← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
"Ahead of tomorrow's confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche"
00:45:27
The botched handling of the Epstein files by this administration and the lack of accountability for victims will no doubt be of prominent focus at tomorrow’s confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche to be the nation’s attorney general.
Loading summary
Transcript73 lines
- [00:01]
Nicole Wallace
Home to the Rachel Maddow Show, Morning Joe, the briefing with Jen Psaki and more Voices you know and trust. Ms. Now is your source for news, opinion and the world. Learn more at Ms. Now.
- [00:19]
Unknown Political Commentator
Any senator who votes to confirm Todd
- [00:21]
Jonathan Swan
Blanche should know you're now part of the COVID up. You're complicit in the COVID up if you vote to confirm this man and make him the Attorney General who has led the COVID up of the Epstein.
- [00:35]
Nicole Wallace
Hi again Everybody. It's now five o'clock in the east. The botched handling of the release of the Epstein files by Donald Trump and his administration and the lack of any accountability for survivors and victims will no doubt be a prominent focus on the part of Democrats at tomorrow's confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche to become the country's Attorney General. Todd Blanche, who was the Deputy Attorney General at the time, was key to the release of of the files. It was riddled with redaction errors and delays. Blanche's predecessor, Pam Bondi, told lawmakers behind closed doors that Todd Blanche was the guy responsible for the rollout of the files. And thanks to intrepid reporting by New York Times reporters Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman for their new book, Regime Change, we have an even deeper understanding of the sprawling tentacles of Todd Blanche's role. According to many scenes recounted for their book, the man who now wants to serve as the country's top law enforcement official was at the center of each and every step of the Trump administration's botched release of the files. He was present for multiple meetings inside the White House Situation Room on this issue. Specifically, he reviewed the files, he spoke to Donald Trump about what was inside them and of course, he volunteered to interview Jeffrey Epstein's accomplice in child sex trafficking, Ghislaine Maxwell. After that interview, she was transferred to a minimum security prison with yoga and puppies. Senate Judiciary Democrats will have Danny Bensky, an Epstein survivor and familiar face to viewers at this program, testify against Todd Blanche's confirmation on Thursday following his appearance before the committee tomorrow. Bringing Bensky to the Hill signifies just how much Democrats intend to focus on the handling of the Epstein files in their questioning of Todd Blanche. Other Epstein survivors are weighing in as well, several sending a powerful message in this video from an organization that works to combat human trafficking. Take a look. My name was released. My phone number was released. Where I went to school, where I live. My students can now search me and read about my abuse. I am an Epstein survivor. I am an Epstein survivor. I am an Epstein survivor. We were exposed nude Pictures of victims were released. Our family's safety was put at risk.
- [02:58]
Norm Eisen
Now Todd Blanche wants to be the
- [03:00]
Nicole Wallace
Attorney General of the United States. Todd Blanche had a duty to protect us. Instead, he protected the people who committed crimes against us. 30 years, 1200 victims, and 6 million files. A mountain of evidence. But Todd Blanche says there are no investigative leads. Todd Blanche failed us. He failed victim. We deserve better. Our country deserves better.
- [03:25]
Jonathan Swan
Vote no and Todd Blanche for Attorney General.
- [03:27]
Norm Eisen
Vote no.
- [03:28]
Dave Farenthold
No.
- [03:29]
Norm Eisen
No. No.
- [03:30]
Nicole Wallace
Vote no on Todd Blanche for Attorney General. A closer look at Todd Blanche's role in the Epstein files is where we begin the hour with New York Times White House correspondent Jonathan Swan, co author of the bombshell book that changed Everything we thought we knew about Trump's second term regime change. Thank you so much for being here.
- [03:51]
Jonathan Swan
Thanks for having me, Nicole.
- [03:54]
Nicole Wallace
So you've been covering Republican politics for a long time. I used to work in Republican politics a long time ago. And the idea that a group like World Without Exploitation, a child sex trafficking, global conglomerate coming out against a Republican nominee for Attorney General is unimaginable, especially since this MAGA version of Trump's Republican Party has taken on this issue and run with it for a decade. What sorts of cross pressures exist inside the MAGA coalition, if not inside Republicans on Capitol Hill against top Blanche?
- [04:27]
Jonathan Swan
Well, it's changed a little bit because I think that there's not so much pressure from the MAGA base anymore on Todd Blanche specifically. They're, I think, very dissatisfied with the way that Trump has handled Epstein. But, you know, the reporting itself makes very clear that we've done in the book that Todd Blanche was at the center of, of all things Epstein related in this administration. And I think from the outside, if you were just watching this, you might think, oh, he was, you know, at the Justice Department handling the mandatory release of the files. But what we show in the book is that his role went much deeper than that. He was inside the White House situation room with Trump's top political advisers having conversations that essentially amounted to public relations conversations, political conversations about how to manage the Epstein material in a way that would be least damaging to Donald Trump. And the thing to really know about Trump and Tom Blanche is Trump still views Todd Blanche as his attorney. He was his personal attorney, and Trump wanted someone like that at the Justice Department. Of course, he had someone like that with Pam Bondi, who was also his personal attorney on the impeachment, but she wasn't doing the job as Trump described it. We asked, Maggie and I, when we sat down with the President. We asked him what, what, what he was dissatisfied with when it came to Pam Body. And he said something to the effect of she needs to move faster. And we said, faster at what? And he said with respect to things, he wouldn't go further than that. But we know very well that what he was dissatisfied was that she was not prosecuting his enemies quickly enough. Todd Blanche is someone that Trump clearly trusts on that front, clearly trusted to handle Epstein in a way that would not damage Trump. And Blanche was indistinguishable from the senior levels of the White House in that effort to manage the Epstein files.
- [06:31]
Nicole Wallace
I remember when Mitch McConnell sat down at the Morning Joe table nine years ago and was asked about his endorsement of Donald Trump in the context of the Access Hollywood tape. He had this folded up of judges, federal judges that he'd been promised would be appointed if Trump won. And that was his entire rationale for throwing him behind, grab him in the you know what, and everything else that came with Trump's 2016 campaign. The judges who have rebuked Todd Blanche include Trump appointed justices. And I want to read a passage of how Todd Blanche was perfectly comfortable threatening them. Menacing judges. And two Supreme Court justices are on Capitol Hill today looking for money to protect themselves. He makes clear in your reporting that he doesn't have any qualms with threatening federal judges. I'll read it. As the president's former defense attorney, Todd Blanche had a unique vantage point in the discussion. He was better equipped than anyone else in the room to weigh the idea is being discussed against Trump's personal and political interests. Todd Blanche laid out what he saw as their best options. Option one, petitioned federal district courts in Florida and New York to unseal grand jury testimonies, the secret transcripts of prosecutors, presentation of witnesses and evidence, and their efforts to obtain indictments in past Epstein related cases. You guys go on to report that that's unlikely to happen. But here's option two. To have Justice Department lawyers question Maxwell and publicly release the transcript. A twist on the idea proposed earlier by Vance in talking about why option one is unlikely. You guys report this. Quote, if the courts refused to unseal those grand jury transcripts as Blanche predicted, they could shift the blame for withholding the Epstein material away from the Trump administration and onto the judges. I know it's quaint and precious to suggest that someone who is comfortable putting federal judges in the middle of their own botched channeling of Epstein material on a pedestal is something that people should still care about. But if you couple that with all of the judicial rebukes from Kilmar, Abrego, Garcia, a judge saying that Todd Blanche reverse engineered that, looking for a crime to fit a person they targeted from the judges who have rebuked all of the illegally appointed U.S. attorneys. Todd Blanche seems to be walking into the job at odds with every federal judge that has touched a Trump case.
- [08:59]
Jonathan Swan
Well, and he's working for a president who has attacked judges in very personal ways, including their families. And, you know, remember that during the Manhattan trial. So that is very much the atmosphere within Trump's inner circle. Stephen Miller and President Trump wanted the Republican Party to go further, to start impeaching judges. I mean, one episode that's sort of been forgotten. They were going to fund. Elon Musk was looking at funding campaigns to impeach judges. So, you know, there's certainly no pushback from the previous leadership of the doj. But what's interesting about the Blanche nomination process is with Pam Bondi, it was somewhat theoretical. We knew that Trump intended to obliterate the line between the White House and the doj. He'd said as much on the campaign, you know, that he wanted his own, you know, retribution and someone in there who would essentially do his bidding. But we've now seen that the top Blanche is willing to be that person. He's shown in many different respects across the board that he's willing to be that person. And Trump trusts him, evidently. I mean, it was very striking to Maggie and I when we sat with President Trump just how effusive he was about Todd Blanche compared to Pam Bondi. He was quite negative about Pam Bondi, this is in March, and very effusive about Todd Blanche. So Trump clearly trusts him to do the job, as Donald Trump conceives of it. And everyone in Congress has seen the results of the last 18 months. So this will essentially be an on the record vote for formalizing Congress, formalizing the new relationship between the Justice Department and the White House. Completely different from what we've seen in the post Watergate era.
- [10:41]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, the public's weighed in on that. I mean, I agree with you that Republicans will have to go on the record. But on the question of the federal government is hiding information about clients of accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein in June, 75% agree that what Todd Blanche has been the architect of is a cover up. Only 8% disagree. I mean, that includes a whole lot of people that voted for Donald Trump, at least some of them in part because they would release the material. What is your sense of how they view this issue. Do they think that people like Joe Rogan, who had Kash Patel on for hours talking about all of the gigabytes of data will go away? Do they think they're feckless? Do they think they're weak? Do they think they're irrelevant?
- [11:25]
Jonathan Swan
They're working for a president who wants the whole thing to go away. And as we document in the book, Trump gets very snappy anytime someone brings up Epstein around him, he doesn't want to hear about it. He wants the whole thing to go away. So even the people within the administration who are more inclined to just put everything out there, they're working for someone who doesn't want that to happen. There are still millions of documents that haven't been released. We don't know what's in them. They're obviously not in compliance with the Transparency Act. And so we don't know what we don't know. But the MAGA base, this was the one issue, it was very interesting. It came through in their private polling. Maggie and I obtained some memos that Trump's top pollster had put together about focus groups they'd done. And the Trump team was quite alarmed this year to find that voters were still bringing up Epstein. They weren't being prompted to. They were bringing it up spontaneously. And they actually, in one of these documents, did a hierarchy of issues, and Epstein rated higher than issues that you would normally think would be higher, like crime, crime and safety. Epstein was higher than that. So this really cut through. And when you look at Trump's political fortunes in the same way that the Afghanistan withdrawal in Biden's first year, you can sort of see the polling decline. Things start to really go off the rails. One of Trump's advisors said to me, it's not so dissimilar, the Epstein crisis. Over the summer, Trump starts to lose altitude. This has had a really big effect that his team did not anticipate at all.
- [13:02]
Nicole Wallace
Yeah. I think people forget in covering sort of the flurry of manufactured crises that the Epstein files are sort of cratering his approval ratings. Right. When he launches the war with Iran, which you also chronicle in the book, I mean, how much of their appetite for this sort of cacophony of chaos is to deflect and distract from the Epstein debacle.
- [13:27]
Ari Berman
I don't know.
- [13:28]
Jonathan Swan
It's always hard to know with those things because it's not like, you know, Trump would ever admit that. I don't think it's so much with his staff. I think that Iran most of his staff didn't want to go into Iran. They thought it was a bad idea. Most of them didn't actually say that to Trump, but Trump himself, it's very hard to know, sort of to get inside his head and know how much that factored in.
- [13:52]
Nicole Wallace
Let me read your reporting about the quote, nipple claim. Trump's advisors in the Situation Room who were aware of the nipple claim seem to have only a passing familiarity with it. Many in the room thought this was all just discredited nonsense. But some argued that none of the credibility issues would matter if a government database gave Ransom's claim a stamp of validity. There was a vast horde of Epstein fanatics in the MAGA base and they wanted the names of rich and powerful men to tear apart. Todd. Blanche argued that in context, the Ransom document and her disavowal of some of her other claims would make clear why the nipple allegations related to Trump hadn't been pursued for prosecution. Besides, these allegations had long been available online, so there was no reason to leave them off a public facing DOJ website. The VP said he thought the President would be okay with releasing the file, saying Trump had been accused of worse. Quote, I think we should put it out. He said. It would cause people to say we're going further than we need to. Susie Wiles quickly responded that the President would not, in fact, be okay with it. It was a point no one wanted to continue arguing. One of the officials would later describe it as a surreal experience to be discussing Donald Trump and abused nipples in the White House situation room. How much does your reporting suggest that people knew one way or the other if Trump was guilty of any of the allegations against him and how much of it was all about what you said at the beginning? Pr.
- [15:22]
Jonathan Swan
I think it was largely a conversation of pr. I don't get the sense that from his, you remember he has really true believers around him. I don't really get a sense that there were people around him who thought there was more there there. However, this was a really kind of shocking moment inside the White House Situation Room that we document in the group, in the book. The context of it was they had built this website. You know, this is during the summer when, when the DOJ and the Trump administration, the White House, they were thinking, how can we put on a show of transparency, a display of transparency that would appease the angry base, make people, make this issue go away. So they built this website which was supposed to be sort of an Epstein library. All things Epstein, not just files within the Justice Department, but all Kinds of civil cases and other things. And it was extraordinary moment where one of Trump's advisers was searching through this website, a private version, right. It hadn't gone public yet. So they're, you know, toddling around in it. And of course they do the obvious thing, which is put in Donald Trump's name, and this thing comes up and they're sort of like, whoa. And it's, you know, again, this is unsealed. It was out there in a civil case from unseale sealed in early 2024. But the alleg. It's a secondhand allegation that Donald Trump abused this young woman's nipples and left them red and raw. And a great example of something that in the Situation Room they were discussing. Would the president, within absentia, he's not in the room, would he be okay with this being put on a DOJ website? There was no discussion of whether it was true or not or anything like that. In fact, I think most people in the room assumed it wasn't. But the question was more of a PR question, would the president be okay with this? And the vice president thought yes. And the chief of staff, I think accurately thought heck no. So this private website never became public. This version of the DOJ website never became public. And ultimately they did not go down the path of transparency. They basically tried to keep this stuff concealed until their hand was forced by Congress.
- [17:35]
Nicole Wallace
Jonathan Swan, the Epstein survivors have spoken for themselves. A lot of them voted for Donald Trump. A lot of Trump voters thought that he meant what he said when he said he would release the Epstein material. Kash Patel is one of the people who promised the release of the files. And Dan Bongino, who's now gone. Kash Patel also, I think, has given the most specific description of just how vast he thought the evidence was inside doj. Do any of them ever talk in your reporting, in the sit room meetings about the survivors, especially those who voted for Donald Trump?
- [18:13]
Jonathan Swan
There's no question that there are senior people on the Trump team who do care about the victims, who are worried about further victimizing them, who are horrified by Epstein's acts. I don't want to sort of get into specific people because I think that would suggest that I talk to them. But there's no question there were people there. But the system secret.
- [18:33]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, is there anyone. I don't want to betray any. Is there anyone who publicly wants to be associated with any empathy for the rape, child rape victims of Jeffrey Epstein?
- [18:45]
Jonathan Swan
You'd have to ask them. But the scenes that we report on in the Situation Room were not focused on the victims. They were focused on public relations. That was absolutely the focus of these meetings was how to spin their way out of this situation and limit damage to Donald Trump. That was the focus. Now, were there other meetings? I'm sure there were. I know that there were other meetings, but the ones that we got for the book, the reporting that we got for the book, these were not meetings about the victims.
- [19:17]
Nicole Wallace
It's extraordinary, absolutely extraordinary. And as I said at the beginning, the book changes what we thought we knew about the second term term. I'm going to ask you to stick around. When we come back, how federal judge tore into the Trump administration over a settlement deal that the judge called blatant self dealing, even referring Trump's attorneys, Bob Blanche included, for possible disciplinary action. The attorney who brought that case called it a resounding victory for the rule of law. And he'll join us to talk about it next. Also ahead, how far Donald Trump is willing to go Thursday night to sow doubts on the integrity of our elections and to try to wipe his 2020 defeat to President Joe Biden from the history books. It is a big lie on steroids and it should set off alarm bells absolutely everywhere. We'll have that conversation later in the hour. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.
- [20:15]
Dave Farenthold
Normally in these ads, you'd expect someone like me to ask you to buy something. But I want to ask you to do something different. I'm Dave Farenthold and I'm a reporter for the New York Times. I'm an investigative reporter, which means that I follow the inside of government and outside of government. The point of my job is to find things people are trying to hide. It involves talking to lots of people. It involves looking through lots and lots of documents. And if there weren't folks like me to go beyond the surface to understand who is really shaping what the government does, the public will be left in the dark about what the government's doing with your tax money, what the government's doing to youth through regulations and spending. If you're like me and you think this kind of journalism is important, seek out a news source that does firsthand fact based reporting. If that's the New York Times, thank you. If that's your local paper, that's great too, because where you get your information matters.
- [21:07]
Ms. Now Announcer
Listen to your favorite Ms. Now shows anytime as a podcast. Enjoy new episodes of Morning Joe, Deadline, White House and the Rachel Maddows Show.
- [21:16]
Jonathan Swan
Every small d Democratic muscle that we have is Flexing.
- [21:21]
Ms. Now Announcer
Plus the Last Word with Lawrence o', Donnell, the Beat with Ari Mel, the Weeknight and more on the go wherever you get your podcasts for ad free listening to all of your favorite shows, subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [21:41]
Nicole Wallace
Among the veritable smorgasborg board of highly questionable conduct by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that will no doubt get scrutiny by at least the Democratic senators during his confirmation hearing tomorrow is Tob Blanche's settling of a case between Donald Trump and the ir. That settlement resulted in Donald Trump being immune from tax investigations and the creation of a $1.8 billion slush fund whose funds could be paid to insurrectionists. Yesterday, a federal judge ruled that that case had been filed for, quote, improper purpose, saying it was an example of self dealing that she referred to Blanche for potential disciplinary action for bringing. Joining our coverage, the co founder and board member of Democracy Defenders Action and publisher of the Contrarian, Norm Eisen is here. He's the co counsel for the judges who filed the brief in the IRS case. Jonathan Swan is still with us. Norm, take us through this development.
- [22:37]
Norm Eisen
Well, Nicole, it's the latest expose of the corruption of Donald Trump and his regime, including the acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against the United States to seek recovery for the fact that a contractor leaked his tax records. The United States didn't really defend the case. And in essence, the judge said, look, for example, they didn't assert that statute of limitations had run. The judge found Donald Trump and the attorneys involved in this lawsuit and Todd Blanche should be referred for bar discipline. She ordered a copy of her decision saying this was a phony effort to go to the New York bar where Mr. Blanche is a member and she really punctured as illegitimate and unlawful both the $1.8 billion a heist on the American people, but also the so called settlement. In fact, she ruled that the parties to this lawsuit are allowed to refer to it as a settlement. Nicole, because releasing all of these liabilities against Donald Trump was not really an arm's length thing. It was a devastating ruling and we'll hear about it in Mr. Blanche's confirmation hearings.
- [24:11]
Nicole Wallace
What happens next on the not to be called a settlement settlement?
- [24:17]
Norm Eisen
Well, the court has invited responses. Among the responses that the court has asked for are attorney's fees potentially to be awarded. You only do that with the most outrageous abuses of court power. And now I think we are going to litigate at Democracy Defender's action. As you know, we have over 300 cases and matters around the country, including tackling Donald Trump's corruption. Now we're going to litigate whether this collusive, non settlement settlement has any legal effect at all. We'll be fighting about that for years to come as we hold Donald Trump, his family and his cronies accountable. The other thing that you can expect is a bar investigation. Does Todd Blanche have the right, the privilege, given this behavior, to have a law license at all, much less be Attorney General of the United States? Another one of our complaints. We filed another complaint on behalf of over 100 judges with the New York bar even before this was decided. The judge refers to that pending complaint as well. So this is deeply disturbing behavior by a nominee for Attorney general. By far the worst pattern of behavior, the worst nominee we've ever seen. If there's any independence in the United States Senate, the president's party, he will reject Todd Blanche.
- [26:01]
Nicole Wallace
Jonathan Swan, I know all of these things. I can just imagine your wheels turning. Check, check, check. This is what Trump wanted in an attorney general. The political problem, though, is that all these things are deeply unpopular and the retribution campaign is almost as unpopular as covering up the Jeffrey Epstein child sex trafficking ring. The slush fund is more unpopular than both of those things right now because it's more front and center. Does anyone around Donald Trump worry about the horrific politics that Ty Blanche is enabling on behalf of Donald Trump?
- [26:33]
Jonathan Swan
I haven't detected any concerns about the retribution campaign when it comes to the political outcomes. There are concerns about the self enrichment stories and the ballroom and all of this because it's in such sharp contrast to the cost of living concerns and affordability crisis among regular Americans. When they see that stuff, you know, it's coming through in the polling. But I'm not seeing any concern about the retribution agenda on Trump's team.
- [27:03]
Nicole Wallace
What is your sense, Jonathan Swan, about whether there's any plan B in case Republicans sort of grow a spine and decide that someone who's running retribution and illegal slush funds for insurrectionists is not fit to be Attorney General.
- [27:19]
Jonathan Swan
Well, one of the challenges that the Republicans have, not just with the Attorney General position, but with the Director of National Intelligence position, is if they don't confirm Trump's nominee, they may have to deal with acting people. And you know, for example, with Director of National Intelligence, it's Bill Pulte right now and he scares Republicans far more than Jay Clayton. So they're going to have to make a decision. And that's something that Trump is using and relying upon is it's not. It's not a choice in a vacuum. It's potentially a choice between what they view as. Maybe some of them view this as a bad choice, but the potential for something that they may view as an even worse choice.
- [28:03]
Nicole Wallace
I don't know. I take Matt Gaetz at this point. Jonathan Swan, Norm Eisen, thank you both so much for joining our coverage today. When we come back, the dangers of Donald Trump using a primetime address to the nation to lie to the nation and further his false election claims. Brand new reporting from our colleague Von Hilliard is next.
- [28:27]
Ms. Now Announcer
Listen to your favorite Ms. Now shows anytime as a podcast. Enjoy new episodes of Morning Joe, Deadline, White House and the Rachel Maddow Show.
- [28:37]
Jonathan Swan
Every small D Democratic muscle that we have is flexing.
- [28:41]
Ms. Now Announcer
Plus the Last Word with Lawrence o', Donnell, the Beat with Ari Melber, the Weeknight and more on the Go wherever you get your podcasts for ad free listening to all of your favorite shows, subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.
- [29:00]
Nicole Wallace
It's really big news.
- [29:03]
Jonathan Swan
It's really, really big news and our country has to shape up. But this what we're going to be
- [29:10]
Nicole Wallace
talking about Thursday is it doesn't get bigger because without free and fair elections,
- [29:17]
Jonathan Swan
you don't have a country.
- [29:21]
Nicole Wallace
Well, on that issue, I agree. You can call it big news, you can call it the big lie. Either way, it's so big, it's so massive, it's the one secret he's not going to leak himself just yet. Make that make sense. But we know we can expect Donald Trump's primetime address on Thursday to be dangerous for our country, to be part of a string of his consistent assault on American elections and American democracy. This afternoon, Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff didn't hold back on the deeply unpopular president's desperate whole of government attempt to sow distrust in our elections and subvert November's midterms.
- [30:04]
Jon Ossoff
When the president calls Georgia elections illegitimate, and if he calls Georgia's senators illegitimate, he is calling Georgia's voters illegitimate. The president of the United States tried to commit voter fraud in Georgia when he badgered Brad Raffensperger to, quote, find him the exact number of votes he needed to win in a state he had lost in 2020. He is reheating debunked conspiracy theories and launching bizarre new lies because he fears losing these midterm elections.
- [30:45]
Nicole Wallace
I want to bring into our coverage senior White House reporter Vaughn Hilliard. He has some new reporting and what we can expect from Trump Thursday night. I also want to bring in Media Matters for America President Angelo Carazone and voting rights correspondent for Mother Jones, Ari Berman is back with us. Vaughn, let me just start by putting out a frame that I think is essential to all of us who are going to be talking about this week. Donald Trump has no questions about the 2016 election when President Barack Obama was the president and Donald Trump won. When the person in charge of protecting our elections from foreign interference was President Barack Obama. Donald Trump similarly has no concerns about the integrity of the 2024 election result when President Joe Biden was the president in charge of protecting American elections from foreign interference. Donald Trump's stew of whatever it is he's going to dish out with his little gold plated ladle is going to have us accept that he was the only one of the three of them who couldn't protect an American election from interference from an American adversary. That's really the pitch.
- [31:58]
Vaughn Hilliard
Part of the pitch is that the 2020 election had irregularities and that it was should be questioned by the American public. And so.
- [32:11]
Nicole Wallace
But what is he going to say that he couldn't do that? Obama But I just, I know that there's reporting and I know you're covering the White House, but what is he going to say he failed to do that Obama and Biden did do?
- [32:25]
Vaughn Hilliard
I don't have any reporting that the president is going to say what he should have done in 2020 as opposed to what he didn't do. But I think that there is part of our new reporting that can answer the question looking forward and perhaps the way in that he wants his executive branch to handle this election differently. And that is the fact that along with our colleagues David Rowe, Jake Traylor and Laura Barone Lopez were reporting that the President does intend to talk about the idea of vulnerability of voting machines. And this is significant because he is going to hearken back, we are told, to 2020 election, even though the intelligence community, I'm told by an administration official who says and makes the case very clearly that the raw material that the intel community has had access to for five and a half years does not prove what Donald Trump wants them to say, that it's going to prove that the election was stolen in 2020, but that there were voting machine vulnerabilities that are still at play. And if in fact the president, as we're told, intends to move forward on Thursday with this speech three and a half months out from the midterm elections, he is suggesting that the voting machines across the country that are gonna be used could potentially be tampered with and hacked into by foreign Governments. And it's notable the delay in releasing this assessment, which we have not seen this intelligence assessment ourself. But I think it's important to note that I was told by an administration official that this was actually information that was first brought to Susie Wiles in the White House last year, but it was told to not be released. And now the President wants to move forward with releasing that intelligence. And what has happened as a result of that passage of time, to the extent that the assessment is accurate, is that dhs, the federal agencies that would be responsible for working in conjunction with state and localities to move forward and ensure that there is a free and fair election, have been hamstrung from being able to do that. And now the President on Thursday night could very well announce to the country that they have reason to believe, again, depending on what he were to try to purport, that there is reason to question November's election.
- [34:39]
Nicole Wallace
Well, let me just put out some data points that are public facing. Bill Barr called that conspiracy, quote, bullshit. Chris Krebs said it never happened. The Director of National Intelligence at the time that you're saying this happened was John Ratcliffe. He's currently the CIA director and he took over in May from Rick Grinnell. So which one of those four are going to be criminally investigated for letting this happen? Vaughn?
- [35:10]
Vaughn Hilliard
John Ratcliffe is currently the CIA director.
- [35:13]
Nicole Wallace
And to your point, he was the DNI in 2020.
- [35:16]
Vaughn Hilliard
He was the DNI in 2020 and made it clear that, for example, when it came to China, made no assertion that there was direct Chinese interference that would have changed the vote outcome of the 2020 election. And I think that this is important when we take into account Tulsi Gabbard is no longer the Director of National Intelligence. And I just want to read a quote to you from a current administration official who is emphasizing that we need to consistently talk about Bill Pulte and John Solomon, the former journalist turned special government employee. Both of those men brought in one month ago into these roles. And the way that it's framed to me is that essentially John Solomon is the one that is pushing a lot of the conspiracy theories, then claims that there is raw material that the intelligence community has access to that they're not released, and that he is the one putting this into the earth of Donald Trump, that there is actually evidence that would support his claim that the election in 2020 was stolen. But then it's Bill Pulte, the current Director of National Intelligence, the acting one, who is essentially the one that is promised The President, we are told by multiple sources, is the one that is essentially doing whatever it takes to carry it out. The quote, I just want to read to you, we're publishing on Ms. Now right now, but we wanted to get this on air. Quote, this is an administration official who has been familiar with the raw intelligence available across the intelligence community. And that is, quote, it's that network of people referring to Solomon and Pulte that is the real effing problem. They try to put bits and pieces together and then make these conclusions. Everything I have seen, it's not what's there. And the reason that I'm emphasizing this is the fact that for the first time, I would say in the second Trump administration, to your point, Nicole, there are factions within this White House and there is one faction that is clearly winning out and it is that Bill Pulte, John Solomon faction, those that have lifted up and supported claims made by people like Michael Flynn. And in the last months, they have had greater access to the President of the United States than ever before. And it is people like Susie Wiles and other in this administration that have effectively, last year, I am told, saw all of this, essentially the assessments from people like John Ratcliffe and Tulsi Gabbard and knew what was available through the intelligence community and clearly made the determinations that there was not enough to go public at that point in time. Fast forward to June of 2026. Donald Trump has turned to two people who have made the commitment to do just that for him. And that is what is happening now. It's those two individuals that are making good on what the President has demanded for five and a half years
- [37:44]
Nicole Wallace
based on no evidence. And there's no evidence that this is actually evidence. This is the housing guy who's so unpalatable that even Donald Trump knows he can't have the job after he does this. I mean, I guess what I wonder, Angelo Carazone, is how much of a limb men like Brian Kilmeade and Bret Baer will go out on to cover something that would hold that Ratcliffe and Bill Barr and Chris Krebs and Christopher Wray engaged in a conspiracy against Donald Trump that no one working for Barack Obama and no one working for Joe Biden, the people who turned against Donald Trump to, quote, rig an election to knowingly suppress evidence that China was flipping votes in a voting machine to orchestrate such an elaborate cover up that Fox paid almost a billion dollars to Dominion, that that was an inside job. Are Brett Baer and Brian Kilmeade going to shovel that, to quote Bill Bar again, bullshit into the mouths of the MAGA base.
- [38:48]
Unknown Political Commentator
Yes, and we know that because they already went out on a limb. And as you indicated with the Dominion stuff, I mean, they helped build the scaffolding, the narrative holding for what happened with January 6, by reinforcing all the lies about the election being stolen. And the thing is, they knew it was. They knew what they were saying wasn't true. That's come out, but they did it anyway. They went out on that limb, then fell because the limb broke, because as you noted, they had to pay a billion dollars. And then even after that, they climbed back up on that tree and went right back out on a limb with Trump. They're still carrying the same water for him and this thing. And Vaughn sort of noted the two key players here, we actually call this Media Matters the chum cycle, because it's actually a pattern and there's the actual facts and the evidence and clearly it's not there, as you keep pointing to. But in a way that doesn't seem to matter because this chum cycle does lead to real externalities. And the key holders like the Kilmes and these other influential figures, they will help determine whether or not it's effective. And it's as simple this. They take a piece of information, they hype it, they put it out into right wing media, oftentimes through John Solomon. That's why it was so scary, you know, a few months ago when he sort of moved his way back into this role, because that's a key part he's played. That's the first step. They put it into the right wing media, then it creates a media frenzy, a frenzy, a massive storm. Second step, the third is that some type of action happens. And you keep pointing to the Bill Barr thing, and that's important to note. But the last time this happened, in 2020, it was a crony DNI, it was Grinnell who put out a bunch of information that led to, about the, about these unmasking and these lists with Michael Flynn. It led to a frenzy. Bill Barr appointed a special prosecutor. They investigated this. Now, as you noted, it didn't turn anything out. It fizzled. But one of the big differences that we've always been pointing out to people time and again is that this time around, it's not the same as last time. They have gotten rid of more serious senior people. They gutted all of these agencies and departments and filled them with cronies at every level. And so the things that were the guardrails the institutional guardrails that were there last time that led to something fizzling after the predicate was put out there, they're not there anymore. And that's to me, why this is a difference maker from say, the last time is that they're following a very similar playbook that has had real consequences, but the mechanisms that undermine it are no longer there. And that's why it's incumbent on all of us to really be very, very, very guarded and careful and serious about what's happening right now. Because it's not just another news cycle. This is a plan that they are, they are beginning to execute. And Thursday is the premier.
- [41:27]
Nicole Wallace
I guess all that I would add is he's doing it from a point of unprecedented political weakness. His approval rating is at an historic low. His approval rating on the economy and immigration, two issues that aided him in returning to the White House, have cratered. So for any voters who swung to him after rejecting him in 2020, they've already passed some judgment. We'll talk about that with Ari Berman. I'll also show you more of what Senator Jon Ossoff had to say about all of this on the other side of that break. Don't go anywhere.
- [42:06]
Jon Ossoff
All this does is motivate Georgians to vote. All this does is galvanize the determination of Georgia voters to defy these cynical efforts to instill fear and intimidation. He fears defeat in the midterms. And that explains his spiral into conspiracy theories, conspiracy theories that put Georgia Republicans in a terrible bind because now not only do they have to defend this president's economic record, not only do they have to defend doubling health insurance premiums for more than a million Georgians, they also have to defend all of these bizarre conspiracy theories coming out of the White House. I don't know of Republican colleagues who agree with the president privately. Most elected Republicans in this building think the president has lost it and is dooming them to dismal losses this fall.
- [42:58]
Nicole Wallace
Rebecca Vaughn, Angela and Ari. So, Ari, again, I know we cover Trump like logic is gone. Like we are expected to accept that his base will accept that only Biden and Obama ran free and fair elections and Trump was the one that botched them. And somehow that's, I don't know, our fault. But the other factual problem, if you'll forgive me, is that Georgia has paper ballots. I mean, what is the conspiracy even about?
- [43:30]
Ari Berman
Well, that's right, Nicole. And no state has been subject to more scrutiny than Georgia, where the results were audited three times, where it was Republican officials up and down the ballot that oversaw and ultimately certified that election. But we know what the plan is. We know that they are continuing to lie and make up even greater lies about the 2020 election so they can create the predicate for massive interference in the 2026 election. And you made a really important point in the previous segment, which is you said Trump is operating from a position of weakness, not strength. And I think that's really, really important in terms of how we think about this, because he is going to try to claim even more dictatorial powers, but that doesn't mean he's going to be any more successful at actually getting those powers. So the Constitution is very clear. States, with oversight from Congress, run their elections. The president, the administration, is now 00:15 in trying to get state voter records, for example. Both of Trump's executive orders have been blocked in court. I fully expect that Trump is going to make up these lies about voting machines, and then this is why it's a national emergency. That's why we have to seize voting machines, stop mail voting, require proof of citizenship, all the things he's tried to do through other means. But I don't think he's going to be any more successful in trying to do it. He's just going to create an even greater panic that's intended to sow distrust in terms of how we vote, how we count votes, and how elections are certified.
- [44:56]
Nicole Wallace
Ari, what do you advise Democrats to do in this moment?
- [45:01]
Ari Berman
Well, I think they need to, number one, point out the facts, which is that so many Republicans, so many conservatives looked at that election and said that it was free and fair, but also make sure that we safeguard the system and that we safeguard the bipartisan election workers that are just trying to do their jobs and that are facing this unprecedented onslaught. I think most people, even people that believe Donald Trump's lies about the election, still want the voting experience to be convenient for them. They still want to be able to vote without waiting in long lines. They still want to be able to have options to vote, and they still want to make sure their votes are ultimately counted. And I think, even if they believe wrongly that the election is stolen, I still believe that at the end of the day, most Americans want the same thing when it comes to their experience in the voting process. And I think Democrats have to make sure we safeguard those options and those abilities as much as possible.
- [46:03]
Nicole Wallace
Angela, I just want to come back to the villain in the story. The villain is. Is who? She. Who Trump just sucked up to on a state visit to China. Ratcliffe who was the DNI when this alleged interference happened? Bill Barr, Chris. I mean, who's going to get thrown under the bus this time?
- [46:20]
Unknown Political Commentator
Three villains. There's three villains. It's the deep state that's going to be his answer to, you know, how he didn't mess up. And I think you're right to keep pointing on that. That's right. He's going to point to them, too. They haven't settled yet. There's a lot of split between whether it's going to be China or Venezuela, and that's what's percolating right now. And I think they're going to end up going with both, truly. That's they're bouncing it back and forth. It's a different villain every day. But those are the finalists and I think they're just going to make them both.
- [46:48]
Nicole Wallace
Aye, aye. Vaughn Hilliard, hats off to you in your intrepid reporting in the Crazy Earth 2 zone. You have to cover Angelo and Ari, thank you for helping me cut through the noise. Quick break for us. We'll be right back. My guest on this week's episode of the Best People podcast was up close when Donald Trump lost the election in 2020 to Joe Biden, longtime CNN anchor. Now independent journalist Jim Acosta has a lot to say about what's changed in Donald Trump's second term and the differences he sees now in Trump this time around. You can watch our conversation by scanning the QR code on your screen or you can download the Best People wherever you get your podcasts, be sure to let me know what you think on Instagram or bluesky. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes tonight. We are grateful.
- [47:35]
Ari Berman
Simone Sanders Townsend and I have known each other for more than a decade, tussling over politics and policy when she worked in the White House and I reported on it.
- [47:43]
Nicole Wallace
And now we're friends and colleagues and on our podcast, Clock it, we are positioning ourselves at the intersection of culture and politics.
- [47:51]
Ari Berman
Clock it is where we talk about what we see and hear in the news. So you can start to clock it, too.
- [47:57]
Ms. Now Announcer
Clock it with Simone and Eugene. All episodes available now.