Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

This Week: Platner Controversies Come To A Head At The Polls; Trump Digs In As Republican Senators Push Back. Dan Sullivan Vs. Dan Sullivan: New Candidate Rocks Key Race; Interview with Sen. Dan S. Sullivan (R-AK); Supreme Court Faces Extraordinary Showdown with Trump; Will Bush Family Dynasty Carry on in Maine? Aired 8-9a ET

Aired June 07, 2026 - 08:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[08:00:41]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): The Maine event. Graham Platner fights back.

GRAHAM PLATNER (D), MAINE SENATE CANDIDATE: Now as every single piece of that past and journey gets dug up, litigated, and weaponized, you have my back.

RAJU: With just two days left, will they really?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Unfortunately, we're going to lose this race again.

RAJU: Plus, digging in.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What the hell do I have to be here for?

RAJU: The president takes on another fight with his own party.

How much in danger do you think the Republican majority is right now?

REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): I think we're doomed.

RAJU: And seeing double.

SEN. DAN SULLIVAN (R-AK): This is just corruption.

RAJU: My exclusive with Alaska's Republican Senator Dan Sullivan facing a challenge from another Dan Sullivan.

SULLIVAN: When people are going, oh, there's two Dan Sullivan's. Isn't that funny? No. It's cheating.

RAJU: Could it help Democrats win? INSIDE POLITICS, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power, starts now.

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (on camera): Good morning. And welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. I'm Manu Raju.

This is a critical moment in the race for the Senate majority. Since the beginning of the cycle, Democrats have made the state of Maine central to their path back to power, with longtime Republican Susan Collins facing slumping poll numbers in a blue state where President Trump is deeply unpopular.

But in just two days, Democratic leaders could be stuck with a nominee who may blow up their chances. And that's Graham Platner, the progressive firebrand who seemed to be on a glide path to victory in the primary after Governor Janet Mills suspended her campaign in April. But he is facing new allegations of unsettling behavior towards women, the most serious of which he's denied.

Yet it comes on top of a month of a drip, drip, drip of controversies. Meantime, Mills is still on the ballot on Tuesday's primary.

At a rally this weekend, Platner made clear he was in it for the long haul.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PLATNER: As every single piece of that past and journey gets dug up, litigated and weaponized. You have my back. And we're going to need to have each other's backs because we are in the fight of our lives.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: So for Democrats, the big question can the worsening environment for the GOP overcome the flaws of any individual candidate, or will public sentiment against Trump be enough to bring them back to power?

Let's bring this -- break this all down with my excellent panel this morning. Marc Caputo from "Axios"; Seung Min Kim of "The Associated Press"; and Astead Herndon from "Vox".

Good morning to you all. Good to see you.

Marc, your sources, what are they telling you about how much alarm there is about Graham Platner at this moment?

MARC CAPUTO, AXIOS SENIR POLITICS REPORTER: Well, Democrats you just played that clip are really worried. And the White House and Republicans are thrilled because this is the one seat that the Republicans are holding. That looked like a pretty good chance to flip. And now they don't really know. RAJU: Yeah. And look, this is -- you know, the question that I posed

there right at the end of this -- this -- the intro here is, is this an environment that is can overcome the candidate flaws or the candidate flaws are still really, really matter. I mean, I think about past election cycles that were terrible for the GOP or that appeared good for the GOP, but flawed candidates like Todd Akin in Missouri, Richard Mourdock in Indiana, Sharron Angle in Nevada, to name a few.

(CROSSTALK)

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: -- North Carolina.

RAJU: Flawed candidates can lose. Is this -- what do you -- what -- how do you think that plays out?

KIM: Well, I think national environment generally was always going to be a bigger factor in the House than in the Senate. The Senate races are much more localized. They're kind of their own entities, although the national environment certainly does matter. Don't get me wrong.

And I think Maine has kind of always been one of those races, because we saw in 2020 that I think a lot of people counted Susan Collins out, particularly in that environment, particularly after a vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh in 2018. But she prevailed.

And I think that she has been able to build this brand in Maine that can kind of overcome the national environment. What's really interesting about how the White House has been approaching Maine has that. They've kind of let her be Susan.

You know, even Vance has said she doesn't always vote with us in the way that she likes, in the way that we would like her to, but we understand that -- and as is Trump.

[08:05:07]

So I think that so she kind of was she kind of was kind of independent from the national environment issues. But there's no doubt that Maine is so critical to the majority. I mean, the path has so far been, you know, North Carolina, Maine, Ohio, Alaska. Now, it may change with Texas, perhaps Iowa, but Maine has just been so critical to Dems regaining the majority. And this certainly makes it a lot more complicated.

RAJU: Yeah. This is the map of what this potential pickups here for Democrats. You know, Alaska, Iowa, Maine, North Carolina, Texas. You know, if Maine falls off the map, suddenly they have to start looking at Texas is still very hard. Yeah. The Republicans have a flawed candidate themselves.

And Ken Paxton, he's got a lot of problems from his past, too. But that's still Texas, still very costly. And then can they win in one of those other red states? That's going to be hard.

ASTEAD HERNDON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: There's no doubt that Democrats chances to retake the Senate are much easier by going through Maine. And that was the reason there was such focus on this race.

To me, you know, the last couple weeks have reinforced the difficulties of leaning on some of these outsider candidates, the kind of non-establishment non-tested there can be an endless kind of roll of new information. But at the same time, I think it also speaks to a DSCC who put up a candidate in the governor, Janet Mills, who did not speak to the electorate. I mean, independently was not raising money, was not polling well.

RAJU: Can she somehow pull off a miraculous victory on Tuesday by being on the primary ballot?

HERNDON: But you mostly see other people making that argument for her. She's not even out campaigning right now. I think it speaks to a sort of lack of energy that she's conducted several points of this race with.

But, you know, the questions about retaking the senate are chief and paramount. But I also think that this race has gotten so much attention because of the uncertainty within the Democratic Party, right? Like me and Marc were talking about this a little bit before, but there's such a parasocial relationship now with Graham Platner. So many people in the Democratic Party are invested on one side or the other about whether Graham is good or bad. And they're not just like letting this race play out more so than they have invested in the teams.

And I think that really speaks to the uncertainty within the party going forward. Right now, there's an open question in 2027 about who they'll be. And a lot, I think, of Democrats are playing up their litmus tests through these midterms candidates right now.

CAPUTO: And to tie this all together, we always have to remember that what matters -- yeah, the national environment. But candidates matter. And in modern campaigning, we are presenting the political establishment presents and sells candidates in the same way that McDonald's sells hamburgers or Coca-Cola sells soda.

RAJU: Yeah. And so he had this group grand Platner that put him up as this great progressive firebrand, this oyster farmer, a kind of true. And, you know, they burnished this image of him. And then now in the crucible of the election, a lot of that is falling away. And notably, he's running and his supporters are supporting him on this idea like, well, Trump is bad and terrible and he's had all of this baggage.

So, you know, our guy like ignore what's going on with our guy. And if you're going to use the Trump model of being this sort of plainspoken figure who is a populist, you've got to follow it through so that when the heat comes on you the way it did with these allegations that he was an abusive boyfriend, he's got to come out there and really be forceful and deny it and fight it back. And he hid like a typical politician running a typical campaign. And if you're going to be the plainspoken oysterman, you can't climb up.

RAJU: Yeah. And the pun is definitely intended there. The number of controversies, of course, have just been building for

him. There's allegations of unsettling behavior towards women. He's denied a lot of that New York times report. There was reports of extramarital sexting. He hasn't quite denied that.

He's -- that tattoo with the Nazi link. There's questions about whether he knew about it or didn't. He says that he didn't know that it was a -- it had Nazi imagery.

And then there's -- there's offensive media posts, social media posts that he has said that it was a different time in his life. He's a different person in the life.

So how are Democrats responding to all of this?

Bernie Sanders is the independent who caucuses with Democrats, his biggest supporter on the left flank of the party put out a post yesterday saying he is fully on board with Bernie -- with Graham Platner talking about his campaign, talking about income inequality and how he's talking about the issues that really matter. And then what about on Capitol Hill, the ones who are very -- not so much in the Bernie camp, Bernie Sanders camp, but also are very concerned about the seat and know how important it is for their quest for the majority.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Are you concerned about Platner's viability given all these controversies?

SEN. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO (D-NV): Well, I can tell you, at the end of the day, I have concerns like some of my colleagues.

RAJU: Are you concerned about his viability as a candidate?

SEN. PETER WELCH (D-VT): That's going to be up to Maine voters? You know, we haven't even had the primary yet.

RAJU: I mean, Janet Mills is suspending her campaign. Do you think that she should unsuspend her campaign?

WELCH: She's still on the ballot.

FETTERMAN: She's the sitting governor and upstanding as a -- as a committed Democrat, you know? And it seems like the only thing wrong with her is she happens to be 78.

REPORTER: Are you still supporting Graham Platner?

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): As I said, I endorsed Graham Platner. We're going to take back -- we're going to beat Susan Collins and take back the Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And that was the -- that was that refrain from Schumer. He said that about five straight times. I -- we're going to take back. We're going to take back the senate and beat Susan Collins. When reporters kept asking him over and over again, including me, saying, well, what are you going to do about Graham Platner? Do you still have confidence in him? And eventually he said, I endorsed Graham Platner.

KIM: Right, right.

RAJU: And then after "The New York Times'" report came out on Thursday, I asked him about do you have any concerns about Graham Platner? And Schumer ignored the question and walked into the senate chamber.

KIM: Right. Because they know how all of these controversies and they're you know, and it's all -- I mean, it's only, you know, June like we may continue to hear more throughout the course of the campaign. They know that this -- these issues can be really problematic.

And I was really struck by I mean, it was almost a literal split screen early on Friday when you have Susan Collins casting, like what, her 10,000th consecutive vote in the senate at the same time that Graham Platner has to address these controversies after "The New York Times" story broke.

And I think that is a conscious that Republicans are continually pushing. I mean, before these allegations came out, Republicans were saying their messaging for this race was that Graham Platner was way too extreme for Maine. But again, the environment I mean, candidates also matter. But environment also matters. And we've seen flawed candidates emerge because kind of the playbook of how you deal with these allegations has changed over the last decade or so.

HERNDON: That's all I was going to say, too, is I think we should remember, this isn't ten years ago, though, and I think we're working from a premise of a Democratic electorate that has lost faith in trusting the establishment sense of electability. And so I was just in Virginia and the Virginia's first a competitive district out there. And one thing that was really clear when we were talking to people is just the anger that they're mostly moving with.

And so, some - -Graham Platner's pitch about kind of not just being a vehicle for policies that are focused on working class, but a kind of a kind of rejection of who establishment thinks should be the candidate is also the point of that campaign. And so I don't think that gives him infinite latitude for scandal. But I do think we should acknowledge that some of the people are signing up for the purposes of D.C. getting mad, you know, like. And so that is kind of built into the cost of the candidacy and is in the air generally in this midterms period.

RAJU: Yeah. So interesting to see. All right. Environment or candidate quality always an issue in these campaigns. We'll see which one ultimately wins out.

All right. Coming up, why President Trump doesn't seem to be listening to the outcries from within his own party over a critical appointment. Plus, my exclusive one on one interview with Alaska Senator Dan

Sullivan. He has a brand new challenger also named Dan Sullivan. New reporting on major GOP concerns about all of this, what it could mean for that marquee race.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:17:32]

RAJU: President Trump has made life for Republicans on Capitol Hill much more difficult than usual. Whether it was his handling of the $1.8 billion DOJ compensation fund, effectively sidelining his immigration agenda until it narrowly passed the Senate on Friday morning and now naming Bill Pulte, a loyalist and political knife fighter with no national security experience, as his new acting director of national intelligence.

Just as Congress was days away from pushing through an extension of expiring federal surveillance authorities, many Republicans are not amused.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Bill, is he qualified to be?

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I don't know of any national security experience he has.

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): I don't know whether he has an intel background before that or -- I truly don't know him at all.

RAJU: Any issues of Bill Pulte as acting DNI?

SEN. TODD YOUNG (R-IN): Don't know much about his background. I'm waiting on the administration to explain to us credentials.

RAJU: What do you think about Bill Pulte as the acting DNI?

REP. BRIAN FITZPATRICK (R-PA): He shouldn't be there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. My excellent panel is back now.

There was news over the weekend about the real impacts of this at the end of the week. There are critical surveillance authorities that are set to expire under the foreign intelligence surveillance act. There was a deal that had been cut between Democrats and Republicans. Remember, this is a constant debate here in Washington since 9/11, protecting national security and also protecting people's civil liberties.

How do you square those two things? There was actual deal to do just that. But now this is completely blown up because Democrats don't want to extend this authority with Bill Pulte as the acting director of national intelligence. So the key leaders in the senate committees, Tom Cotton, Chuck

Grassley, just sent a letter to the administration, writing, we write with regret to ask that you plan for a potential significant gap in foreign intelligence collection.

Seung Min, that's significant.

KIM: That's a really big deal. Obviously, these surveillance authorities expire after Friday, and it does come at a time where obviously, we're always in a heightened security environment, just not just only in politics, but overall. But there are a lot of major events, starting this summer. You have America 250 festivities.

You have the World Cup kicking off this week or later this week. So this is actually a very big deal. But you know, when you were laying out the problems here, Democrats were fully or most or enough Democrats were fully on board with extending these FISA authorities. You know, you're going to always lose a few Republicans on this issue.

[08:20:02]

So, you know, you lose about five Republicans in the Senate. You needed -- there were about 12 to 15 or so Democrats were willing to back this overall deal. But now, because of -- because of Bill Pulte's appointment, they're saying this is the guy who has no national security experience, who will be in charge or who partially in charge of administering this program. We can't have that.

So they're trying to use the leverage that they have to try to get Trump to back off. But Trump loves this guy. I mean, he is not backing off. I think his only concession, if you will, is the fact that he's not going to be the permanent DNI.

RAJU: Yeah. And this is what Hakeem Jeffries told me on Thursday about this. He said, well, the Democrats get behind this, extending the surveillance authorities. Remember, they could have the votes in the house if Democrats fell in line. He said FISA was already on life support as it relates to receiving substantial support from House Democrats. And Donald Trump's appointment of bill as the director of national intelligence has likely pulled the plug on any remaining meaningful support.

So, Marc, you know, Bill Pulte and Trump and why is he so dead set on making him the acting director of national intelligence?

CAPUTO: Because he decided it. That's why. And Bill Pulte apparently walked in his office, called him on the phone like, hey, I want to be DNI, the head of DNI, and Trump's like, okay.

And the deal that was made at the time is that Pulte promised he would fully support him and everything, and he'd fire a bunch of people. One of the things that Donald Trump doesn't like ODNI, he doesn't think the agency is useful. It has a reputation of having a lot in the White House's view of dead wood, intelligence agents from other agencies and offices who just got parked there. And it has the, quote/unquote, "deep state". So he just wants to purge it. And this is his hatchet man. The thing

with Pulte is Pulte is a member of Mar-a-Lago. He's known Trump since before his presidency. His family has it's a big developer family in Florida. And Pulte has a very good relationship with him. He's a guy he can throw out with.

For instance, when Donald Trump posted that very controversial meme of him as a Christ like figure healing, the guy who showed it to him at first, the meme bill.

RAJU: Of course, that actually tells you a lot right there.

But it also is, you know, he's also the guy who was trying to push them -- these alleged mortgage scandals on Democrats, not so much on Republicans, but on Democrats. And Trump, of course, likes that.

HERNDON: You know, Donald Trump has a clear rubric for how you get his affection. It is fealty. It is mimicry. It's deference. And Bill Pulte has done that, and the reason why he's so close to him.

But I think that the larger kind of priorities here speak to something that's different from the first Trump term. I think in that one, you could tell yourself that it was just incompetence or chaos, or Donald Trump is intentionally exploiting the temporary window in which poultry can be there for the purposes of him firing folks.

I'm like, it is not coming from a place of incompetence. It's actually a clear way for them to exploit a loophole for their anti deep state priority. And I think that, you know, this has been an inflicting point of this second term self-inflicted economic crisis, a self- inflicted crisis with Republicans on the Hill. They have made a clear priority of like our agenda at maximum, no matter how it's done. And they're willing to take the political blowback that comes with some of that.

RAJU: All right. Meantime, next Sunday, Trump has a big birthday coming up, number 80. And there have been all these videos over this past year or so of during meetings, Trump appearing to close his eyes for an extended period of time, perhaps dozing off like this past Thursday at a meeting at the White House.

Now, the White House -- they don't seem to -- they deny it, right? Right. They seem to deny that he's actually napping there.

What do you think, Marc? What's going on with the president? Why can't he keep his eyes open -- I mean, right there that that right there with the Dr. Oz seems to be Trump's sleeping.

CAPUTO: Well, I can't say if he's sleeping or not, but I can definitely say a lot of these meetings are boring and go on for two --

RAJU: And especially the cabinet meetings, they're just like droning on about Trump.

KIM: Trump has said, talk shorter. CAPUTO: And then the other thing is, it's like -- he -- if you look

at his true social feed, he's up at 1:00, 2:00 in the morning. I'm asleep by then. I'm 53. He's turning 80, right?

So he's up late at night shitposting, like at a certain point you got to get some winks in. Again, I don't know if he's sleeping, but I can understand why he's bored.

RAJU: What does the White House say about this?

KIM: Well, I mean, I think you've seen the White House really. I mean, they're very cognizant and almost even sensitive to these criticisms. And I was just really struck by how aggressively the White House on social media pushed back by, you know, posting pictures and videos of reporters who are clearly blinking and saying that, oh, you know, they're falling asleep on air.

But, you know, he is turning 80 in a week. You know, he has gotten, you know, more than the average number of physical exams at Walter Reed. So I think just the age of the -- you know, the oldest president is something that's always going to be a subject of scrutiny.

RAJU: Especially since he brought up against Joe Biden constantly --

[08:25:02]

CAPUTO: Yeah.

RAJU: -- including calling him sleepy Joe Biden constantly.

All right. We'll see if the president tomorrow, actually late night at the game, three of the NBA finals in New York.

All right. Still ahead, Dan Sullivan versus Dan Sullivan? A new shakeup in a crucial race in Alaska could have voters seeing double and helped Democrats flip the seat. My exclusive interview with the Republican incumbent, Senator Sullivan. Why he's not amused.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SULLIVAN: This is serious stuff. When people are going, oh, there's two Dan Sullivan's. Isn't that funny? No. It's cheating.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:30:07]

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST: Imagine going to vote in a very important race. But when you look at the ballot, there are two candidates with the same name from the same party. It would be a little confusing, right?

Well, that's exactly what's happening in the crucial Alaska race that could ultimately decide control of the United States Senate. Incumbent Republican Senator Dan S. Sullivan is up for reelection, and there's an 11th hour add also running as a Republican and his name is Dan J. Sullivan. The only difference is on the ballots will be their initials and that could have enormous ramifications because the state has an open primary where the top four vote-getters all advance to the November election.

Republicans fear that both men could end up in the final four and effectively split the vote, handing the election to the Democrats' well-funded candidate, former Congresswoman Mary Peltola.

The challenger, Dan J. Sullivan, did not respond to our many calls about his campaign bid, but he just gave an interview to his hometown newspaper saying, quote, "I have every right to stand up and do this." And he called himself a, quote, "pragmatic Republican centrist".

I caught up exclusively with Senator Sullivan, who accuses Democrats of being behind all of this, something they firmly deny.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: Dan Sullivan.

SEN. DAN S. SULLIVAN (R-AK): Yes.

RAJU: You're running against Dan Sullivan.

SULLIVAN: Well, we'll see. Schumer has said his path to the majority, the majority leader, the ultimate power for him, runs through Alaska, flipping the Alaska seat. It's not my seat. It's the people's seat.

So I'm running against a former two-term liberal Democrat congresswoman named Mary Peltola. Ok. She was fired by the Alaska people in her reelection in 2024, primarily because she was ineffective.

I think the Democrats say, hey, geez, Dan Sullivan's got a great record. Their opponent, Peltola, doesn't have anything. Dan Sullivan got a real strong vision for Alaska. She doesn't. Schumer doesn't.

So it's not gotten to the point where they want it. So they're like, now we got to cheat. So let's cheat.

So what do I mean by cheating? And this is serious stuff. When people are going, oh, there's two Dan Sullivans, isn't that funny? No, it's cheating.

Democrats recruited a guy by the name of Dan Sullivan. He is a liberal progressive, right. We've seen his donations to all the far-left groups. He's donated to Peltola, ok.

And his whole purpose of running is to confuse Alaskans, to make him -- make them think, Alaskan voters, that somehow he's me so they could rig the vote in favor of Mary Peltola.

What are the facts behind that? At the last minute, when he filed, he filed as a Republican. He's not a Republican. No one -- is not -- it's kind of a joke. Of course, he's not a Republican, but he filed as a Republican because

he wants Dan Sullivan with an R, and I'm Dan Sullivan with the R, everybody knows me as the Republican, so they want that there, ok.

So that's just false, right? And it's meant to confuse Alaskans.

Then when he filed his campaign logo, his letterhead, his Web site -- all had my campaign logo that I've had for 13 years, right?

So he stole it -- just for people -- that's mine, right. That's his, ok.

RAJU: Pretty similar.

SULLIVAN: Well, I'd say about 98 percent similar. Ok. So why would he do that? To confuse Alaskans on who, you know, is it me or him.

And then finally, when this gets interesting in your world, when he put out his big press release, when he was running with my stolen logo on it, we did the metadata search on it and the press release was actually written by a Democrat consultant, well-known, who the New York times in two different articles, describes as a Peltola supporter.

So, so Democrat consultant, Peltola supporter, writing the press release of this guy, the sham candidate. So this is just corruption.

RAJU: Could this succeed? Are you worried that this could succeed and end up costing you your seat?

SULLIVAN: If -- look, you know I'm going to win, right? But they're trying to cheat. I mean, there's no plausible explanation.

[08:34:44]

SULLIVAN: What this letter is doing. It's the NRSC saying to the lieutenant governor of Alaska who's in charge of elections, this is a sham candidate.

Of course, people have the right to run for office. But, and this is well researched, the case law says, federal and state case law, you don't have the right to run for office if your primary intent is to confuse the voters and rig the election in favor of someone else.

And that's exactly what this guy is doing with the support of the Democrats and a Peltola campaign supporter. If somehow the DSCC or Schumer or Gillibrand knew about this or were ok with this, or maybe even orchestrated it, my view is this would be a scandal of the highest order.

RAJU: I mean, politics is a dirty business, people will say. It happens. People have tried to do things like this in the past. Trump tried to overturn the 2020 elections. There are things that happen.

This is politics. What do you say to people who say that this is just the way things are? SULLIVAN: Well, there's laws, right? And there's regulations and I

don't think people are that cynical, right.

This is dirty politics. My hope is the lieutenant governor does the right thing, reads this brief and says this person is not qualified.

RAJU: And if he doesn't?

If it was determined that, you know, he needs to stay on this ballot because, you know, he is an eligible candidate --

SULLIVAN: Yes.

RAJU: -- then what's the implication?

SULLIVAN: I think that we've already put it in this letter. The implication is this will probably lead to litigation.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: All right. My panel is back.

Now just first, for the record, the Democrats -- we polled all the top Democrats in Alaska and in Washington. They're all denying that they had any involvement in getting Dan J. Sullivan, the challenger, into this race.

This is what the Peltola campaign told us. They said they had no involvement with either Sullivan campaign.

And that's what the Senate super PAC said here in Washington. Chuck Schumer's office said they had no involvement. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said they had no involvement.

Could this be enough though? You can hear the concern from the senator. He is very, very worried that if Dan J. Sullivan stays in this race, it could have a major impact.

ASTEAD HERNDON, VOX HOST AND EDITORIAL DIRECTOR: I take his concern seriously. I think that it could have an impact. But the thing I would disagree with him -- with the senator on is he said people are, you know, people don't want this type of politics or something like that.

I think there's an expectation that politics has this kind of trickery in it. That both sides have kind of engaged in that. So I'm not sure you're really going to see some mass outcry for the unfairness of this all.

In some ways, it feels like a kind of challenge that might be uncomfortable or might be difficult, but puts the onus on him to communicate clearly about the distinctions between the two candidates.

RAJU: Yes, the one letter difference. And just for the record, Dan J. Sullivan, he, you know, he did give money to the Peltola campaign. A small amount, it was $130 over -- in two house campaigns that we found. $650 he gave to ActBlue, which is the Democratic Party's main fundraising platform. So small amount of money.

he did use a Democratic consultant. He acknowledged in this interview to help write that press release. He said he was googling around, and that's why he found her.

And then he said about his own political views, he said, I'm a moderate on both ends of things. I look for people that I think are going to solve some problems, get things done. I think they're going to work with people and seem like they are caring. And that's why I've given money.

He said he supported both sides of the aisle. He said he supported Democrats and Republicans in the past. So it's going to be hard to remove him from the ballot, it seems.

SEUNG MIN KIM, ASSOCIATED PRESS WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Right. My question is, why is it always Alaska that has these like, named shenanigans? Because remember, like Lisa Murkowski is there because she won on a writing campaign which are --

RAJU: A writing campaign.

KIM: -- very complicated or very hard to spell last name for the average person.

But this is such a fascinating development because when it comes to Alaska, and particularly Dems, including Alaska in that path to the majority, a lot of things have broken right for Democrats in Alaska of all places, which has not had a Democratic senator in, I believe, 12 years because a, they got a great candidate in Mary Peltola, who has won statewide. And Republicans are worried enough that they are making reservations in that state.

So this is -- any little thing I feel could really affect this.

RAJU: Republicans have reserved $12 million for until the end of the year, and Democrats $8 million.

MARC CAPUTO, AXIOS SENIOR POLITICS REPORTER: Well, also, you've got a senator who's wandering around the halls of the Senate now with a sheet of paper that he has to show reporters like, this is me and I'm the real me, and this is him and he's the fake me.

RAJU: Yes.

CAPUTO: Right, here's my -- so he's obviously nervous and understandably so. You know, the problem he's got is that it is a little funny.

RAJU: Yes. And a couple of -- a couple of points could be enough to turn a critical race that could have an impact on the race for the Senate majority, which is why this is so, so significant.

All right. With just a month of its term left, the Supreme Court could still have a major impact on the midterms. We'll tell you why. That's next. [08:39:43]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: The Supreme Court has already upended the U.S. House with its blockbuster decision on the Voting Rights Act, impacting this year's midterms, and even more so in the future.

But there are still some explosive cases left that could impact this campaign season.

Here's a list of some of the cases yet to be ruled on. As you see, some of these cases are over how much power the president can wield and could lead to an extraordinary showdown with President Trump while others could potentially affect the outcome of Novembers elections.

[08:44:52]

RAJU: My panel is back. Since we are INSIDE POLITICS, let's talk about a couple of the ones that could have an impact on the campaigns.

Mail in balloting, of course, Trump has battled this for so many years. This could have a big impact because there are laws on the books in certain states that allow for these ballots to come in after election day, if they're postmarked before election day.

As you can see in the states here, the Republicans are suing to prevent that. So only ballots that are received on election day can be deemed eligible.

There are 14 states. There are states that are key to the race for the House and the Senate. California, Texas among those, some in the northeast as well.

So this could have an impact on the Republicans' win here in this Supreme Court case.

CAPUTO: It sure could. I mean, it puts the onus mainly on Democrats who have embraced mail-in voting more to educate their electorate as to how to cast ballots.

And that is a complicated thing, because a lot of people are prisoners of habit. They're used to voting the way they are. And so they'll think potentially that they're casting a lawful ballot, hoping that the postmark matters. And it won't if this ruling goes the way Republicans want.

RAJU: And Trump has, of course, battled mail-in ballot for so many years, even as Republican leaders want him to embrace it.

KIM: Right, right. I mean, Republicans, there are -- I mean, there are states that are only mail-in balloting. And obviously, Republicans can benefit from mail in ballots in the sense that a lot of their voters could be rural voters and that can make them easier to vote, which is why the mail-in balloting hadn't really become a toxic issue until President Trump really brought it to the fore for the Republican Party.

But he constantly talks about it. He talks about it as evidence of cheating, which it -- cheating in elections -- which it is not.

But so, so what the Supreme Court decides here will be really, really monumental and consequential.

RAJU: Yes. And also there's one about campaign finances. There's no limits right now about how much political parties can coordinate in with specific candidates. And different states have different levels on coordination limits.

Republicans want to do away with all those limits, essentially allow them for these direct coordination between the candidates and these party committees to be unlimited.

And that could lead to a significant amount of outside spending if the Republicans win. There's already a significant amount.

Just look at the -- look at the screen -- just how expensive elections have become. I mean, it is just mind blowing. I mean, nearly $15 billion in 2024, even more was spent in 2020.

I mean, this will go higher than $20 billion perhaps if the Republicans win in this case.

HERNDON: Yes, we could see spending increase. And I think that that is a real focus on the Supreme Court term, the question of political power, the question of the presidential authority are all wrapped up here.

But I think also as a longer-term impact, one thing that we hear more of is a -- on the Democratic side is, is elected officials talking about Supreme Court reform.

I think that's going to come up a lot in 2027 and 2028, as I think Democrats have become more motivated about how to kind of rethink some of that institution, too.

So as the short-term question of the midterms and how we'll do that, but I think also this rubs up against the electorate, and we'll see that play out in the next presidential.

RAJU: And there's this birthright citizenship case, too, which could come down any day now as well.

KIM: Right. And President Trump actually attended those arguments, and he's kind of signaled that he thinks the court will rule against him. But, you know, we'll just wait and see.

RAJU: And if he does lose that case, then Trump will rail on the Supreme Court. But -- or is he willing to take the loss here?

CAPUTO: I can never say that. I also think DPS like 350,000 Haitians could wind up being kicked out of the country; 11,000 Syrians, a lot of people. RAJU: Yes, huge, huge impact in the days ahead.

All right. Is America ready for another Bush in office? Well, a cousin of former President George W. Bush is up for election this week. And guess what? He's distancing himself from his family. More on that next.

[08:48:43

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: From the Kennedys to the Clintons, political dynasties have dominated American politics and still do. And one of the biggest are the Bushes, who, for the better part of four decades had a family member in office somewhere in the United States, from the Oval Office to the governor's office in Florida.

And this week, Jonathan Bush, the nephew of former President George H.W. Bush and a cousin of W., may come a step closer to restoring that tradition.

A former health care tech CEO, Bush is running for governor of Maine, home of the Bush family compound in Kennebunkport. He's trying to break through a crowded GOP field in this Tuesday's primary, and testing whether the name Bush will help or hurt in the Trump era.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN BUSH, CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR IN MAINE: I'm Jonathan Bush. Now hold on. I know what you're thinking. Not another Bush. I get it.

But hear me out. I might be different than what you're expecting. First, I'm not low energy anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Even though he's related to two presidents, he's pitching himself as an outsider as he told CNN's David Wright.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Mainers don't want an insider right now. You've got an allergy to somebody who's part of the system. They feel like the system has betrayed them.

So when you hear the name Bush, they imagine somebody who's sort of all wired up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Bush isn't the only current candidate hoping to hold on to and take advantage of their family's ties to public office.

[08:54:50]

RAJU: Even in Maine, two of the Democratic candidates for governor are the children of sitting members of Congress, Angus King III, and Hannah Pingree. And down in New York, President John F. Kennedy's grandson, Jack Schlossberg, is running for Congress in New York. And in California, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's daughter, Christine, is running for state office.

And, of course, with President Trump barred from winning a third term, it's an open question whether any one of his kids will try to kick off the Trump dynasty at a later date.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. You can follow me on X @mkraju. Follow the show @Inside Politics. You can also find me on TikTok and on Instagram. And remember, you can now stream INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY live on the CNN app.

Up next, "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH".

Dana's guests include Virginia Senator Mark Warner, Pennsylvania Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick, New York Congressman Tom Suozzi.

Thanks again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. We'll see you next time.

[08:55:47]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)