Former DNC chairwoman and current ABC contributor Donna Brazile joined outgoing GOP Rep. Dan Crenshaw and HBO’s Real Time host Bill Maher to show an amazing display of hypocrisy. In the span of only a couple of minutes, the short-tempered Brazile would claim that Republican redistricting efforts are “immoral,” but that Democratic efforts are what “voters decided.”
Brazile also sought to add race into the conversation, “I come from one of those states that all of a sudden, the Supreme Court said, 'Well, we don't like partisan gerrymandering. No, we don't like racial gerrymandering.' So, one out of three voters in Louisiana is a black voter. One out of three. And they are now thinking of eradicating. So, that says people from some parts of Louisiana can represent New Orleans better than the folks who are representing—or Baton Rouge. It is wrong, it is immoral, and it is unjustified.”
Addressing Maher and Crenshaw, she continued, “Bill, let me just say this, and I saw what the congressman tweeted today after Tim Kaine—but here’s it—I’m old enough—”
Former DNC Chair/ABC contributor Donna Brazile thinks Louisiana redisctring after the SCOTUS's VRA ruling is "is immoral and it is unjustified," but when SCOVA threw out Virginia's referendum, "The voters decided, as you well know, in California, the voters decided in Virginia."… pic.twitter.com/xI85tvFjWz
— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) May 9, 2026
After Maher sought to understand what Crenshaw had tweeted and some table crosstalk, Brazile changed her position on gerrymandering, “He's saying the constitution is—they made it based on the constitution. They made it based on—they said the voters were already voting when the state put this law into place. So, that the voters can decide. The voters decided, as you well know, in California, the voters decided in Virginia. Politicians should not choose their voters, but I have one more—”
Maher interrupted, “Well, they have done it forever. We’ve—”
An insulted Brazile snapped back, “Don't I know that, Bill?”
Following some more crosstalk, Brazile went back to her first position, “When did my family get the right to vote, Bill? 1965. 61 years ago. So my daddy served in war and could not vote for that. My grandparents—my grandmother was 77 when she got the right to vote. Her husband—so we understand—”
Maher interrupted again to rebuke Brazile’s tone, “Yeah, I'm on your side. Don't yell at me.” Brazile scoffed, “Oh, you’re on my side?” After Maher answered “Yeah, of course,” Brazile quipped, “I didn't know.”
Eventually, Brazile allowed Crenshaw to say his piece, “If you are on the side of the Constitution, you're on the side of democracy. So, Congressman, I will let you describe why you went into Tim Kaine's ass today. He tried to put his entire side into another man's ass.”
After objecting to Brazille’s phrasing, Crenshaw recalled his comments about Kaine, “He was making a case that the Supreme Court doesn’t know what it's talking about and that they’re misreading. I pointed out that he should—I know reading is time-consuming, but you might read the actual case that the Supreme Court wrote. It is very well written, it’s very logically written, it’s pretty irrefutable, and it was a 10-1 vote.”
The SCOVA ruling was 4-3. The map was 10-1, which is interesting given Brazile’s earlier laments about New Orleans and Baton Rouge being represented by someone outside the cities because it got that way by splitting dark blue Fairfax County into five districts, which means people far away from the Beltway would have been represented by a Beltway liberal.
Crenshaw added, “They're making the case that, simply, the constitutional amendment was, in itself, unconstitutional because of the process they followed. That is what the Supreme Court argued. It was not about the ability to politically gerrymander.”
That is correct. It is also worth noting that Brazile and Kaine’s objection that the decision was made after the vote is also gravely dishonest considering Virginia Democrats originally demanded the court follow precedent and wait until after the vote to make its ruling.
Here is a transcript for the May 8 show:
HBO Real Time with Bill Maher
5/8/2026
10:20 PM ET
DONNA BRAZILE: I come from one of those states that all of a sudden, the Supreme Court said, “Well, we don't like partisan gerrymandering. No, we don't like racial gerrymandering.” So, one out of three voters in Louisiana is a black voter. One out of three. And they are now thinking of eradicating. So, that says people from some parts of Louisiana can represent New Orleans better than the folks who are representing—or Baton Rouge. It is wrong, it is immoral, and it is unjustified.
Bill, let me just say this, and I saw what the congressman tweeted today after Tim Kaine—but here’s it—I’m old enough—
BILL MAHER: What did he tweet? I don't know.
BRAZILE: Well, he’s going to have a—
DAN CRENSHAW: Tim Kaine—Tim Kaine is wrong.
[Crosstalk]
BRAZILE: He's saying the constitution is—they made it based on the constitution. They made it based on—they said the voters were already voting when the state put this law into place. So, that the voters can decide. The voters decided, as you well know, in California, the voters decided in Virginia. Politicians should not choose their voters, but I have one more—
MAHER: Well, they have done it forever. We’ve—
BRAZILE: Don't I know that, Bill? The Constitution. 1787.
[Crosstalk]
1787. The Constitution. When did my family get the right to vote, Bill? 1965. 61 years ago. So my daddy served in war and could not vote for that. My grandparents—my grandmother was 77 when she got the right to vote. Her husband—so we understand—
MAHER: Yeah, I'm on your side. Don't yell at me.
BRAZILE: Oh, you’re on my side?
MAHER: Yeah, of course.
BRAZILE: I didn't know.
MAHER: You didn’t know?
BRAZILE: If you are on the side of the Constitution, you're on the side of democracy. So, Congressman, I will let you describe why you went into Tim Kaine's ass today. He tried to put his entire side into another man's ass.
CRENSHAW: Phrasing! You know, phrasing. You know, alright, he is the last ass I would go into.
BRAZILE: Okay.
CRENSHAW: But Kaine—he was making a case that the Supreme Court doesn’t know what it's talking about and that they’re misreading. I pointed out that he should—I know reading is time-consuming, but you might read the actual case that the Supreme Court wrote. It is very well written, it’s very logically written, it’s pretty irrefutable, and it was a 10-1 vote.
BRAZILE: 4-3 in Virginia.
CRENSHAW: They're making the case that, simply, the constitutional amendment was, in itself, unconstitutional because of the process they followed. That is what the Supreme Court argued. It was not about the ability to politically gerrymander.
