a runoff?

That's the $122 million question here of what role does he play here?

I think Kornin can probably start making a better case because of his overperformance

here that you need me to win here, you need me to keep your Senate majority.

If Paxson's an nominee, he puts it in play, and you kind of saw that in both Paxson

and Kornin's victory speeches last night, they were to an audience of two people, to Donald

Trump, who they were reaffirming their loyalty to, Ken Paxson talked about being there on

his on Trump's election launch in 2024.

Kornin talked about how important it was for him to win that nomination to help Trump

serve out the net's two terms to make sure his agenda doesn't stall in the Senate, and

also Wesley Hunt.

They were trying to make appeals to Wesley Hunt supporters to get his endorsement because

he finished with about 13.5% or so percent, about 14%.

If any one of those two were able to capture those voters, that would put them over the

line in the runoff.

And John Kornin currently ahead in vote counts at 41.9% to Ken Paxson's 40.7, Wesley

Hunt.

You had it at 13.5%, of course, in Texas, it takes 50 plus one vote to win the nomination.

You mentioned some of the down ballot races.

What else are the takeaways from Texas, especially in Tony Gonzalez' race in Texas, 23rd District

to Congressman, getting a lot of attention, negative attention on Capitol Hill for his personal

issues up here.

It's at the end.

He's really dud in there.

He said he's not a general resign.

He said he's not a general walk away here.

I wonder if the results last night make him change his mind at all.

It's kind of like the situation with Representative Van Taylor from a few years ago who had a bombshell

revelation of an affair the weekend before the primary.

He got drawn into a runoff and then decided, instead of going through a 12-week relitigation

of his record, he decided to drop out.

Tony Gonzalez has given us no indication he will do that because he still has Trump's

support.

Trump did not withdraw his endorsement neither to the NRCC, and I think that's kind of

my big takeaway here is that Trump is still the golden ticket for Republicans.

If you look at the one member who did lose re-nomination, Dan Crenshaw, that's the one

member of the entire Texas delegation that Trump did not endorse and handed up losing

pretty handedly.

Go to North Carolina, at the Tar Heel State, that Senate race expected to be one of the key

races of the 2026 cycle.

Absolutely.

It's one of the four toss-up races and it's key for Democrats if they want any hope

of retaking the Senate here.

This primary was not nearly as bitter or expensive at all as it was in Texas.

It was kind of decided when both the Republican and the Democrat jumped in.

Former Democratic Governor Roy Cooper sailed through the primary here on the Democratic side,

on the Republican side, former RNC chair Michael Watley, who is also the former chair of

the North Carolina Democratic Party.

A Republican party went right through and with how easy this was, it's going to be so

much more difficult now that we're in a general election footing.

I talked to some strategists on both sides of the aisle, with the price tag for this race

alone is going to do top half a billion dollars with how much money is going to be spent

in here.

We're off to the races now.

This is a key race for Democrats and Republicans, heading to November.

Were there down-ballot house races in North Carolina that you were watching last night?

So there were two that I was watching in North Carolina, you know, Republicans in the

state, Jerry Bandered, and Redrew the District.

So there's only one lone swing district that's Don Davis' seat up in Northern North Carolina.

He's a Democrat.

It's now a seat that Trump won by about 13 points.

So Republicans are going to be favored heading into November on this one.

Lori Butthoud, who jumped in at the last minute, I believe the week before filing deadline.

She was the 2024 nominee.

She said that she wasn't going to run again.

She changed her mind.

Jumped in and barely scraped by the Republican primary there with about maybe three or

so percentage points lead.

That's going to be a real blockbuster race because she has the ability to sell fundraise.

Don Davis has the ability to raise a lot of money as well.

So we'll be keeping a close eye on that race.

But the big one that I was watching was in North Carolina for, were Valerie Fushie, Democrat

was facing off a Justice Democrat, endorsed progressive challenger, Anita Almond.

And right now, that races within a percentage point.

There's still no AP race call.

The representative has declared victory.

Alam said that she is going to request a recount under North Carolina law, anything

within a percentage point automatically goes into a recount.

This could have real big impacts throughout the rest of the primary season because this

is kind of laid bare the visions within the Democratic Party.

That was Kirk Beto, Editor of National Journal's Hotline.

Finally, Wall Street Journal National Political Reporter Ken Thomas discusses this week's

release of the videos of depositions of former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton

in the Epstein investigation.

So remind us about why the Clintons were deposed in the Oversight Committee.

The committee wanted to get more information on any knowledge they might have about Jeffrey

Epstein and his activities.

The House Oversight Committee is doing an investigation into how the government investigated these

cases.

And so there was a long-standing legal battle here between the Clintons and their lawyers

and members of the committee on whether or not the Clintons should have to testify.

There was a threat to hold them in contempt and then finally the Clintons agreed to do

this, this deposition which we saw on Thursday and Friday.

They wanted to have a public hearing and the agreement was that it would be videotaped.

The, it was the Oversight Committee that released the file, the, sorry, the videos.

Correct.

Did they edit them?

No, both depositions are about four and a half hours.

It's edited in the sense that there were moments when they had to go off the record.

But for the most part, any viewer who watches these videos start to finish will get a real

sense of what it was like in the room, beginning with introductions, with an opening statement

from either Clinton and then questioning from both the majority and the minority.

So if they're not edited, why not air it live?

What's the difference?

Well, I think the majority of the committee felt like it was in their rest interest to simply

do it this way.

And I think the agreement was also that this would allow the Clintons to just simply do this

in their hometown that they wouldn't have to come down to Washington and have a big production.

But I think from the Clinton standpoint, they felt like the Republicans didn't want

it to be a public forum because they were afraid that the optics would be bad, that it

might conjure up the Hillary Clinton Benghazi hearing of more than a decade ago in which

the Republicans on that committee didn't really come out that well.

So what did we learn about the relationship of the Clintons to Jeffrey Epstein?

Fairly limited information.

I think if you start with Hillary Clinton's testimony, she went first last Thursday.

She was adamant that she really had no relationship with Jeffrey Epstein at all.

And I think her posture was just, why am I here?

You know, there's a moment early on, it was a much more of a tense hearing, I would say,

at that position.

There was a moment about an hour into the session in which the Clinton legal team learned

that photographs of Hillary Clinton from within the deposition room had been leaked to

a social media influencer, it was out on social media.

And that was in violation of the rules.

And I think as a result, you saw this very strong reaction from Hillary Clinton.

She was very upset that these photos had been leaked.

And so it was much more of a tense hearing.

She really did not feel like she could add much to the committee's understanding, whereas

with Bill Clinton.

Well, so before we go into Bill Clinton, let's actually show that part that you're talking

about of former secretary Clinton at the deposition, here it is.

And this is an email, this is an invitation to the fundraiser where you were there.

Do you have any idea if the Epstein referred to is the Jeffrey Epstein?

There's a lot of people named Epstein in this area.

This is in the DOJ files.

I have no knowledge of it.

It says Mr. and Mrs. Epstein.

Yeah, I have no knowledge of this.

Okay, so it could be a different Jeffrey Epstein.

I have, you're showing me an email from someone who I don't recall knowing about a fundraiser

that wasn't for me, but was for Congresswoman Lowey.

I have no information.

Okay.

I went to the fundraiser to support my friend, Neil Lowey.

All right.

Excuse me.

Can I interrupt?

I have another photo that are being released of the secretary as she is testifying from

inside this room.

Can you please advise me as to whether or not that's permissible and consistent with the

rules, particularly given that we have asked for public hearing if there are photos that

are being released of the secretary as she is testifying?

Can you please explain how that can work?

I've done with this.

If you guys are doing that, I am done.

You can hold me and contempt from now until the cows come home.

This is just typical behavior.

You will go off to record.

I think those ones have sex to understand how that permissible for the hearing was.

It doesn't matter.

We all are abiding by the same rules.

I will take that down.

Yeah, well, I would like to take a break at this moment.

Yeah, I'd like to have a conversation for now.

Go off the record.

Go ahead, Ken.

So now on the Bill Clinton side of things, I think there was a lot more material to work

through.

Bill Clinton talked about that he first became connected to Jeffrey Epstein in his post-presidency

through Larry Summers, the former Treasury secretary.

Summers said that this is someone who has a large plane and could take you and your staff

in the Secret Service to the places you needed to go to, establish your foundation, and

really all he wants in exchange is-

So this is after his president, not during?

That's right.

This was like in 2001, 2002.

And in exchange, really, Summers said, you just have to sit with Jeffrey Epstein for

an hour, talk politics, talk economics, that kind of thing.

And so, you know, for a foundation that was just getting off the ground, that was interested

in doing work to reduce the cost of AIDS medication around the world.

This seemed like a nice arrangement.

And you know, the thing that Clinton said throughout is that there was nothing that he saw

or learned that would have indicated that Epstein was involved in any of this malfeasance.

And he also, during the testimony, I thought was interesting.

He talks about a conversation he had with Donald Trump at the time, you know, Trump

was, this was in around 2002, 2003.

He talks about being at a charity golf tournament and Trump brought up.

Hey, I heard you have flown on Jeffrey Epstein's plane.

And what Clinton said about the conversation is that Trump said, you know, we used to

be friends, but we had this falling out over a land deal.

And so it seems to establish that this, you know, there was a real estate deal that had

gone bad, and that's what led to Trump and Epstein having a breakup.

But the thing Clinton did say is that there was nothing that Trump said that indicated

Trump knew of anything, you know, that any criminal behavior or anything like that.

Well, let's watch a portion of former President Bill Clinton here at his deposition.

Moving on to Virginia, Robert Schufer, are you familiar with her?

Has already been established.

She has stated in numerous sworn statements, including a sworn deposition in the deposition

in the Maxwell trial that she saw you on the island, which Jeffrey Epstein.

And in fact, this morning, her family shared her diary with me.

And in it is a quote wherein she writes, quote, Bill Clinton met two times

island with two girls, C-T-G-M and J-E.

What is your reaction to that?

It's not true.

Do you have any dates associated with that with their dates on the diary?

I don't have, I don't have that information, but we'll be happy to share it with you.

What?

It's terrific, because I think there are also records that were reflected where I'll see what it been.

So thanks.

Would you say that or both?

This is from her personal diary that her family shared with us.

It's, but the book came out more recently.

Did she say that on the book?

I can't, I'm just reading you the entry from her diary that her family shared with me.

I think she ultimately reached a different conclusion, although I had no contact with her.

Okay, well, I just want to make sure that it's on the record that that is for Virginia

and Jufrey's statement.

Any comment on that, Ken?

Yeah, it's an interesting exchange, I think.

That's an issue of whether President Clinton went to Jeffrey Epstein's island or not.

He says that he didn't, there were some allegations that he might have,

but he's adamant that he never took a trip to the island.

I think what's also notable about that exchange is that the person asking the question

is Melanie Stansbury, a Democratic member from New Mexico.

So it shows there is a real bipartisan push here to get facts here.

It's not like a Democratic member of that committee is going light or easy on President Clinton

because he's a member of the same party.

That was Ken Thomas, national political reporter for the Wall Street Journal.

Here are more interviews from C-SPAN's Washington Journal on our website at C-SPAN.org

on the C-SPAN Now app or on C-SPAN television, live every morning from 7 to 10 a.m. Eastern.