CNN’s “Inside Politics,” host Dana Bash pushed House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries aggressively on the ongoing government shutdown and questioned his party’s role in resolving the impasse.

Bash repeatedly challenged Jeffries’s narrative that Democrats were ready to negotiate, suggesting instead that the real paralysis lay within Democratic leadership’s own demands.

At one point, Bash pressed Jeffries: “You say you want to talk, but Speaker Johnson apparently hasn’t been given permission to meet with you — have you tried knocking on his door, walking down the hall?”

Jeffries responded that Republicans had cut off communication, arguing that informal meetings would not be fruitful without willingness on the part of congressional leadership.

But Bash would not let the exchange end there.

She pressed whether the Democratic proposal — which included extending Affordable Care Act subsidies and reversing GOP healthcare cuts — was negotiable, or whether it was a nonstarter.

Jeffries maintained that Democrats remained open to bipartisan solutions but insisted Republicans had gone “radio silent.”

The tension escalated when Bash framed a question in a blunt, almost confrontational tone: “You could probably take a few steps… have you tried that?”

At several junctures, Bash’s questioning seemed designed to corner Jeffries into accountability, undermining his attempt to shift blame entirely to Republicans.

She also raised the inconsistency of Jeffries’s position, pointing out that what he called “negotiable” may not actually be open to compromise if Democrats hold firm on all their demands.

Jeffries attempted to shift the blame back, saying Republicans had repeatedly tried to repeal the ACA and were unwilling to extend subsidies without structural changes.

Bash followed up by asking whether he would support a one-year extension of those subsidies if Republicans would allow it.

Jeffries demurred, saying he was not ready to accept that narrow fix without broader action.

Through the interview, Bash adopted a skeptical posture toward Jeffries’s narrative — something that conservatives seized on as evidence that even legacy media are now pushing back harder on Democratic talking points.

Conservatives applauded Bash’s refusal to act as a passive conduit for official messaging. One commentator called the moment a turning point in media deference.

Social media users echoed the sentiment: “Even leftist CNN’s Bash shuts down Jeffries’ shutdown whine — caught off guard with brutal challenge.”

The exchange also undercut Jeffries’s argument that Democrats were trying to negotiate in good faith.

Bash sought to expose whether those overtures were real or rhetorical cover.

From a conservative vantage, this marked a welcome line of questioning from mainstream media — one that forces Democratic leaders to defend their posture rather than allowing them to dominate the narrative unchallenged.

The interview ended without a clear breakthrough, but the dynamic was telling: more pressure on Jeffries, less room for him to stick to the standard talking points.

In the coming days, this exchange may be referenced by Republicans as evidence that Democratic leaders aren’t being upfront about what they’re willing or unwilling to give up in negotiations.

BREAKING: Anna Paulina Luna Claims The Biden DOJ DESTROYED…

Representative Anna Paulina Luna has leveled explosive information against the Biden Department of Justice, claiming that critical materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation have been deliberately destroyed.

Luna, who chairs a congressional task force focused on federal transparency, has stated unequivocally that she possesses evidence implicating high-ranking officials in the DOJ.

She introduced legislation titled the SHRED Act, aimed at imposing severe penalties on government agents who destroy or conceal federal records. The proposed bill calls for 20 years to life in prison for anyone caught eliminating evidence in cases of national significance.

“Even if they are conducting a criminal investigation, you should probably pick up the phone and call us,” Luna told Fox News. “We have been more than patient.”

These developments come amid growing conservative suspicion that the Biden administration has no interest in unmasking Epstein’s full network. The notion that key records could be gone forever only intensifies fears that justice is being buried under a bureaucratic rug.

Luna’s office has reportedly sent multiple requests to the Department of Justice demanding clarity on the handling of Epstein-related materials. So far, those inquiries have been met with either vague responses or complete silence.

The congresswoman did not mince words in her public statements, suggesting that the DOJ’s behavior constitutes a deliberate act of obstruction. If true, such actions could violate federal law and trigger an entirely new legal battle.

“The Biden DOJ has obstructed Congress, ignored subpoenas, and now appears to have destroyed critical evidence,” Luna said. “This is corruption at the highest level.”

Critics argue that this is yet another example of double standards in Washington. “Had this been a Republican-led DOJ accused of destroying documents in a child sex trafficking case, the media would be apoplectic,” one conservative commentator noted.

For years, the Epstein case has symbolized the deep rot within America’s elite circles. The financier’s suspicious death in prison and the subsequent lack of high-profile indictments have fueled accusations of a widespread cover-up.

Now, Luna’s allegations breathe new life into those concerns. If records were indeed destroyed, the implications are profound. It would mean that the DOJ, under Biden, actively shielded criminals from justice.

What’s more troubling is that these destroyed materials could have named prominent individuals—politicians, celebrities, and global financiers—who participated in or enabled Epstein’s crimes.

In this context, Luna’s SHRED Act isn’t just legislative symbolism. It is a clarion call for accountability in an era marked by elite impunity. Her bill seeks to ensure that future officials think twice before erasing truth from the historical record.