Donald Trump said Friday he plans to testify in his hush-money trial, set to start Monday.
Trump previously backed out of testifying in his civil fraud trial.
The former president could open himself up to risky cross-examination if he testifies.
Former President Donald Trump on Friday said he will "absolutely" testify in his upcoming Manhattan hush-money trial, which is set to begin jury selection on Monday morning.
But Trump hasn't always kept his testimony promises.
The first of Trump's four pending felony trials is slated to start in Manhattan state court next week, where the former president faces allegations he falsified 34 business records to cover up a $130,000 hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels days before the 2016 election.
In a Friday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump told reporters he plans to testify in the trial, which he called a "scam" and "witch hunt."
"I'm testifying. I tell the truth. All I can do is tell the truth and the truth is they have no case," he said.
Trump's pledge to testify, however, far from assures he will actually take the stand. People familiar with his planning told The New York Times that Trump will likely wait to decide whether he testifies until he sees how strong a case District Attorney Alvin Bragg presents. The former president will also likely make a decision based on whether the judge allows prosecutors to cross examine him on the stand, the outlet reported.
During his December trial on fraud charges in New York civil court, Trump cancelled his testimony just one day before he was supposed to take the stand a second time in the case — an abrupt pivot from his lawyers' previous insistence that Trump would testify again.
Trump is not required to testify in the hush-money case and cross-examination could leave him open to questions about several aspects of the case, including the nature of his relationship with Daniels. If found guilty, Trump could face probation or prison time.
He has pleaded not guilty to the charges and said he never had a sexual relationship with Daniels.
A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
Earlier this year, Trump testified in the defamation trial brought against him by columnist E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexually assaulting her. The judge in that case significantly limited what Trump was allowed to say on the stand and later ordered him to pay her $83.3 million.
A subscription to Tesla's Full-Self Driving software — now called FSD (Supervised)to remind drivers that the system requires their attention at all times — is now being offered for $99 a month, down from $199 a month.
It's just one of a few recent moves Tesla has made to hook more people onto the company's Level 2 self-driving system, which requires a driver to constantly monitor the vehicle.
Elon Musk recently mandated all Tesla employees in an internal memo to take new customers on a "short test ride" of FSD before handing over the vehicle during the delivery process.
His rationale was that "almost no one actually realized how well (supervised) FSD actually works," according to the memo that Business Insider confirmed.
In March, the company also announced that it would be giving a free one-month trial of FSD beta to all US customers.
Now, the newly announced discount could make Tesla's controversial driver-assist software more accessible to its customers, which would be beneficial at a time when the company is missing investor expectations and continues to work toward improving its software.
At the beginning of April, Tesla said it had delivered fewer cars in the first three months of 2024, selling 386,800 cars — about 90,000 fewer than investors expected. The company's Q1 performance marks the first year-over-year decline in sales in nearly four years, BI reported.
More customers using Tesla's FSD could also mean more data the company can gather to improve its software, according to TechCrunch.
The discount also marks a departure — even momentarily — from Musk's expectation that Tesla's Full-Self Driving system would only get more expensive.
In 2020, Musk said on X that the value of FSD could reach $100,000 as it "gets closer to full self-driving capability with regulatory approval." It's unclear if Musk was referring to the price per vehicle.
For a moment, that prediction did come to fruition when Musk raised the lifetime service price of FSD from $12,000 to $15,000 in 2022, with a monthly subscription option offered at $199. But last year, the company dropped the lifetime price to $12,000.
A Tesla spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg won his latest pretrial victory Friday over Donald Trump
Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images; Brandon Bell/Getty Images
Trump's hush money trial remains on track for Monday jury selection after a decision Friday night.
Judge Juan Merchan denied Trump's bid to delay the trial due to "pretrial publicity."
The judge has yet to rule on one last pretrial delay bid, a defense request that he recuse himself.
Donald Trump's hush money trial remained on track for Monday jury selection after the judge on Friday night denied — in no uncertain terms — a defense bid to delay the trial indefinitely due to prejudicial pretrial publicity.
"This is not tenable," the trial judge, New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, said in his decision, noting that much of the pretrial publicity has been caused by Trump himself.
Delaying the trial "is simply not an adequate remedy when there is a chance the postponement may become indefinite," the judge wrote, in his most blisteringly-worded decision in the case to date.
Friday night's decision leaves just one potentially trial-delaying matter yet decided before Monday.
But it's the longest of longshots: Trump's request that the judge recuse himself from the case because his daughter is a partner at a Chicago-based political consultancy firm that had repped such big-name Democrats as President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
Merchan had rejected a nearly identical defense recusal motion in August, after the state Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics found the daughter's independent political activities provided insufficient basis to question the judge's impartiality.
"Defendant appears to take the position that his situation and this case are unique and that the pre-trial publicity will never subside," the judge wrote in Friday's decision.
"However, this view does not align with reality," he wrote.
"In just the past 12 months, Defendant has very publicly been involved in a multitude of criminal and civil cases across several states in both federal and state jurisdictions," he wrote.
"In this County alone, Defendant has had two civil trials, one in State Court and the other in Federal Court," the judge wrote, referring to Trump's previous Manhattan cases — a civil fraud trial and his E. Jean Carroll defamation case.
Losing those two cases resulted in well over a half-billion-dollars in judgments against him. Trump has posted bonds covering both judgments while he appeals.
"In those two matters, he was personally responsible for generating much, if not most, of the surrounding publicity with his public statements, which were often made just a few steps outside the courtroom where the proceedings were being conducted, and with his unrelenting media posts attacking those he perceived to be responsible for his plight," the judge wrote.
"The situation Defendant finds himself in now is not new to him and at least in part, of his own doing."
Defense attorneys Susan Necheles and Todd Blanche had argued that "prejudicial media coverage has saturated the venire," or jury pool, and that Manhattan is "overwhelmingly biased" against him.
They said that a fair jury could not be chosen any time in April, and asked Merchan to delay the trial indefinitely.
"President Trump's Constitutional right to a fair trial is at stake," the defense wrote in a March 18 delay motion that included 180 pages of supporting documents.
Defense-hired pollsters found that 61% of Manhattan potential jurors already believe Trump is guilty of something, nearly twice the rate of surrounding counties, they argued.
Just 35% believed Trump was guilty in the hush-money case specifically.
Prosecutors had questioned the defense poll's methodology, and Merchan on Friday agreed.
The poll "provides no information about how it obtained the contact information of respondents or how it ensured its samples were actually random or representative," the judge wrote.
Prosecutors also argued that the onslaught of pretrial publicity is in large part Trump's own fault, and that jury selection will effectively weed out biased prospective jurors.
"Defendant's own incessant rhetoric is generating significant publicity, and it would be perverse to reward defendant with an adjournment based on media attention he is actively seeking," lawyers for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg had written in opposing the delay.
Last week, Trump lost a Manhattan appellate court bid for an emergency delay of the trial on pretrial publicity grounds.
That appellate effort is still ongoing and argues that the trial should be moved out of Manhattan altogether.
Trump on Monday is set to become the first former president ever to stand trial on criminal charges.
Prosecutors allege he falsified 34 Trump Organization business records — including invoices, checks, and ledger entries — to hide a $130,000 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels that silenced her just 11 days before the 2016 election.
Trump has denied the charges and Daniels' claim that she was paid to hide a 2006 sexual encounter with the then-Apprentice star.
Travelers waiting for their baggage at Oakland International Airport.
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Oakland officials voted to add "San Francisco" to their city's airport name.
San Francisco is not having it.
Oakland officials say the name change would bring more travelers to their airport, bolstering the city's economy.
Oakland Airport wants what San Francisco has — its name.
The Port of Oakland's Board of Commissioners decided in a unanimous vote on Thursday to change the name of their airport from "Metropolitan Oakland International Airport" to "San Francisco Bay Oakland International Airport."
Oakland officials argue that because the name change would more accurately represent the airport's location in the San Francisco Bay, it would increase the airport's traffic, and in turn, bolster the city's economy.
The Port of Oakland estimated in an agenda report that the name change, which would not alter the airport's three-letter code "OAK," would cost $150,000 to implement.
Port officials in Oakland argued that their airport is just as close, if not closer, to many parts of San Francisco as San Francisco's SFO is, when traveling via the Bay Area Rapid Transit system.
But, San Francisco officials don't want to share.
Ahead of Oakland's Thursday vote, San Francisco's city attorney David Chiu posted on X, formerly Twitter, that the name change "would cause immense confusion for travelers and infringes on SFO's trademark."
"If these plans are not abandoned, SF will take legal action," he added. Chiu also wrote a letter to the Oakland Port's Board President and other officials urging them to reconsider.
San Francisco's mayor, London Breed, also formally voiced her opposition in a letter to Oakland officials, taking the time to throw a bit of shade at OAK.
"We encourage Oakland Airport to follow a similar model to SFO and grow its airport services rather than adding 'San Francisco' to its name," Breed wrote.
"Oakland is a great city with a rich history," she added. "It does not need the name San Francisco as part of its airport to stand out."
But Oakland officials say the city actually really does need it.
"I think 30,000 jobs and tax revenue is on the line," Oakland Port board member Yui Hay Lee said before the vote, according to The Wall Street Journal. "The bottom line is we really have no choice. Doing nothing is not an option."
The city of Oakland — which has a population of over 400,000 people, according to the US Census Bureau — has faced serious financial setbacks in recent years.
After closing its largest ever budget shortfall, a deficit of about $360 million last summer, the city has since found a $177 million hole in its two-year fiscal plan, the San Francisco Chronicle reported in March.
Gypsy Rose Blanchard filed a temporary restraining order against Ryan Scott Anderson, People reported.
People previously reported that Blanchard filed for divorce after announcing their split on Facebook.
The couple met after Anderson wrote Blanchard a letter while she was in prison.
Gypsy Rose Blanchard, the woman who conspired with her then-boyfriend to have her mother killed, has filed for a temporary restraining order against her estranged husband, Ryan Scott Anderson, amid divorce proceedings, People reported on Thursday.
According to People, which obtained the court filing, Blanchard also requested that the court order Anderson to pay her interim and long-term spousal support because she is "in need and defendant has ability to pay and she is not at fault for the dissolution of marriage." She also asked that Anderson be denied any spousal support from her, People reports.
On Monday, Annette M. Fontana, the clerk of court for Lafourche Parish, where Blanchard's father lives, confirmed to the publication that Blanchard had filed her divorce papers to the court for a judge to review.
People previously broke the news on March 28 that Blanchard had announced her separation from Anderson in a statement on her private Facebook account accessed by the publication.
"People have been asking what is going on in my life. Unfortunately my husband and I are going through a separation and I moved in with my parents home down the bayou," the statement read, per People. "I have the support of my family and friends to help guide me through this. I am learning to listen to my heart. Right now I need time to let myself find… who I am."
Blanchard was granted parole in December 2023 after serving eight years for her role in the death of her mother, Dee Dee Blanchard, who prosecutors also acknowledged was abusive.
"Gypsy Rose Blanchard has openly shared her life with Lifetime and our cameras from the moment she was paroled. Her story, including her relationship with Ryan, will continue to unfold on Gypsy Rose: Life After Lock Up, debuting this June on Lifetime."
Anderson hasn't confirmed the separation, but on Saturday he shared a video on Instagram in which he said: "I just want to thank everybody for the support. It's been great. I'm just living my life guys. Y'all will see what really happened on Lifetime. We were filming a lot, so stay tuned for that."
Here's everything we know about Blanchard and Anderson's relationship, including how they met.
Who is Gypsy Rose Blanchard's estranged husband, Ryan Scott Anderson?
Gypsy Rose Blanchard and Ryan Scott Anderson in January 2024.
Raymond Hall / GC Images
According to People, Anderson is a middle school special education teacher from Saint Charles, Louisiana.
Blanchard, 32, married Anderson in 2022 while she was still serving her 10-year prison sentence at the Chillicothe Correctional Center in Missouri, according to the Springfield News-Leader. At the time, she was 30 years old and Anderson was 36 years old.
Anderson is also a big wrestling fan, as he mentioned in the Instagram video he released after his and Blanchard's separation was reported. He made headlines when he picked Blanchard up after her early release from prison in a silver Cadillac with vanity plates that said "HITMAN," according to a photo published by People at the time. (Though some thought it was eerily reminiscent of the circumstances that landed Blanchard in jail in the first place, the vanity plate appeared to be styled after WWE Hall-of-Famer Bret Hart, who often went by the stage name "The Hitman.")
Blanchard told People in an interview before her release that Anderson had been a crucial source of support since they met in 2020. She and Anderson told People that they were planning on consummating their marriage after her release from prison, and expressed the desire to have children.
Sure enough, Blanchard said during a January 2024 appearance on Nick Viall's "Viall Files" podcast that one of the first things she did after her release was consummate her marriage.
Blanchard told Viall that she was released from prison at around 3 in the morning due to safety concerns regarding the amount of press stationed outside the facility. After Anderson picked her up, she said they drove to a local hotel and spent the night there.
"We had our first intimate moments as husband and wife, and got to consummate our marriage, which was great," Blanchard said on the podcast.
How did Gypsy Rose Blanchard and her husband meet?
Gypsy Rose Blanchard in the 2017 HBO documentary "Mommy Dead and Dearest."
HBO
Blanchard and Anderson first met after Anderson wrote her a letter while she was in prison in 2020, he told People.
According to Anderson, he decided to write to her after his coworker said that he wanted to write to Joseph Maldonado, better known as "Joe Exotic," the subject of the Netflix docuseries "Tiger King."
"It was when 'Tiger King' was really popular," says Anderson of the hit Netflix show about the wildlife businessman and convicted felon.
"I said, 'I'll tell you what, if you write him, I'll write Gypsy Rose Blanchard," Anderson recounted to People. "I never thought she'd be my wife."
Anderson told the publication that he wrote in his letter to Blanchard about the impact she had on him, in addition to plenty of information about himself.
The couple's relationship grew as they corresponded, both Blanchard and Anderson told People. Anderson said that he'd get butterflies when they wrote emails to each other, but hearing her voice for the first time was a tipping point.
"Ryan has seen me through some really good times, some really hard times. I would say that he is probably the most compassionate soul that I've ever met, and the most patient," Blanchard told People.
Gypsy Rose Blanchard defended her husband from social media trolls, then deleted her accounts
Screenshots of Gypsy Rose Blanchard's and Ryan Anderson's comments.
Instagram
"Ryan, don't listen to the haters. I love you, and you love me. We do not owe anyone anything," she wrote. "Our family is who matters. If you get likes and good comments great, if you get hate then whatever because THEY DON'T MATTER. I love you💕."
Blanchard added: "Besides they jealous because you are rocking my world every night…yeah I said it, the D is fire🔥 happy wife happy life ❤️."
Anderson responded in a comment: "Who said I gave a damn about what these jealous people say anyway, haha…now come get it Baby…"
Earlier in March, Blanchard deleted her public TikTok and Instagram accounts, which had garnered millions of followers. According to The Cut, she explained why in a video: "With public scrutiny as bad as it is, I just don't want to live my life under a microscope."
In another video shared on TikTok before deleting the account, per People, Blanchard apologized to those she had offended "with a lack of accountability, the first month or so that I was out of prison and the lack of accountability in my interviews."
A source told People at the time that Blanchard had been advised to delete her accounts by her parole officer "so she won't get in trouble and go back to jail."
A close friend of Blanchard told People that the estranged couple had a heated argument the night they split
Gypsy Rose Blanchard-Anderson previously criticized the series.
Raymond Hall/Getty Images
Nadiya Vizier, a friend of Blanchard, told People in a story published on April 5 that Blanchard and Anderson had a fight on the night of their breakup, leading to Blanchard locking herself in the bathroom of their home in Lake Charles, Louisiana.
Although Vizier, who wasn't there but relayed what she said was Blanchard's account of the situation, didn't say how the fight started. she said Anderson was banging on the door and screaming at Blanchard.
"He got in her face and screamed," Vizier said. "Gypsy said that she was afraid he was going to hit her. He didn't — but that happened in the past with her mother. So, her first instinct was to tighten up and be prepared."
Vizier said Blanchard phoned a relative to pick her up and, at dawn, took her belongings and drove to her father's house in Cut Off, Louisiana.
"She got to safety and called her lawyer, too. Ryan is a big guy, and she told me it was really scary," Vizier added.
Vizier also said she noticed Anderson becoming more controlling toward Blanchard and that filming the Lifetime series, "Gypsy Rose: Life After Lock Up," put a strain on their relationship.
"It was like she was on a leash," Vizier said. "What's the difference between being locked in a prison cell and feeling locked in her own home and marriage? She didn't want to put up with it anymore."
Vizier, who will appear in the Lifetime series, said Anderson will also be more affectionate in front of the cameras than when they weren't on camera.
"He was being very, very loud and just doing things in a way that just seemed like he was trying to show the world he was a good partner — like he wasn't using her or something," Vizier said. "I guess it felt played up for the camera."
A representative for Anderson did not reply to a comment request from Business Insider.
People reported that Anderson did not respond to a request for comment.
Blanchard has reconnected with her ex-fiancé, Ken Urker
Rod, Gypsy Rose, and Kristy Blanchard.
Courtesy of the Blanchard Family
On April 2, People reported that Blanchard had met up with her ex-fiancé, Ken Urker, citing Blanchard's cousin and Urker's mother.
Urker got engaged to Blanchard in 2018 after he wrote a letter to her in prison, but they split in 2019.
A few days after Blanchard's statement about her breakup with Anderson, Urker's mother, Raina Williams, told People that the pair met up for lunch and went to a tattoo parlor.
"They are not back together. They're very cool. Ken is just being a supportive friend to her and that's it," Williams said.
Bobby Pitre, Blanchard's cousin who owned the tattoo parlor the pair visited, told People that they got matching husky dog tattoos together.
People reported that Urker said he and Blanchard were "just friends" during a TikTok live video on Blanchard's account on April 4. Blanchard was also part of the live video.
The murder of Dee Dee Blanchard followed years of alleged abuse
Gypsy Rose Blanchard in 2024, left; right, an undated photo of a young Gypsy Rose and Dee Dee Blanchard.
Jamie McCarthy/Getty Images; Courtesy of the Blanchard family
Blanchard was sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2016 after she was found guilty of conspiring to kill her mom Dee Dee Blanchard, who was found dead in 2015.
Her story received nationwide attention due to the strange and extraordinary circumstances of the situation:Blanchard has said in interviews that for years, her mother has subjected her to medical treatment she never needed, including forcing her to use a wheelchair, eat through a feeding tube, and undergo several surgeries.
One pediatric neurologist told Buzzfeed News in 2016 that he didn't "see any reason why she doesn't walk" after performing numerous tests on Blanchard.
Dee Dee was widely believed to have Munchausen by proxy, a rare behavioral disorder in which a caretaker, such as a mother, imposes a physical or mental illness on someone who is otherwise healthy.
Blanchard has said that she was desperate to get out of the situation, leading her to ask her then-boyfriend Nicholas Godejohn to kill her mother.
Godejohn continues to serve a life sentence for first-degree murder at the Potosi Correctional Center in Missouri.
While Godejohn has said in interviews that he would kill again for the sake of Blanchard, Blanchard told People that she regrets what she did.
"Nobody will ever hear me say I'm glad she's dead or I'm proud of what I did," she said. "I regret it every single day."
When you buy through our links, Business Insider may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more
The best 85-inch TVs offer a cinematic experience even in big spaces.
Steven Cohen/Business Insider
The best 85-inch TVs deliver a viewing experience that smaller displays simply can't match. Though sets this big used to be few and far between, manufacturers now offer 85-inch versions of several of their most popular models, and though still expensive, they've come down a lot in price.
We've tested and researched the top options available to choose the best 85-inch TVs you can buy. The TCL QM8 offers the best balance between price and performance at this size thanks to its bright QLED panel and high-contrast Mini LED backlight. But if you want an 85-inch TV without breaking the bank, TCL's cheaper Q6 QLED is a more budget-friendly alternative that's often on sale for under $900.
We also have picks for OLED and 8K models at this size, so all home theater needs are accounted for.
Note: LCD-based TVs (LED, QLED) are often manufactured in an 85- or 86-inch screen size, but OLED displays are sold in a slightly smaller 83-inch size. For that reason, we've included 83-inch OLED TVs in this guide.
When balancing price and image quality, TCL's QM8 QLED is the best 85-inch TV you can buy. It's incredibly bright while maintaining excellent contrast thanks to the precision of its Mini LED backlight with local dimming capabilities. And despite its extra-large size, it's often on sale for $1,700, which is fantastic for a display this big with this level of performance.
Though we recommend OLED models, like the Samsung S90C, as our top pick in many of our other best TV buying guides, OLEDs at this screen size jump up a lot in price, and most are missing color and brightness perks that their smaller counterparts offer. We think an OLED will still deliver better overall image quality, but the QM8 QLED has a slight edge in value for most people, and it even has a few features OLEDs lack at this size.
The QM8's color volume is especially impressive thanks to its quantum dot filter, which is something you won't find on competing OLEDs over 77 inches. Quantum dots also help the TV achieve a peak brightness of around 2,000 nits, which is more than enough to enjoy the full benefits of most HDR content.
It has a leg up over cheaper QLED models thanks to the QM8's high number of local dimming zones, which helps it achieve deep black levels without major halos around bright objects. However, contrast still can't match the pixel precision of an OLED panel, so you might see the dimming zones at work during certain scenes when watching TV in a dark room.
When reviewing the QM8, we also noticed slight issues with shadow details getting lost in dimmer scenes, but this can be mitigated by adjusting some of the display's settings. But the QM8's biggest weakness is its viewing angles. Colors and contrast distort when you sit off to the side of the screen. If you want a similar 85-inch QLED TV with better off-axis viewing, we recommend Samsung's more expensive QN90C. Otherwise, you'll need to pay substantially more for an OLED like the Samsung S90C or LG C3.
With Google TV built-in, the QM8 offers a reliable interface and easy access to all of the best streaming services. The TV is also a great fit for gamers thanks to its fast panel with up to a 144Hz refresh rate when paired with a compatible PC. The TV's build and design aren't as premium as more expensive models, but the QM8's strengths far outweigh its cons.
Samsung's 83-inch S90C OLED is more than double the price of most QLED TVs at this size, but the S90C delivers an infinite contrast ratio with true black levels and wider viewing angles than any QLED, leading to a notable upgrade in overall image performance, especially if you like to watch TV in a dim home theater environment.
We still think our top pick, the TCL QM8 QLED, is a better overall value for most people on the hunt for a TV this big, but if you're willing to spend twice as much, this midrange OLED has some key perks. In a dark home theater environment, the S90C's pixel-level contrast control outmatches any QLED we've tested, offering one of the best movie-watching experiences you can get from an 83-inch TV.
And though not anywhere near as bright as the QM8, the S90C still gets bright enough to suit most rooms. However, unlike smaller versions of the S90C, the 83-inch model does not use quantum dots in its panel. This means that it can't match the color volume or color gamut that you'd get on TVs that do use quantum dots, so bright colors won't look quite as intense as they do on sets like the QM8.
In this performance class, there's also the 83-inch LG C3 OLED to consider. At this size, the C3 and S90C both use similar, if not identical, display panels. The C3 does have a slight edge since it supports Dolby Vision for a more accurate HDR experience, but the 83-inch C3 is often $500 more than the 83-inch S90C. If you find the C3 on sale for the same price as the S90C, it's a slightly better midrange OLED at this size. But since it's typically cheaper, the S90C clinches this spot.
LG's 83-inch G4 OLED is ideal for buyers who want the most premium viewing experience they can get in an extra-large TV. It's the most advanced OLED available at 83 inches, besting the overall picture quality of all our other picks. Of course, it also has the highest price tag of any TV you'll find in this guide.
First things first, buyers should note that the 83-inch G4 is designed with wall mounting in mind. So much so that it doesn't include a traditional TV stand. Instead, you get a bracket that lets you mount it flush to your wall with virtually no gap. It looks beautiful hung up this way, but you can still buy a stand separately if wall mounting isn't an option for your room.
Outside of its elegant style, the G4 is a picture-quality powerhouse. Using LG's latest OLED Evo panel, it offers all the benefits that OLEDs are known for, including an infinite contrast ratio, perfect black levels that disappear into a dark room, and wide viewing angles so you get a great image no matter where you sit.
The 83-inch G4 doesn't include a stand but LG sells stands separately for an extra cost.
Steven Cohen/Business Insider
On top of all that, the 83-inch G4 also incorporates MLA (Micro Lens Array) technology to boost its brightness. This feature was missing from the 83-inch edition of last year's G3, and it enables a sizable upgrade in luminance over competing 83-inch OLEDs, like the Samsung S90C. During our tests, we measured a peak of around 1,550 nits on the 65-inch G4, which should also carry over to the 83-inch option.
Though the new Samsung S95D OLED can get brighter in short bursts, that model is not available in 83 inches. As it stands, the 83-inch G4 is the brightest OLED you can get in such a large screen size, and it delivers gorgeous HDR highlights while maintaining great performance even in rooms that let in a lot of light. Matte screens, like those used on the Samsung S95D, still reduce reflections and glare better than the G4's screen, but the G4's glossy coating does a superior job of preserving inky black levels with the lights on.
LG's solid webOS smart TV interface rounds out the package with access to every major app there is, along with nice perks like hands-free voice control and a remote that supports motion controls so you can navigate menus by waving the remote at the screen to move a virtual cursor.
Our top pick, the TCL QM8 QLED, still delivers a better price-to-performance ratio, and our midrange OLED pick, the Samsung S90C, delivers similar contrast performance for less money. But if budget isn't a concern and you want the absolute best image quality you can get at this size, the LG G4 is the 83-inch TV to beat.
Best 8K display
Though we still think most buyers are better off with a high-end 4K TV, 8K displays like the Samsung QN900C have their fans, especially at extra-large screen sizes. At 85 inches, an 8K TV will offer some benefits over 4K thanks to its higher pixel density, which means you can sit very close without seeing individual pixels like you would on a 4K set this large.
However, it's important to remember that the perks of 8K remain subtle. There's still no native 8K content to watch outside a few YouTube videos, and though the TV's upscaling looks great, it's not a big improvement over watching the same content on a 4K TV with similar capabilities.
Samsung's QN900 TVs deliver incredible image quality, but their 8K resolution isn't a big selling point. (2024 QN900D model pictured above.)
Steven Cohen/Business Insider
But even ignoring its 8K resolution, the QN900C is just a stunning QLED TV through and through. Its Mini LED backlight is one of the best out there, and it gets about as close to OLED-level contrast as we've seen on a display like this. It also has an incredible peak brightness of about 2,300 nits, and it can sustain that brightness much better than an OLED.
This is one of the best Samsung TVs you can buy, but its impressive picture quality is more a result of its dimming performance and quantum dot colors rather than its actual pixel count. If you're willing to spend top dollar for high-end picture quality, we still think you're better off with a 4K OLED like the Samsung S90C or LG G4, but if you're set on buying an 8K display, the QN900C is easily one of the best 85-inch TVs to snag.
Buyers should note that Samsung does sell a 2024 edition of this display, called the QN900D. We got a hands-on look at the new model, and it performed much like the QN900C during our tests. But since the QN900D currently costs a lot more than the QN900C, we still recommend the older model as the better buy.
Best on a budget
The best 85-inch TVs don't come cheap. Even basic models rarely dip below $800, and those sets make many performance sacrifices to get that cheap. However, there is one 85-inch TV that still manages to deliver solid image quality for a typical sale price of just under $900: the TCL Q6 QLED.
Other options that cost a bit less, like the Hisense A7 and the step-down TCL S4, use regular LED panels without quantum dots, which limits their color volume and brightness performance. But the Q6 offers a more vibrant and accurate HDR image while remaining competitively priced for its size.
That said, the Q6 still has drawbacks compared to pricier models. Viewing angles are narrow, so picture quality takes a big hit if you sit to the side of the screen. This is common for TVs in this class, so if viewing angles are a priority over color gamut, we recommend going with an alternative budget model like the 86-inch LG UQ75 instead. And like many TVs in this class, the Q6 is limited to a 60Hz screen rather than 120 or 144Hz, which makes it less suited for high-end 4K gaming.
Though brighter than cheaper 85-inch sets, the Q6 maxes out at around 500 nits, lower than the 600-nit range we typically recommend as a starting place for budget HDR TVs. It also lacks local dimming, so it can't adjust brightness across different zones on the screen. This leads to elevated black levels compared to step-up models, like the TCL Q7.
For most screen sizes, our go-to budget pick is the Hisense U6K which does have local dimming. But unfortunately, that model isn't offered in sizes above 75 inches. As it stands, the Q6 is the most affordable 85-inch QLED TV you can buy, and compared to its direct competitors, it delivers great value for the money.
How we test 85-inch TVs
A peak brightness test pattern displayed on an LG OLED TV.
Steven Cohen/Insider
To choose the best 85-inch TVs, our team relied on a combination of hands-on testing and research informed by more than a decade of experience covering the home entertainment product market.
When we review TVs, we typically evaluate each model's 65-inch option since that's considered the industry's flagship size. However, a model's overall performance often remains comparable across sizes 55 inches and up. For example, an 83-inch LG C3 OLED and a 65-inch C3 OLED have the same specs. The only notable difference is the size of each panel.
However, there are instances when certain TV models have more dramatic differences across their screen sizes. For instance, the Samsung S90C uses quantum dots on its 55-, 65-, and 77-inch models but does not use quantum dots on its 83-inch model. This means that the 83-inch model can't match the color performance of its smaller counterparts. We take all of these differences into account when recommending TVs and detail these instances when they pop up.
To evaluate displays, we look at key picture quality elements like color performance, clarity/sharpness, contrast control, HDR brightness, refresh rate, smart TV interface speed, off-angle viewing, and overall value. We use an X-Rite iDisplay Plus colorimeter and test patterns on the Spears & Munsil UHD HDR Benchmark 4K Blu-ray disc to check the brightness and other objective image attributes.
We also rely on various movies and TV shows to look at real-world performance in bright and dark rooms. We've selected specific scenes to compare performance across TVs with black levels, shadow detail, HDR capabilities, and upscaling in mind. Sources include 4K, 1080p, and standard definition (SD) material from Blu-rays, streaming services, and cable TV.
85-inch TV FAQs
The subtle benefits of 8K resolution are more noticeable on 75- and 85-inch TVs.
Steven Cohen/Business Insider
Is 85 inches a good TV size?
The best 85-inch TVs can provide a level of immersion that smaller displays can't achieve, and they're especially good for larger rooms since you can sit farther away and still get a cinematic experience. Though there are fewer 85-inch models to choose from compared to smaller screen sizes, several of our picks for the best 4K TVs are sold in 83 to 85-inch versions.
However, many rooms simply can't accommodate a TV this big, and 85-inch sets are typically pricey. If you need a smaller display, check out our guides focused on other sizes:
Generally, you should expect to pay at least $900 to snag one of the best 85-inch TVs, though high-end models cost $5,000 or more.
We've seen entry-level 85-inch LED TVs on sale for as low as $750, but budget QLED models typically start at around $1,000, and midrange options with local dimming and higher brightness capabilities sell for around $1,500 to $1,800. High-end 85-inch QLED 4K TVs with the best performance usually cost around $2,000 to $3,000, and 8K models can be between $5,000 and $7,000.
If you want one of the best OLED TVs in this class, you can find 83-inch options starting at around $3,500, while high-end 4K OLEDs this big can cost as much as $6,500.
Is 4K resolution enough for an 85-inch TV?
In general, 4K resolution is plenty to deliver a sharp and detailed image on an 85-inch TV. That said, the higher pixel density of an 8K display can present some improvements in picture clarity if you sit very close to your TV.
On an 85-inch set, improvements in pixel smoothness should start to become most visible if you sit less than five feet from your display. However, for most people, this subtle benefit is not worth the extra money that an 8K TV costs.
Despite being known as a member of one of America's most iconic political families, Schlossberg has asserted he has no plans to enter a race of his own. However, he's already making a name for himself.
Here's what you need to know about Jack Schlossberg.
John "Jack" Bouvier Kennedy Schlossberg is the 31-year-old grandson of President John F. Kennedy and the son of Caroline Kennedy.
Jack Schlossberg introduces Speaker Nancy Pelosi who received the 2019 Profile in Courage Award at The John F. Kennedy Presidential Library And Museum on May 19, 2019.
Paul Marotta/Getty Images
He was named for his maternal grandfather, John F. Kennedy, and his maternal great-grandfather, John Vernou Bouvier III.
He is the youngest child of Caroline Kennedy and designer Edwin Schlossberg, who have been married since 1986.
Caroline Kennedy and Edwin Schlossberg attend their wedding ceremony on July 19, 1986.
PL Gould/IMAGES/Getty Images
Kennedy came from an Irish-Catholic background, while Edwin Schlossberg was raised Jewish.
Jack Schlossberg was born in New York City on January 19, 1993.
Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg walks with her son Jack and a school friend in April 1999.
Lawrence Schwartzwald/Sygma/Getty Images
In 2011, he graduated from The Collegiate School, a prestigious all-boys private school on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.
Caroline Kennedy and Edwin Schlossberg share two other children besides Jack: Tatiana Schlossberg, 33, and Rose Schlossberg, 35.
Caroline Kennedy, Rose Schlossberg, Tatiana Schlossberg, and Jack Schlossberg on stage during rehearsals at the 2008 Democratic Convention.
Ron Antonelli/NY Daily News Archive/Getty Images
Schlossberg is the lone grandson of John F. Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy and the eldest surviving male descendant of the former president's immediate family.
Rose and Tatiana Schlossberg are both married, but Jack appears to be single.
When appearing on the "Today" show in 2022, Schlossberg shared that his sister Tatiana had recently welcomed a son named Edwin, after their father. Schlossberg also said he'd moved back to his "childhood bedroom" to be closer to his family after graduating from Harvard.
He bears a striking resemblance to his maternal uncle, John F. Kennedy Jr., who died in a plane crash in 1999.
John F. Kennedy Jr. and friends in New York City in 1979.
/Ron Galella Collection via Getty Images
John F. Kennedy Jr. died after an aircraft he was piloting crashed off the coast of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, on July 16, 1999. His wife, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, and her sister Lauren Bessette also perished in the accident.
The couple did not have any children together, so there were no surviving Kennedy heirs through Kennedy Jr.
Schlossberg is on track to follow the family tradition of becoming a lawyer.
Barack Obama shakes hands with Jack Schlossberg during a dinner in honor of the Medal of Freedom awardees at the Smithsonian National Museum of American History on November 20, 2013.
Kevin Dietsch-Pool/Getty Images
After Schlossberg graduated from Yale University in 2015 with a history degree, he entered Harvard Law School in the fall of 2017 and Harvard Business School in the fall of 2018.
"I'm inspired by my family's legacy of public service," Schlossberg said in his first live interview on "Today" in 2017. "It's something that I'm very proud of."
He graduated from the university in 2022, and in April 2023 he shared that he had passed the New York State bar exam.
His mother, Caroline, passed the same bar exam in 1989. According to People, his uncle John F. Kennedy Jr. famously failed the New York bar exam twice before ultimately passing on his third try in 1990.
He appears to share his family's interest in politics and civic justice.
Prince William, Jack Schlossberg, Tatiana Schlossberg, and Caroline Kennedy visit the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum on December 2, 2022.
Samir Hussein/WireImage/Getty Images
"I'm still trying to make my own way, figure things out, so stay tuned. I don't know what I'm going to do," he told "Today" in 2017. He again told Savannah Guthrie in 2022 that he had "no plans" to enter politics at the moment.
While he hasn't committed to a career in politics just yet, Schlossberg has taken an increasingly public role with the family's Profile in Courage Awards, which honors world leaders, and the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation.
According to People, Schlossberg has also worked as a Senate page and intern for former Secretary of State John Kerry.
Schlossberg spoke at the 2020 Democratic National Convention as a representative of his family and has appeared with his mother at many public events. In December 2022, the Harvard graduate was pictured alongside his mother and sister Tatiana meeting with Prince William at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum.
Schlossberg has become the face of a new generation of Kennedys.
Caroline Kennedy and Jack Schlossberg attend the 2017 Met Gala.
Rabbani and Solimene Photography/Getty Images
Schlossberg boasts over 101,000 followers on Instagram, where he often shares photos and videos related to his paddleboarding hobby.
He's also shown that he has a sense of humor. In July 2023, a series of light-hearted videos Schlossberg posted to Instagram about the downsides of eating at restaurants went viral.
"We have to wait there to eat something that we don't get to choose, really, what it is," Schlossberg said to the camera in one video. "We only get a few choices and you don't know what any of them are gonna taste like or what's good … and we're gonna sit there and wait for some guy to ask us a question. And we're gonna have to talk to some guy about what we wanna eat."
Secretary of State John Kerry once said of him, "A sense of humor is not genetic, but apparently in the Kennedy family, it can be inherited. In President Kennedy's grandson, Jack Schlossberg, this quality seems to abide."
The Burj Al Babas is an abandoned ghost town in Turkey filled with Disneyland-like castles.
Construction of the luxury community began in 2014 and cost $200 million.
When Turkey's economy fell, the project halted. Today, 587 castles remain empty.
A town of castles called the Burj Al Babas in northwest Turkey was originally designed to draw foreign vacationers.
After more than 500 were built and $200 million was invested in the property, Turkey's economy fell, and so did the Burj Al Babas, The New York Times reported.
Today, 587 villas sit empty, forming a ghost town, Yes Theory reported. Take a look inside.
Near the small town of Mudurnu in Turkey's northwest region sits Burj Al Babas, a ghost town filled with castles.
Hundreds of castles fill the small village.
Chris McGrath/Getty Images
Today, there are more than 500 vacant identical homes, Yes Theory reported. Their blue-gray steeples and Gothic fixtures call to mind the castles found in Disney parks.
Disneyland in Anaheim, California.
MediaNews Group/Orange County Register/Getty Images
But the property lacks Disneyland's crowds. Instead, the more than 500 villas sit empty, and Burj Al Babas stands as a symbol of the nation's economic plight.
A shot of the hundreds of abandoned villas.
Chris McGrath/Getty Images
The project got its start in 2014 when the Yerdelen brothers and Bulent Yilmaz, construction entrepreneurs from Istanbul, Turkey, drafted plans for a $200 million luxury community, The New York Times reported.
The Burj Al Babas project sits in Turkey's northwest region.
Chris McGrath/Getty Images
When creating the design, the trio pulled inspiration from their home city. The buildings mimic Istanbul's Galata Tower and Maiden's Tower, as well as British and American architecture, Mezher Yerdelen told the Times in 2019.
The buildings were inspired by famous Istanbul buildings.
Esin Deniz/Shutterstock
They also picked a strategic location. Mudurnu is a Roman spa town, according to Condé Nast Traveller. So, the region's nearby hot springs would fill hot tubs in every home and provide warmth for underfloor heating.
The original plan included 700 buildings that the group hoped would attract foreign buyers, who, according to the Times, vacation in Turkey for its Mediterranean climate.
A view of the hundreds of half-built villas.
Chris McGrath/Getty Images
The homes were sold for $370,000 to $500,000 each, depending on the location — a price tag that catered to a wealthier Middle Eastern clientele, according to the Times.
A row of partially built homes in the Burj Al Babas community.
Esin Deniz/Shutterstock
The group also planned for a shopping mall in the development's center, along with gardens and lakes throughout the 250-acre property.
The designers had imagined lakes and gardens throughout the community.
Esin Deniz/Shutterstock
The project was initially successful. Of the 732 planned villas, about 350 were sold to customers from Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia, Bloomberg reported.
Each villa has a balcony and a classic castle-like roof.
As construction started in a valley outside Mudurnu, not everyone was happy with the project, the Times reported.
Construction halted on the development shortly after building began.
emasali stock/Shutterstock
Some locals were frustrated that the castles strayed away from Mudurnu's traditional Ottoman-style architecture, Condé Nast Traveller reported. Others worried that the development would damage nearby forests.
An overhead view of the partially completed development.
Esin Deniz/Shutterstock
Then oil prices plunged. Potential buyers backed out of their agreements, and others stopped making payments on their future vacation homes, the project's architect told the Times.
The abandoned villas create a grid-like pattern in the village.
Chris McGrath/Getty Images
That, coupled with Turkey's soaring inflation, political turmoil, and an economic downturn led the developers to file for bankruptcy, placing the project at a standstill in 2018, Newsweek reported.
What remained was 587 completed homes and $27 million in debt.
Not a single villa was fully completed.
Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images
In 2019, the brothers were granted permission to complete the construction of the contracted houses when their bankruptcy ruling was overturned, according to the Hurriyet Daily News. Soon after, the COVID-19 pandemic delayed the project again.
According to Atlas Obscura, the entire project was then acquired by NOVA Group Holdings, a multinational American corporation, which may attempt to salvage the development.
O.J. Simpson tries on a leather glove allegedly used in the murders.
Lee Celano/WireImage/Getty Images
The O.J. Simpson trial lives on infamy more than 30 years later.
Maybe you remember where you were when the Bronco chase ensued, or the verdict was read.
Here are some of the biggest moments from "the trial of the century."
Nicknamed "the trial of the century," O.J. Simpson's 1995 murder trial captured public attention.
A former NFL player, Simpson was already a celebrity. The case touched on polarizing racial politics just a few years after Rodney King was brutally beaten by members of the Los Angeles Police Department.
The courtroom proceedings were also broadcast on live TV, a relatively new phenomenon that helped spawn unscripted reality shows and bolster cable news. Rupert Murdoch reportedly launched Fox News after seeing how lucrative the trial coverage was for CNN — around $200 million, CNN reported.
The trial still remains a cultural touchstone, with the Emmy-winning 2016 FX series "The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story" starring Cuba Gooding Jr., Sarah Paulson, John Travolta, David Schwimmer, and Sterling K. Brown.
Here's a look back at some of the most iconic photos from the trial.
Coverage of O.J. Simpson's murder trial kicked off with a car chase on June 17, 1994, that was broadcast on live TV.
Police cars follow the Ford Bronco carrying murder suspect O.J. Simpson.
Vinnie Zuffante/Getty Images
Days after Simpson's ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were found dead, Simpson failed to turn himself in to the Los Angeles Police Department to be charged with first-degree murder. Instead, he evaded authorities in a car chase on the 405 freeway in Los Angeles and Orange County.
Simpson sat in the backseat of a white Ford Bronco, holding a gun to his head as Al Cowlings drove away from the police vehicles in pursuit.
News channels interrupted their programming to broadcast live coverage of the chase, which ended with Simpson's surrender at his home.
Simpson's defense team was led by Johnnie Cochran, a prominent civil rights attorney.
Defense attorney Johnnie Cochran Jr. (center) puts his hand on the shoulder of O.J. Simpson during a hearing.
REED SAXON/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
Cochran developed a reputation for litigating high-profile cases related to police brutality.
In Simpson's trial, he argued that LAPD officer Mark Fuhrman planted evidence to frame Simpson for the murders, motivated by racism, CNN reported.
Simpson's defense also included Robert Kardashian, a friend of Simpson's and the father of the famed Kardashian siblings.
O.J. Simpson consulting with friend Robert Kardashian (center) and Alvin Michelson (left) during a hearing in Los Angeles.
VINCE BUCCI/AFP via Getty Images
Kardashian's wife, Kris Jenner, was also close friends with Nicole Brown Simpson.
The media dubbed Simpson's defense team of high-powered lawyers "The Dream Team."
Marcia Clark served as lead prosecutor.
Prosecutor Marcia Clark during the trial of O.J. Simpson.
POOL/AFP via Getty Images
Clark's appearance, demeanor, and personal life, including an ongoing custody battle, were widely covered and criticized during the trial.
"That was the hell of the trial," Clark told Vogue in 2016. "There was no privacy. I was famous in a way that was kind of terrifying."
The trial became a media circus with live TV broadcasts covering every moment.
A Massachusetts store with all of its televisions set to trial coverage.
Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via Getty Images
The Simpson trial occurred in the early 90s — long before today's saturated and fractured digital media environment, Business Insider's Peter Kafka reported Thursday.
As a result, the event drove massive viewership figures on TV, with even pre-trial moments like the Bronco chase nabbing Super Bowl-sized ratings. All three major broadcast networks cut into their regularly scheduled programming to cover the chase, which nabbed 95 million viewers.
In one of the most famous moments from the trial, Simpson appeared to struggle to put on a leather glove that was found bloodied at the crime scene.
O.J. Simpson tries on a leather glove allegedly used in the murders.
Lee Celano/WireImage/Getty Images
A key piece of evidence in the trial was a pair of leather gloves that prosecutors alleged Simpson donned while committing the murders, and which were stained with the blood of the victims.
But when asked to try on the gloves in court, Simpson appeared to struggle, saying they were "too tight."
Prosecutors argued the gloves didn't fit because the blood had caused them to shrink, and because of the the rubber gloves underneath that Simpson was wearing to protect the evidence.
A 2016 documentary put forth another theory: that Simpson had stopped taking his arthritis medicine, which had caused his hands to swell.
The prosecution provided a new pair of gloves, but the damage was done.
O.J. Simpson shows the jury a new pair of Aris extra-large gloves, similar to the gloves found at the crime scene.
VINCE BUCCI/AFP via Getty Images
After the first demo proved dubious, prosecutors asked Simpson to try on a new pair of gloves in the same brand and size, which appeared to fit well.
Nevertheless, the gloves inspired a quip in Cochran's closing argument that became synonymous with the trial: "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."
In 2012, looking back at the case, one of Simpson's lawyers, Alan Dershowitz, said he couldn't imagine "anything stupider" than for prosecutors to have had Simpson try on the gloves. Prosecutor Christopher Darden responded at the time that the defense had "manipulated" the evidence.
When the verdicts were announced, viewers across the US stopped to watch the trial's dramatic end.
Logan Airport travelers watch a TV as the verdict is announced.
Boston Globe
With the proceedings airing gavel to gavel, viewership culminated on Oct. 3, 1995 with the reading of the verdicts after just four hours of deliberations.
Time reports that a staggering 150 million people tuned in for the "not guilty" verdicts, amounting to roughly 57% of the US population.
If you were alive at the time, chances are you remember where you were. Some students at the time recall watching the verdicts during school hours, with televisions being wheeled into lunch and classrooms.
Goldman's family reacted in horror.
Members of Ron Goldman's family — Kim, Fred, and Patti — react to the not guilty verdicts.
MYUNG J. CHUN/AFP via Getty Images
After the verdicts were delivered in a highly-charged courtroom, members of Goldman's family — including father Fred, stepmother Patti, and sister Kim — wept and comforted one another.
"This prosecution team didn't lose today," Fred Goldman said at a press conference, according to the Associated Press. "I deeply believe this country lost today. Justice was not served."
Simpson's relatives celebrated.
Simpson's family members — including his mother Eunice, daughter Arnelle, son Jason, and sister Shirley — react to the verdict
MYUNG J. CHUN/AFP via Getty Images
The defense, on the other hand, celebrated the jury's decision with relief.
Simpson smiled and mouthed "thank you" to the jury, according to the AP, while Cochran slapped Simpson on the back. Simpson's children Arnelle and Jason embraced, while the AP reported that another Simpson family member told Cochran, "We did it!"
He's been accused of violating the law by directing the podcast's ad revenue to a super PAC.
In a break from his usual approach, he's declined to substantively address questions about it.
When I approached Sen. Ted Cruz at the Capitol this week, he appeared upbeat, quipping that he was "living the dream" when I opened our conversation.
The Texas Republican quickly turned combative, however, when I told him I had questions about a strange story that began bubbling up in recent weeks about his thrice-weekly "Verdict" podcast and a super PAC set up for the sole purpose of supporting his reelection.
"Of course you do," Cruz replied. "I understand you have a mission to write an attack piece."
It was similar to the approach he took when asked about the controversy by a local TV station in Houston, where he declined to substantively address the issue and instead accused a reporter of trying to "parrot left-wing Democrat attacks."
All of this began in late March when the Houston Chronicle reported that iHeartMedia — the company that hosts Cruz's podcast — had since the beginning of 2023 deposited more than $630,000 into "Truth and Courage," a super PAC set up to support Cruz's reelection.
iHeartMedia, which signed on as a corporate partner to the podcast in late 2022, has confirmed that the payments to the super PAC were derived from advertising revenue generated by podcast.
However, campaign finance laws forbid direct coordination between candidates and the super PACs that support them, and the payments raise the possibility that Cruz struck some sort of agreement with iHeartMedia to direct the ad revenue to the super PAC — an apparent violation of those laws.
When I asked Cruz if that was the case, he said his team had already put out a statement on the matter — though the only such statement I could find was the statement given to the Houston Chronicle, which accused the media of wanting to "stop" his podcast while noting that he makes the appearances "for free."
Cruz is usually eager to talk about both his podcast and campaign finance laws
On some level, it's not hard to see why Cruz is agitated — the brewing scandal is creating negative press as he faces a competitive reelection race against Democratic Rep. Colin Allred this November.
The Campaign Legal Center and End Citizens United have also filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing Cruz of violating campaign finance laws.
BP America, an oil company, asked iHeartMedia to yank their ads from the podcast, saying that they "were never informed" that their advertising dollars were "going directly to a super PAC."
Yet Cruz's refusal to answer questions about the arrangement is a departure from his typical approach.
When Allred first tried to make an issue out of Cruz's podcast possibly distracting the senator from his responsibilities, the Texas senator confidently told me that his podcast was actually "integral to doing the job," even if it "takes quite a bit of time." Cruz has also been known to tell Capitol Hill reporters to listen to his podcast in order to get a fuller sense of his views on various topics.
He's also engaged with me before on campaign finance matters, explaining his opposition to a bill to disclose dark money spending in federal elections and speaking with me at length about his eponymous Supreme Court case.
In that case, Ted Cruz vs. FEC, the Texas senator deliberately challenged existing campaign finance laws, suing the FEC with the goal of getting the conservative Supreme Court to eliminate an existing $250,000 cap on the amount of money that a candidate can raise after their election to repay personal loans to their campaign.
That cap had been designed as an anti-corruption measure, limiting donors' ability to line the personal pockets of lawmakers.
Cruz made a relatively straightforward argument to me in May 2023 about why he disagreed with that, arguing that the cap was really an effort to "disincentivize any challenger from taking the risk and loaning their own money to their campaign."
I've since written about some of the fallout from that June 2022 Supreme Court decision, including both Cruz and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin repaying themselves for years-old campaign loans and Sens. JD Vance of Ohio and Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma doing the same as they accepted corporate PAC contributions.
So when I approached Cruz this week, I asked if he might be doing something similar here to what he did before: challenging existing campaign finance law with the intention of changing it. And I hoped he might be willing to explain his intentions, as he's done in the past.
"When you write a positive story on something I've accomplished here, on legislation I've passed, then I'll answer your questions," Cruz replied. "In the meantime, if you're just gonna do attack pieces, knock yourself out."