Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News and Analysis

Episode: No Spin News - Weekend Edition - January 17, 2026
Host: Bill O'Reilly
Date: January 17, 2026

Episode Overview

This weekend edition of No Spin News dives into pressing political and legal controversies: the Clintons’ subpoena surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, the Justice Department’s investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, American foreign policy traditions versus Trump-era actions, and the scope of executive power and state rebellion under the Trump administration. Bill O'Reilly hosts a series of expert guests—lawyer Bob Driscoll, financial analyst Anthony Esposito, historian Randall Woods, and media columnist Colby Hall—for robust debate and sharp analysis “with no spin.”

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Clintons Subpoenaed by House Oversight Committee

Guest: Bob Driscoll, Attorney

• Background: Bill and Hillary Clinton are subpoenaed for private depositions regarding Bill Clinton’s 26 flights on Jeffrey Epstein’s plane, some in connection with the Clinton Foundation.
  • O'Reilly: “They’re not going to show up. I’ll be stunned if they show up.” [00:21]
• Legal Framework:
  • Precedent set by Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon, both of whom defied Congressional subpoenas and were imprisoned.
  • Driscoll warns, “I think it could happen,” regarding the possibility of a former (or sitting) President facing prison for defying Congress [02:10].
• Strategic Advice:
  • Better to appear and object to specific questions, or challenge the subpoena in court.
  • Ignoring the subpoena puts them at serious legal risk; Congress may vote to hold them in contempt and refer to the Department of Justice.
  • New procedural developments: referrals can now go directly to the DOJ without a full House contempt vote [04:19].
• Memorable Exchange:
  • Driscoll: “If our guy had to go to jail, so do you.” [05:28]
  • O'Reilly: “If you are on Epstein’s plane 26 times under the banner of the Clinton foundation, you got to ask the questions about that.” [05:30]
• Final consensus: Not showing up is the worst possible move for the Clintons. [06:16]

2. Justice Department Investigating Fed Chair Jerome Powell

Guest: Anthony Esposito, Financial Analyst

• Issue: DOJ is investigating Jerome Powell over a $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed’s headquarters; speculation that it’s politically motivated, especially as Trump has shown animosity toward Powell.
  • O’Reilly: “Nobody cares about this, but I do... 2.5 billion renovation... How is that possible? It’s my money!” [06:31]
• Powell’s Tenure:
  • Esposito: “Jerome Powell has positioned himself in a really bad way with the president because... he’s attacked America... and he’s attacked President Trump... through his seat at the Fed and monetary policy.” [07:49]
  • Describes Powell’s rate increases under Trump during a strong economy, sharp rate cuts under Biden, and then increases during inflation—argues this benefited Democrats and hurt Trump politically [08:13].
• Motives for Investigation:
  • Trump likely perceives Powell as part of the “deep state,” believes Powell’s actions were politically manipulative [09:39].
  • O’Reilly: “Trump believes... Powell is a deep state guy... manipulating the US economy to get Democrats elected...” [09:39]
  • Esposito: “He manipulates the rates to benefit the Democrats.” [09:56]
• Perspective on DOJ Actions:
  • Esposito says there is “a bit of retribution” in play, but “enough legitimacy to make it not some kind of contrived situation.” [11:32]
  • “I don’t think President Trump had anything to do with the subpoena, but I’m sure he’s not losing sleep over it.” [11:49]

3. Historical Foreign Policy: John Quincy Adams vs. Trump

Guest: Dr. Randall Woods, Historian

• Discussion Prompt: How would John Quincy Adams view Trump’s efforts to reshape the hemisphere to be more pro-American?
  • Woods: “He would approve efforts to recreate the Americas to suit our interest. I’m not sure he would have gone about it in exactly the same way.” [13:03]
• Comparison of Doctrines:
  • O’Reilly claims the “Don Roe Doctrine” is not much different from the Monroe Doctrine [13:37], but Woods contrasts the expansionist/isolationist tension in practice.
  • Woods reviews US history of hemispheric intervention, from Spanish-American War, Roosevelt’s "big stick," to Cold War anti-communism [14:06–14:36].
• Debate on Narcotics and Security Threats:
  • O’Reilly names narcotics as a security threat to justify intervention: “Let me challenge you on narcotics flooding into this country, killing millions... That’s a national security threat, is it not?” [14:52]
  • Woods: “Nobody’s forcing Americans to take drugs.” [15:09]
  • O’Reilly: “That doesn’t negate the threat... these cartels... hurt our country. So president supposed to just do nothing?” [15:12]
  • Woods: “I’m not sure that’s a good reason... Maduro was a bad actor...” [15:50]
• On Corruption and US Actions:
  • O’Reilly references Maduro’s seizure of US assets and US seizures in response [16:03], defending aggressive policy: “I’m saying the overarch of challenging anti American countries... is a legitimate way to use our power.” [17:13]
  • Woods: “Absolutely, I agree with you. I just think there’s a better way to do it.” [17:25]
• Covert Action:
  • Woods: “If you look at the history of regime changes during the Cold War, they used the CIA.” [17:33]
  • O’Reilly: “Well, that’s what they use now. The CIA ran that entire Venezuelan operation.” [17:40]

4. Executive Power, State Rebellion, and Media Critique

Guest: Colby Hall, Mediaite Columnist

• Mediaite’s Take:
  • O’Reilly reads from Hall’s “Enough is Enough” column, criticizing Trump’s “scale, speed and brazenness” in using executive power to bypass checks and balances [19:11].
• Debate on Executive Authority:
  • Hall: “Under an executive branch that literally acts with impunity, with zero checks and balances... might makes right... That’s not really democratic.” [20:45]
  • O’Reilly: “I don’t have that perception... The courts ruled that the president could not send National Guard to L.A... He took them out. He’s been constrained.” [21:36]
  • Hall: “You just basically said Trump doesn’t want to take Maduro to Congress because he knows he won’t get what he wants. I’m sorry, you don’t get to pick and choose what the Constitution says.” [25:54]
  • O’Reilly: “If you have national security concerns behind you, yes, you do.” [26:10]
  • Hall counters that “national security” is a subjective justification; “checks and balances” can’t be abandoned for expedience [26:15–26:29].
• Law, State Rebellion, and ICE:
  • O’Reilly: “There are 10 states in open rebellion to the United States government because they fail to obey the law... When you say, ‘I’m not going to obey the law...’ you’re in rebellion, are you not?” [25:19]
  • Hall: “Rebellion is a narrative that oversteps considerably. I remember... states rights were a big talking point on the Right. Now... gone away.” [25:34]
• Ending Thoughts on Immigration and Public Opinion:
  • Hall: “Only 28% of the people are sort of agreeing with the narrative that the ICE agent was justified in shooting.” [27:32]
  • O’Reilly: “ICE has to tighten it up a little bit and has to... give more of an explanation.” [29:05]
• Closing Dynamic:
  • O’Reilly: “Trump is basically saying this... ‘I was elected to protect the American people and I’m going to do it. I am not going to submit to some theoretical process...’”
  • Hall (final word): “You’re being very generous... I don’t think a lot of people feel like mullahs in Iran pose a direct threat to their lives... But geopolitically, they are a huge threat... I also think... people want illegals extracted... but don’t want to see... agents invading homes without a search warrant.” [28:28–29:05]

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On Subpoenas and Risk:
  • Driscoll: “Not showing up puts him in the worst position because his argument there is, ‘There’s not one relevant question I could be asked,’ and that’s clearly not true.” [05:55]
• On the Clinton Investigation:
  • O’Reilly: “If our guy had to go to jail, so do you.” [05:28]
• On Powell and the Fed:
  • Esposito: “He manipulates the rates to benefit the Democrats.” [09:56]
• On Drug Cartels as Security Threats:
  • O’Reilly: “Narcotics flooding into this country, killing millions… that’s a national security threat, is it not?” [14:52]
  • Woods: “Nobody’s forcing Americans to take drugs.” [15:09]
• On State Rebellion:
  • O’Reilly: “When you say, ‘I’m not going to obey the law that has been passed by Congress, not Trump. I’m not obeying it.’ You’re in rebellion, are you not?” [25:19]
• Executive Power and Checks:
  • Hall: “You could defend the extraction of Maduro... that really threatens and is very risky to our NATO alliance... under an executive branch that acts with impunity.” [20:45]
  • O’Reilly: “If you have national security concerns behind you, yes, you do.” [26:10]

Important Segment Timestamps

• Clintons and Oversight Subpoena: 00:07–06:21
• Justice Department & Jerome Powell: 06:31–12:10
• Historical Foreign Policy & John Quincy Adams: 12:14–18:19
• Executive Power, States’ Rights, ICE, and Media Critique: 19:11–29:05

Overall Tone & Takeaways

Bill O’Reilly steers a combative, fast-paced conversation, pressing each guest with challenging hypotheticals and pushing back against what he sees as partisan double standards. The guests bring legal expertise, financial analysis, historical perspective, and media critique, fostering debates that don’t shy away from grey areas or unpopular conclusions. This episode serves listeners keen on understanding not just the facts, but the competing frameworks shaping American governance in 2026.