“Anything and everything to distract”

Summary

Deadline: White House – Episode Summary: “Anything and Everything to Distract”
Release Date: August 5, 2025
Host: Nicolle Wallace, MSNBC

In this compelling episode of Deadline: White House, host Nicolle Wallace delves deep into the multifaceted strategies employed by the Trump administration to divert public attention from the escalating scrutiny surrounding the Epstein case. Drawing on expert analysis and firsthand accounts, the episode unpacks the intricate web of distractions, political maneuvers, and systemic challenges threatening the fabric of American democracy.

---

1. Trump's Diversion Tactics from the Epstein Case

The episode opens with Sam Stein addressing the unprecedented lengths the Trump administration is taking to shift focus away from the Epstein scandal. Trump’s relentless attacks on various public figures—ranging from radio hosts to celebrities—serve as a primary tactic to muddy the waters around his own contentious involvement.

Notable Quote:
Sam Stein remarks, “[Donald Trump] is trying anything and everything to distract us from the furor over the Epstein case” ([01:55]).

2. The Ghislaine Maxwell Prison Transfer Controversy

A significant portion of the discussion centers on the controversial transfer of Ghislaine Maxwell to a minimum-security prison. MSNBC’s Kyndalinian reports that Maxwell, a convicted sex offender, was moved in a manner deemed unprecedented, raising suspicions of a potential cover-up.

Notable Quote:
Charlie Sykes emphasizes, “This is the issue that has gotten the base riled up” ([02:10]).

3. White House Press Corps and Limited Accountability

Lawrence O'Donnell and Charlie Sykes critique the current state of the White House press corps, highlighting a lack of rigorous questioning on pivotal issues like the Epstein files. The administration's selective transparency and alignment with conservative media outlets have stifled meaningful discourse.

Notable Quote:
Lawrence O'Donnell observes, “There are voices that have been handpicked by this administration who ask him instead about his relationship with Laura Loomer and Sydney Sweeney” ([08:29]).

4. Texas Redistricting and Democratic Resistance

Transitioning to national politics, the episode scrutinizes the Texas Republicans' attempts to redraw congressional maps, aiming to secure five additional seats in the upcoming midterm elections. This redistricting effort, perceived as a direct nod to Trump’s declining approval, has sparked significant resistance from Texas Democrats who fled the state to obstruct the process.

Notable Quote:
Texas House Democrat Gene Woo asserts, “We will not be complicit in the destruction of our own communities” ([48:59]).

5. Trump's Manipulation of Economic Data and Democratic Concerns

The firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) commissioner after unfavorable job reports underscores a broader pattern of data manipulation. Experts like Ben Rhodes and Charlie Sykes discuss the implications of undermining data integrity, warning of long-term consequences for economic policy and public trust.

Notable Quote:
Ben Rhodes states, “It's a shocker of a report. Those 258,000 downward revisions of the prior reports is a big deal” ([37:42]).

6. Epstein’s Victims Express Frustration at the DOJ

The episode features harrowing letters from Epstein’s victims, who express profound frustration with the Department of Justice’s handling of the case. These letters demand full transparency and accountability, condemning the administration's apparent prioritization of protecting high-profile individuals over victim welfare.

Notable Quote:
One victim writes, “Why not be completely transparent? Show us all the files with only the necessary redactions” ([66:56]).

7. The Story of Narciso Barranco and Immigration Policies

Narciso Barranco, a California landscaper and father of three U.S. Marines, shares his traumatic experience of being violently detained by immigration agents. His story underscores the human cost of Trump’s stringent immigration policies and the broader implications for American families.

Notable Quote:
Barranco poignantly states, “Why was it so important for you to ask Alejandro to keep doing the work?” ([78:54]).

8. Autocratic Trends and Democratic Backlash

Throughout the episode, commentators like Charlie Sykes draw parallels between Trump’s actions and global autocratic leaders, highlighting a worrying trend towards the erosion of democratic norms. The systematic dismantling of independent institutions and the redirection of political narratives pose significant threats to the United States’ democratic integrity.

Notable Quote:
Charlie Sykes warns, “We've already seen the Republican Party gerrymander seats for a long time, way out of proportion” ([58:38]).

Conclusion: A Battle for Democratic Survival

Deadline: White House wraps up by emphasizing the critical juncture at which the United States finds itself. With Trump’s administration employing every tool to maintain power and suppress dissent, the role of journalists, political analysts, and democratic institutions becomes ever more vital in safeguarding the nation’s democratic values.

Final Notable Quote:
Nicolle Wallace asserts, “We have to name this for what it is. This is the white nationalist project” ([63:29]).

---

Key Takeaways:

• Diversion Strategies: The Trump administration is actively attacking various public figures to distract from the Epstein case.

• Questionable Decisions: The transfer of Ghislaine Maxwell to a minimum-security facility raises red flags about potential cover-ups.

• Press Corps Limitations: The White House press corps is predominantly aligned with conservative media, limiting accountability.

• Gerrymandering Concerns: Texas Republicans’ redistricting efforts are seen as a strategic move to secure more congressional seats amid Trump’s low approval.

• Data Manipulation: The firing of the BLS commissioner after unfavorable job reports signals a troubling trend of undermining governmental data integrity.

• Victims' Voices: Epstein’s victims are increasingly voicing frustration over the lack of transparency and accountability from the DOJ.

• Immigration Hardships: Personal stories like that of Narciso Barranco highlight the human impact of Trump’s aggressive immigration policies.

• Democratic Vigilance: There is an urgent need for continued scrutiny and defense of democratic institutions against autocratic tendencies.

---

This episode of Deadline: White House serves as a crucial examination of the Trump administration’s tactics to maintain control and distract from significant controversies. Through in-depth analysis and powerful personal narratives, Nicolle Wallace underscores the importance of vigilance and resilience in the face of challenges to democratic governance.

Transcript

[Nicole Wallace]

Saturday, October 11th. From New York City, it's MSNBC Live 25. Join your favorite MSNBC hosts, Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Nicole Wallace, Ari Melber, Alicia Menendez, Simone Sanders Townsend, Michael Steele, Chris Haynes, jen Psaki, Lawrence O', Donnell, Stephanie Ruhl and more. Visit msnbc.comlive25 to buy your tickets today. Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Each morning, read sharp insights from the voices you trust. Catch standout moments from your favorite shows.

[Sam Stein]

The second Trump administration has gone to unprecedented lengths to radically transform America.

[Nicole Wallace]

Stay up to speed with our latest podcasts and documentaries and get fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. It's everything you love about MSNBC delivered to your inbox. Sign up [e-mail].

[Sam Stein]

Hi there everyone. It's four o' clock in the east. Happy Monday. We begin today with a Monday riddle for you. What do windmills, a radio show host, a former American president, and the Washington commanders all have in common today? Maybe you can guess. They are all targets of Donald Trump's rage as he tries anything and everything to distract us from the furor over the Epstein case, which of course has weakened his grip on his own base of supporters. One of his latest targets, radio show host podcaster Charlamagne, the God. In a long rant, Donald Trump trotted out his usual laundry list of insults for Charlamagne, especially for Donald Trump when the target in question happens to be a black man. Take a listen to what set Donald Trump off in the first place. I think there's a political coup going.

[Charlie Sykes]

On right now in the Republican Party.

[Nicole Wallace]

That people aren't paying attention to.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Oh, interesting.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah.

[Sam Stein]

I think that the, I think that.

[Charlie Sykes]

This Epstein thing is going to be a way for traditional conservatives to take their party back. This is the issue that has gotten.

[Ben Rhodes]

The base riled up.

[Charlie Sykes]

The base, the MAGA base isn't letting this issue go.

[Sam Stein]

And for the first time, they know.

[Nicole Wallace]

They can, you know, probably take their party back and not piss off the MAGA base.

[Sam Stein]

I think, I think, I think they're going to do that. Don't let it be lost that he said those things to Donald Trump's daughter in law, Charlemagne, of course, also poking at Donald Trump's soft spot, his greatest political weakness, because weeks after the release of a memo that tried to pour cold water on the claims of bombshells hidden in the Epstein files, claims that were spread for many, many years by Donald Trump's own closest allies and now senior most Aides, after that, 16% of Americans now approve of Donald Trump's handling of the Epstein case. That's according to a poll by the Washington post. Even among MAGA Republicans, just 43% of them approve of how Donald Trump is handling the Epstein case. In the face of those poll numbers, Donald Trump has tried and failed to change the subject over and over and over again. In the last couple weeks, he's threatened to strip Rosie o' Donnell of her citizenship, something he has no right to do. He has accused President Barack Obama of treason over the Russia investigation, using accusations debunked by his own Secretary of State, as well as the special counsel appointed by Attorney General Bill Barr. He's also demanded that the Washington commanders and the Cleveland guardians change their names back. He has lashed out at Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon and Stephen Colbert. And we could go on and on. It would take all two hours. Maybe we'll try it one day. A few hours ago, he took digs at Taylor Swift and he attacked Bud Light. And for good measure, he also attacked Senator Elizabeth Warren. Importantly, though, not a single one of those attacks on our wall of rage has succeeded in steering the conversation or moving the poll numbers away from his handling of the Epstein case. It's partly because everything his administration does invites more questions, more pushback, more skepticism on Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's sudden move to a minimum security prison. MSNBC reports this Maxwell was actually ineligible to be transferred to a low security prison because she is a convicted sex offender, and to do this, the administration had to get a waiver. A consultant who deals with the Bureau of Prisons tells MSNBC's Kandelanean that he has never, never seen this done before for a convicted sex offender. First, for everything. Bulwark writes it like this, quote, Ghislaine Maxwell, one of two organizers of a massive and horrendous child sex trafficking ring, of which Donald Trump appears to have had considerable contemporaneous knowledge, meets with the Deputy Attorney General of the United States of America, who had previously been Donald Trump's private lawyer, and the White House openly embraces it. One week later, contrary to the normal rules for a prisoner convicted of her crimes, Ghislaine Maxwell is transferred to a minimum security Club Fed facility. This was presumably a down payment on not spilling the beans about Trump. And perhaps as an interim step on the way to a pardon, this cover up is happening in broad daylight. Donald Trump trying and failing to distract from what appears to be a cover up of some aspect of the Epstein case is where we start once again today with some of our favorite reporters and friends, MSNBC senior White House correspondent Vaughn Hilliard is here. Also joining us, managing editor of the Bulwark, MSNBC contributors Sam Stein is here, an MSNBC columnist, author of the newsletter to the Contrary, Charlie Sykes is here. Vaughn Hilliard, I guess I would start with you, and my question about Trump 2.0 is who's going to tell him that his desperation is showing?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

I think that's a fair question to ask here six months in, because at this point in time it does not appear that anybody internally is somebody that goes and tries to gut check the President of the United States. And I was actually on weekend duty for this network this weekend over in New Jersey, just down from his Bedminster Club where he was playing golf on Saturday. And as part of my duties, I was watching on not only Saturday night, that interview that took place between Lara Trump and Charlemagne Tha God, which actually, to be clear, the President's response I think is telling in a lot of ways about particularly the Jeffrey Epstein part because the rest of the conversation was actually a pretty human conversation that took place between his daughter in law and Charlamagne the God. But then also on Friday night there was one part of an interview on Newsmax that took place that I think actually kind of came and went without much attention, but plays into your intro here this evening, and that is Nicole, when the president was asked specifically about whether he would pardon Sean Diddy Combs. And he noted after not ruling out a pardon for potentially Ghislaine Maxwell, when it came to Sean Diddy Combs, he said, well, that one would be more unlikely because Sean Diddy Combs was, quote, very hostile to him when he got into politics in so many ways for as much of a distraction effort there may be underway within this White House to take away from the Jeffrey Epstein files and his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. At the same time, he is also speaking so much in a way that it is very transparent that his mindset moves hour to hour. And in a situation like that was quite revealing to suggest that while Ghislaine Maxwell he would not rule out a pardon for he effectively ruled one out for Sean Diddy Combs because he was hostile to him when it came to politics.

[Sam Stein]

Vaughn, what is the why are they talking to Maxwell? I know it's been happening. I know it happened a long time. I mean, what is their answer for why Todd Blanche is talking to Maxwell? And then I guess the second question is why did they move her?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Well, the White House's response is that they're fighting for Transparency. Now, obviously, we realize there's a lot into that and the president could do more to release these files, but they're contending that they are seeking to go and try to reveal these grand jury transcripts. Now, interestingly, the responses to those New York federal judges from not only Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney, but also the victim's attorney is due. And it is not clear at this point in time whether the Department of Jury, Department of Justice, has requested that not just the grand jury transcripts, which we know are essentially the testimony of just two law enforcement personnel to the grand jury, but also whether there is greater material that the Department of Justice will seek to have be revealed because the one federal judge did explicitly ask the Department of Justice in their filing to detail the other material that was used to bring forward to the grand jury. And so for this White House, I think that there's a lot more that they clearly could do. At the same time, this is a moment where Donald Trump has done everything but explain his relationship that spanned at least 15 years with Jeffrey Epstein. It would take a long, extended interview for him to openly discuss why he viewed Virginia Giuffre as having been stolen from his property and what exactly he knew and perhaps did not share, but what was understood across Palm Beach, a moment of reckoning, if you will, whether he was involved in any criminal acts or not. Of course, those have not been explicitly alleged against him when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein. But what did he know? And was there something else that could be taken away by him and others that perhaps are in these files that in this year of 2025, could be a moment that could actually advance this conversation and advance this moment for the victims and their families who went through so much at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

[Sam Stein]

Vaughn, I don't mean to put you on the spot, but we understand from Julie K. Brown and Tara Palmieri, who've covered the Epstein victims extensively, that Ghislaine Maxwell was involved in the sexual assault of children, that she was the one that told young girls allegedly to take their panties off. That's a quote from Julie K. Brown. She is a convicted sex offender. Are reporters hammering Donald Trump with questions about why he is making her more comfortable as a convicted sex offender? I mean, what is the climate like? Can you take me inside his press avails?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

I wish that I was in New Jersey on the actual tarmac, getting the chance to ask the questions. I was not a part of the pool that had the opportunity to do that, to give Folks, kind of an idea when you're hearing like for example last night there on the tarmac in New Jersey before he came back here to Washington, I would say perhaps 75%, three out of four of the individuals who are there asking him questions are part of either. You could call MAGA media, conservative media or right wing propaganda. They are, there may be one print and one television producer reporter that come from traditional media outlets like our own. But other than that, there are voices that have been handpicked by this administration who ask him instead about his relationship with Laura Loomer and Sydney Sweeney and her jeans television ad. And so in so many ways there are oftentimes in these situations when you watch, whether it's in the White House or on the tarmac, you are not seeing necessarily always even follow up questions hammering in. And I think that that is where the president, of course, would have plenty of opportunities to sit down for a one on one interview to discuss Jeffrey Epstein. But we have not heard him go into great detail about Ghislaine Maxwell and his relationship with her. Of course, he was with our friend Jonathan Swan back in 2020 when upon her being indicted and ultimately convicted for being a sex trafficker, he wished her well. And beyond that, we have not heard him go into detail about the victims and their accounts of Ghislaine Maxwell and what she did to them. But instead we have heard him essentially push aside and even question just how serious of crimes Ghislaine Maxwell committed.

[Sam Stein]

And again, I apologize for putting on the spot, but I really, I worked in that White House. I never dealt with anything like this. But I think it's important for our viewers to understand how much the White House press corps has changed in content and character. And this is really important. I just have one more question for you. His cabinet officials were littered across the Sunday shows defending the indefensible, the firing of the person who puts together economic data Donald Trump didn't like. Were they peppered with questions or pressed with questions about why Donald Trump sought to move a person who is accused by Epstein's victims? Of course, quote, asking girls to take off their panties and participating in the sexual assault of children?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Not without having watched each of the interviews, Nicole, to their start to the beginning, I can't answer that question very explicitly, if I may, Nicole. I mean, at the same time, I think that we have watched, if I may, these administration officials here, whether it be for the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we have watched them over the last 10 years. We know that the president Is is somebody who not only lies about accounts, but also has a difficult time taking responsibility for his own actions and own reality. So I think in a lot of ways, where we would have had this conversation in 2016 compared to where we are now, it's almost just become par for the course that it's expected that there's going to be a defense of this White House of what he says and his relationships that he has had. Of course, he was found liable for sexual abuse and defamation of E. Jean Carroll. And the individuals in this White House chose to go and work for him, whether they were on his campaign or not at that time. That was a decision that has been made. And so I don't think in any way is it a surprise who is in the White House here at this moment in time. And the fact that he had a Jeffery relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is not a surprise either.

[Sam Stein]

I think that's super important context and I think it's worth reminding he is an adjudicated sexual abuser found liable for sexual abuse and defamation of E. Jean Carroll. And after that was known and adjudicated, this group of people went to work for him. But I guess I'm pressing on this because Epstein and Maxwell are different. A lot of those people, including his FBI director, including his attorney general, including his deputy FBI director particularly, are all have all been on the record, extremely interested in getting to the bottom of the Epstein Maxwell scandal. And my question, Vaughn, and it is super important, I think what this story has revealed to the likes of Joe Rogan and other podcast hosts is that I'll quote Joe Rogan, quote, what do they think we are, babies? Yes, yes. He thinks his supporters are, to quote Joe Rogan again, effing babies. And I want to understand what the posture is that they think they can go on like business as usual. Let's announce another asinine tariff and not be asked about the statements and the movements around a convicted child sexual sex offender like Ghislaine Maxwell. I wonder, Vaughn, if you could ask anyone anything about moving Ghislaine Maxwell, who would you want to talk to and what would you ask them?

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

I mean, I think Susie Wiles, the chief of staff, is somebody who, unlike any other person we have seen in Donald Trump's orbit over the last 10 years, aside from Stephen Miller, is somebody who has gained his respect. And, and again, Susie Wiles is somebody who I think is often hailed for being able to communicate for the president and be able to keep the drama low. But in large part, that was by building an administration of individuals who the president very explicitly trusted and did not believe would be disloyal to him. I think that is where in the mind of the president, Susie Wiles is successful. She decided to sign onto this campaign in 2022 in the middle of the E. Jean Carroll trial. This is somebody who has a long, deep history within the Republican Party spanning back, you know, to the Bush administration. And I think that somebody who by all accounts, I think your question is absolutely accurate. And I think it's a frustrating part, if I may, of what we are doing here because there are serious policy conversations about the American economy and the impact that tariffs are going to be having on American families, the fact that Russia, Ukraine war continues to kill thousands of innocent Ukrainians, that there are tens of thousands of Palestinians who are being killed. And we are in the middle of a moment here in which the president of the United States is not being held to account by members of his own administration and federal government. In large part, I think journalists to defend our colleagues who are over in the White House press conference. I think there's an effort and a balance that is so often attempted to be struck while asking those pointed questions, while also looking at other issues that are facing Americans. And I think in large part, we used to often rely on those in actual government, those in the political parties to hold the standard bearers of those parties mantle to account. And we have seen the Republican Party here coalesce around the president and really hardly ask him any serious, difficult questions. And I think this is another moment where we have watched the Republican Party from Capitol Hill down to the state levels, down to those that are holding governor's seats not do their part to ask these questions. So it's complicated, Nicole, not to skirt your question. I think it's all very real. And I think this is a moment that we are living in here in 2025.

[Sam Stein]

I have devoted a lot of time and energy trying to understand the manosphere. And I guess I will follow up just quickly with you, Sam Stein. What seems to be weighing on folks like Joe Rogan on the Epstein story is to be publicly made a fool of, right? So he loaned his massive audience. He has a massive audience and they listen for a very long time. They listen to him for all three hours and they trust him and believe him. And so he's at the hinge point of being and again, I'll keep quoting him, quote, what do they think we're babies treated like a baby and a fool by Donald Trump who has had moved ghislaine Maxwell, who was convicted of, among other things, asking girls. A lot of Republicans have daughters. These weren't women, these were girls. These were girls under 16 years old, 12, 13, 14 year old girls. Donald Trump described them as his property, saying, quote, I didn't like that he took them. The ones that worked at Mar A Lago. Ghislaine Maxwell frequented Mar a Lago. He is swirling around with convicted sex traffickers. And I haven't seen a single, a single frantic press availability where people peppered him or anyone in his administration with questions about what they're doing moving a convicted sex criminal. Have you?

[Ari Melber]

Not that I can put my finger on, to be honest. I mean, there's been questions here or there and then he moves on very quickly to a follow up or a different question, I should say, in a kind of a deft manner, I suppose. But, yeah, he's not allowed himself to be pinned down and he doesn't sit for lengthy interviews necessarily in a way that would allow it for now. You asked about the manosphere too, which I think is kind of interesting because that's the type of format where you could see this exchange happening, right? It's lengthy. They care about these issues. They're known as conversation, like long conversations where there are lots of follow ups. I think one of the reasons that you see Joe Rogan, for instance, getting upset about this is precisely because he does feel misled. It wasn't just that Trump promised him X, Y or Z, it's that quite literally Trump world figures went on Joe Rogan and promised him X, Y and Z. And so you have video of Kash Patel on the show saying, this is the most important situation issue of our time. We need to get these files exposed. We need transparency. And then of course, Cash Patel, when it comes out there and says there's nothing in files. And so there's a level of deceit that I think people are trying to grapple with. The other thing, though, is that a lot of these manosphere broadcasters make their, you know, bones and conspiracy theories. Right? I mean, Joe Rogan pushes a lot of conspiracy theories. I think he would admit that. And if you are now seeing another cover up on top of a conspiracy theory, it's gonna, it's gonna tickle you a little bit, it's gonna make you angry a little bit. It's gonna cause you to wonder what your priors were telling you. And I think that's what's happening here as well, is that these people who are not traditionally political, who got into politics because they were conspiracy theories around it that drew them in there now feel like that conspiracy might go a little bit deeper than they thought.

[Sam Stein]

It's wrapped up, too, in what these guys spend a lot of time talking about. I watched 54 minutes of a Shane Gillis Netflix special last night. I'm deep down this rabbit hole trying to understand this, but that was a.

[Ari Melber]

Very precise number, I gotta say. 54.

[Sam Stein]

Yes. It will require all of them to explain what they meant about masculinity, because if that includes covering up for a guy and or a woman in this case, that carried out heinous sex crimes against children, girls, these are not women. They're not women. These were not. And I'm not excusing sex crimes against women. But what Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell did was they were predators against children. And so what Rogan and the people in the manosphere seem to be wrestling with is, are we on board for that? Because what Donald Trump has done is requested that Ghislaine Maxwell move from where she was to somewhere else. And I haven't seen anyone get to the bottom of how, why and WTF are you doing? Vaughn Hilliard, thank you for letting me put you on the spot and ask you those questions. I really appreciate you. Thank you for starting us off with that exciting, extended conversation. We'll bring Charlie in on the other side of a quick break. I know he's bursting with insight. Sam also sticks around. Also ahead for us, continued fallout and reaction from the firing on Friday of a statistician working on the country's job. Numbers. Numbers relied upon the world over. Donald Trump's autocratic move to control the message and the messenger is raising a lot of alarms around the world today. We'll bring you that story. Story ahead and later. Republicans in Texas are right now trying to rig the game ahead of the national midterm elections. Democrats there are holding their ground and fighting back. We're bringing the latest on the redistricting efforts and much, much more. And deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.

[Nicole Wallace]

MSNBC Films presents Season 2 of Leguizamo does America, an NBC News Studios production hosted by John Leguizamo. On the final episode, John travels to San Antonio, Texas, the birthplace of Tex Mex cuisine.

[Sam Stein]

And guess what? It's also considered the cradle of Latin civil rights movements.

[Nicole Wallace]

Leguizamo Does America season finale Sunday at 9pm Eastern on MSNBC and streaming on Peacock. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus Content to all all of MSNBC's original podcasts, including the chart topping series the Best People with Nicole Wallace, why is this Happening? Main justice and more. Plus new episodes of all your favorite MSNBC shows ad free and ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, Ultra Bagman and Deja News. Subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts.

[Sam Stein]

Charlie, let me come back to this reporting from Kyndalinian and I may have scrambled this. Let me just read it again. MSNBC reports that Ghislaine Maxwell was ineligible to be transferred out of a low security prison into a lower security prison because she is a convicted sex offender and that to do so the Trump administration had to get a waiver. One consultant who deals with the Bureau of Prisons tells MSNBC's Kendallanean that he has never seen this done before for a sex offender. That's the history that's been made. She was moved. Now we don't know that Donald Trump was involved in that at all. We don't know that Todd Blanche was involved in that at all. We just know that that happened. Your thoughts about where we are in this story?

[Lisa Rubin]

Well, that's an educated guess, isn't it? I mean, I think we do see what's going on. You know, you used the phrase before a cover up in plain sight. Well, is it really a cover up if it's taking place in broad daylight? And that's that Donald Trump has that everybody sees what he is doing, that he's trying to entice her into coming up with some sort of an exoneration. Now is that actually a cover up? The problem is, is that there's an extensive public record whether or not we see the Epstein files. I just finished taping a very extensive podcast with Tara Palmieri who walks through everything that we know about Ghislaine Maxwell and the role that she played. This woman was a monster. She's not a victim, she's not a truth teller. She is not the person who going to unlock the secrets of this particular pedophile ring. She was at the very center of it. And we also have the victims and the survivors. Let's remember them because they are still out there. They have been trying to tell their story. They have been traumatized over and over again. They are being re traumatized and it seems unlikely that they will remain silent if in fact Donald Trump tries to cover up all of this by commuting or pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell, who in fact, as you pointed out not only went and recruited them for Jeffrey Epstein, but also engaged actually in the sexual abuse and sexual assault of these young girls. So I don't know how Donald Trump really is going to manage to cover this up by shining such a spotlight on his own efforts to release one of the world's most notorious and egregious sex traffickers.

[Sam Stein]

Charlie, do you understand? I mean, I feel like you and I have spent an unhealthy amount of time in moments like this trying to understand the view from Trump's perch. Why is he aligning himself with Ghislaine Maxwell other than. Well, just answer that. Why do you think he's aligning himself with her publicly?

[Lisa Rubin]

Because he's worried. The only possible explanation is that he has been, as you point out, unable to change the subject. He's a master of controlling the news cycle, but he hasn't been able to distract from all of this. He worries about what she can say, what he can tell. She basically knows a great deal of information. He's been very reluctant to say anything about her. He told Jonathan Swan that he wished her well. And now as he walks through all of the various other tactics, he's hit upon the possibility that maybe he could get her to come forward and provide some sort of an exoneration in return for commutation or a pardon. But this reeks of flop sweat. It reeks of real anxiety on his part, which is really extraordinary because you walk through all the things that he's gotten away with in the past, all the things that his voters have forgiven him for. Well, then what is in those files? What could she possibly have to say that he finds so embarrassing or so threatening? We don't know.

[Sam Stein]

And let me just stipulate, as I have since the day Elon Musk said Donald Trump is in the Epstein files, no one has accused Donald Trump of crimes. I mean, we're not aware that she. So when Trump says he's going to send the worst of the worst to Seekot, doesn't it make more sense politically? I'm just coming back to my time in the manosphere here, Sam. Doesn't it make more sense politically for him to send Ghislaine Maxwell to Seekot in El Salvador as opposed to a more cozy prison?

[Ari Melber]

Well, I appreciate that you keep coming to me for the manosphere questions. I will read into that.

[Sam Stein]

I'm just trying to understand what he's doing with her or what. We don't have any evidence he's doing anything, what his administration is doing.

[Ari Melber]

All stipulated. All stipulated. But I struggled with this exact question because on the surface, going lenient on someone who was convicted of the horrific crimes that Ghislaine Maxwell is convicted of makes absolutely no sense. Right? I mean, it creates an obvious vulnerability, not to mention the morality of it. And yet here we are. And whether or not Todd Blanche or Donald Trump has instructed the Bureau of Prisons to transfer her, who knows? But what we do know is that Todd Blanche met with her. What we do know is that Donald Trump repeatedly has said he has the right to pardon her in public, the type of generosity that would not be extended to anyone else who was accused and convicted of these crimes.

[Sam Stein]

So why.

[Ari Melber]

And I guess I come back to sort of Charlie's explanation, which is in theory, perhaps she could say something akin to like, well, you know, I was there and Donald Trump did nothing wrong, case closed. And then he would use that and say, see, Case is closed. But the idea that you would have to go through, jump through these hurdles to get to this point, dangle a pardon, a more lenient sentence, potentially giving her a better, more cushy prison facility, I mean, that is itself troubling and creates its own set of problems. And certainly it's being noticed.

[Sam Stein]

Charlie, let me come back to what Charlemagne the God said that set off Donald Trump and his tirade against him. First, he calls him a political, like a once in a generation or once in a lifetime political juggernaut. Big, big, big sort of credit given to his political accomplishments. But then describes this coup in the Republican Party over this story. I think that's a sound and pretty balanced political analysis. I guess the question is it's there for the taking. Do you see Republicans sort of grabbing their party back over the deception and the botched handling of the Epstein files?

[Lisa Rubin]

No, because we've been talking about this for the last 10 years. You know, he may lose people in the, in the Trump adjacent world. But, but no, I mean, look, you know, if, have you met the Republican Party lately? I mean, these are people who, who just who the, you know, the Republicans just confirmed Emil Beauvais and Jeanine Pirro and Joe Cant to positions in office. They're not going to break with him. But I do think it's interesting that the, remember, Donald Trump is the President of the United States. He's got a lot of important things. He's got nuclear submarines off of Russia. Right. There's a, there's a war in the Middle East. There's, there's economic problems. And he sure has a lot of time on his hands to spend going after, you know, podcasters and radio hosts who say negative things about him. You know, and I think that at some point you go, you know, don't you have something better to do, Mr. President? I mean, seriously, aren't there, like, big things you should be doing and how, you know, thin is your skin that you have to respond to everyone that says something negative about you? And believe it or not, there are people in important jobs who are too busy to react to every single thing anyone says about them. And yet Donald Trump apparently can't control himself or thinks that this is the distraction or has rabid ferrets running around in his brain, and it's just like whatever comes up, he has to somehow react to. But none of it seems to be particularly effective. Although, once again, it is interesting to reflect that there's an entire Republican Party out there watching all of this, joined at the hip with him, and none of them have the guts to be able to stand up and say, yeah, we didn't sign up for that. This is crazy pants stuff. We're out. That's just not happening.

[Sam Stein]

It's just amazing that where we are is that the MAGA adjacent comedians who sort of make up the most watched parts of the manosphere media ecosystem have the, you know, what's to say? I'm out. You guys promised us hours of videotapes. You're treating us like babies. And they may align with him on other things, but on this question there, I mean, Rogan calls it a, quote, line in the sand. I mean, to your point, Charlie, it's amazing that Republicans who are elected leaders won't draw a line at the sand at not making a convicted sex offender more comfortable by moving her from a low security prison to a lower security prison. And again, we don't know that Donald Trump or Todd Blanche had anything to do with that. But in the words of a Bureau of Prisons consultant, it has, quote, never been done before. So here we are. Sam Stein, Charlie Sykes, thank you for spending time with us on all of this. Up next for us, Donald Trump's war with the truth and facts with numbers, while not new, it is escalating. And now his latest effort to control the facts and the numbers and the message feels like it is ramming the country headfirst into its autocratic future. We'll talk about that next. These numbers are put together by teams.

[John Busey]

Of literally hundreds of people following detailed.

[Sam Stein]

Procedures that are in manuals. This is the stuff of democracies giving way to authoritarianism.

[Ben Rhodes]

This is the action of a petulant child like you give me bad news, I fire the messenger.

[Jacob Soboroff]

When he's trying to weaponize the Bureau.

[Nicole Wallace]

Of Labor Statistics, that tells you a lot about their insecurity about the economy.

[Sam Stein]

The commissioner doesn't see the numbers for.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Until Wednesday before they're published.

[Sam Stein]

By the time the commissioner sees the numbers, they're, they're all prepared. They're locked into the computer system. I was commissioner and I was sometimes locked out of the process. It is exactly the sort of thing people warned would happen if Donald Trump was reelected, especially after he publicly told his own supporters during his first term not to believe what they see and read and hear that it wasn't what was actually happening. And now here we are, the worst case scenario when lies and manipulation aren't just a political strategy, but become the policy of the United States federal government. Trump again today defended his decision to shoot the messenger following a poor jobs report, a, quote, rigged one he suggested today without a scrap of evidence. He also said he'd find a replacement for the labor statistics commissioner he abruptly fired. He said he would do that quickly. Now it's on his Republican colleagues to defend him, as they always do in Congress and in his administration. Watch the director of the National Economic Counsel, Kevin Hassett, squirm a little bit when asked direct questions about this.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Is the president prepared to fire anyone who reports data that he disagrees with?

[Charlie Sykes]

No, absolutely not.

[Sam Stein]

The president wants his own people there so that when we see the numbers.

[Jacob Soboroff]

They'Re more transparent and more reliable.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Do you have any hard evidence that these numbers were wrong?

[Jacob Soboroff]

Yeah, there is very hard evidence that we're looking at the biggest revision since 1968.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Are you going to present that evidence?

[Charlie Sykes]

Look at the number itself.

[Sam Stein]

It is the evidence.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

But just saying it's an outlier is not evidence.

[Sam Stein]

Mr. It's a historically important outlier. It's something that's unprecedented, so unprecedented, it's still not evidence.

[Charlie Sykes]

I've been looking at it for 40.

[Jacob Soboroff]

Years and I'm like, it must be a typo.

[Sam Stein]

Importantly, there is no evidence that there was anything worthy of doing what Trump did. Joining our coverage, CNBC senior economics reporter Steve Lispens back and former deputy national security adviser to President Obama. MSNBC contributor Ben Rose is here. Steve, take me through your thoughts as this action hasn't just sunk in, but been defended by Trump's spokespeople.

[Ben Rhodes]

Yeah, that's one of the more disheartening parts of all this because guys like Kevin Hassett, I got to say, got to know better, these revisions are part of the normal process. What's happening is a bureaucrat in the government is being punished for telling the truth, for taking the numbers that were initially reported. They get more data as time goes by and they tell you what actually happened. It is a shocker of a report. Those, those 258,000 downward revisions of the prior reports is a big deal. It has changed the view on Wall street of what might be happening in the jobs market. It's probably having a big effect at the Federal Reserve because it was always a puzzle. You had growth coming down, you had consumer spending coming down. Why weren't jobs coming down too? Well, it turns out they were. And just to echo what William beach said, I talked to Erica Groschen, the former commissioner, over the weekend. She said they don't get this report. This report is done by hundreds of people and then 40 final people have get involved in crunching the data. A lot of it is automated and then it's handed to the BLS commissioner. So you kind of fired the wrong person if you fire that person. The other thing, Nicola, that always has struck me about these charges which crop up from time to time, that there's politics behind these numbers. If the government is so good at having a conspiracy to change the numbers involving so many people, we probably ought to be giving government more things to do because they're way more competent than we thought.

[Sam Stein]

So much of the reaction that you bring to us from the titans of American business and industry is cautious, waiting to see, taking what they like from Trump. Does that remain the mindset or did this change their view of what the next three and a half years will be like?

[Ben Rhodes]

Well, there is concern I'm reading from people that, you know, the next person that they might mess around with it. The thing that Kevin Hassett, among the things he has wrong, is that the policy is actually very transparent. If they start making changes with it in ways where the numbers don't add up, they're going to have a big problem. So it's going to be difficult, I think, for them to mess with the data, but it is very important. And Wall street would be very concerned if the data would appear to be messed with and not be as reliable as it possibly can be. But the bigger focus actually and a lot of my focus reporting today is Wall street isn't buying the political argument. They're buying the jobs are weaker argument. And that's really the area of concern out there, which is how weaker jobs and how weaker the economy. That's the abiding concern of investors Today.

[Sam Stein]

Well, and that, to be frank, is what they've distracted from. So thank you for bringing that back into focus. I mean, ask both of you to stick around. I'll bring Ben. And on the other side, don't go anywhere. I see good reports. I think. I think we're going to have good numbers from the beginning.

[Nicole Wallace]

These are fantastic numbers.

[Sam Stein]

I was watching some of the reports this morning. They were surprised. So, Ben, there was no issue when the numbers were good numbers. Your thoughts on this sort of Monday after.

[Charlie Sykes]

I think it's important that we have to see this not as an isolated incident or even, as Chris Christie said, the response of a petulant child who didn't get what they wanted. Because this is actually a part of a systematic effort to dismantle data and information that does not comport with Trump's view of reality. He would basically like the experience of the entire United States, if not the entire world, to be like the experience of a Fox News viewer that is only getting his version of reality. Because to just kind of tie together a few things. Nicole, you've got the firing of the person who's in charge of assembling statistics on the jobs report. You know, a couple weeks ago, I was talking to you about the fact that the US Intelligence community assessed that Iran wasn't developing a nuclear weapon. And after Trump wanted a different assessment, he just got a different assessment. So we already know that the intelligence community is only allowed to tell Trump under his directive, what he wants to hear. The CBO made estimates about the impact on debt and deficits from the big, beautiful bill that ran into the trillions of dollars. And the White House put out a fact sheet saying that miraculously, the big, beautiful bill will somehow reduce debt, debt and deficits over time. Right. So this is. You saw every single, you know, you saw over a dozen, I think, inspectors general fired without the proper notification to Congress. Those are people that are supposed to report on waste, fraud, or abuse within agencies. So you're seeing this kind of systematic effort to ensure that the federal government only provides Trump with the reality that he wants. And, you know, even if it's hard to cook the books, whoever is hired to do this job next knows that Donald Trump will not want that person to be bringing them him bad news, in the same way that the intelligence community knows to not provide Donald Trump with information that, you know, is at odds with his priorities. And it means that we're going to be functioning as a government and society without the kind of independent information that you rely on for everything from job forecasts to intelligence reports to extreme weather, event planning, predicting when floods might happen, all these things that we rely on, kind of like background noise to our society are going to be ripped away from us. And it's going to be incumbent on the rest of us to try to figure out what actually is objective reality.

[Sam Stein]

Well, I mean, and I would add measles outbreaks and disease and Covid numbers to it. And I guess I want to give you the last word on the other side of a break, Steve, about whether employers make any adjustments in this moment. With this sort of settling in, we have to sneak in a break first. We'll be right back. So, Steve, how do the country's biggest employers adapt to this data free zone?

[Ben Rhodes]

It's a good question. I think there is a bunch of private sector data. None of it is public, proven to be as impactful as the government data. The Wall street still follows the government data even while several private organizations have put it out. You know, you fly a little bit blind. That's really the story here. The hope is that no matter who replaces the fired commissioner, that the system remains the same. Look, there are places for improvement. But I just want to be clear, this notion that the spokespeople for the president have said that there are problems at the bls, that is really a distraction from the idea that the president fired this person because he didn't like the numbers and claimed they were political. In our repeated attempts to ask for proof, as Christian Welker tried there, of any kind of political hankering with the data, they haven't come back with anything. Yeah, there are problems at the bls. There is a whole new front frontier of big data out there and AI and all sorts of stuff. But all that's going to take time and by the way, money. And let's just point out that the Trump administration for FY26 penciled in budget cuts and staffing cuts at the BLS for next year.

[Sam Stein]

Well, and we should also point out that it's not like this move was made at a point when the numbers went in a direction that he liked. It was made in a fit at peak, which is the only place where the five year old, I mean, I agree with that on the five year old comment, but that's the only place where it fits. Steve, thank you for making us smarter and keeping us honest. Ben sticks around for the next hour with us. Just ahead, Democrats fighting back nationally against the Republican power grab in Texas. The next hour of deadline White House starts after a quick break don't go anywhere.

[Nicole Wallace]

MSNBC presents the chart topping original podcast the Best People with Nicole Wallace. This week she sits down with MSNBC reporter Jacob Soborough.

[Jacob Soboroff]

It's about the connection that you and I have and our colleagues have, but it's also about the connection and the trust that people place in us at a time when trust in media I think is at all time lows.

[Nicole Wallace]

The Best people with Nicole Wallace listen now. For early access ad free listening and bonus content, subscribe to MSNBC Premium on Apple Podcasts. Start your day with the MSNBC Daily Newsletter. Sharp insights from voices you trust, standout moments from your favorite shows, and fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. Sign up [e-mail].

[Sam Stein]

I remember when Trump called Georgia, he called the secretary of state. He told them, I need to just find 11,780 votes. What did Georgia say? No? Well, Donald Trump called our governor and he said, I just need a small change. I just need you to send me five congressional members. What did our governor say?

[Charlie Sykes]

Sure, give me a minute.

[Sam Stein]

Coming right up. While Texas are waiting for relief, Republican leaders are redrawing maps to silence voters hijack our democracy. Hi again Everybody. It's now 5 o' clock in the east. One hour ago, the Texas State House convened for another day of its special legislative session. But no business could be conducted as dozens of Texas Democrats left the state in protest yesterday, depriving Republicans of the quorum needed to move anything forward. More than 50 Texas state Democrats went to Chicago, New York and Boston to fight back against Republicans newly proposed congressional map. It would give the GOP a path to pick up five U.S. house seats in next year's midterm elections. It's a map that answers a request, direct request of Donald Trump's. Texas Democrats have called this move an attempt by Trump to rig the next election as he currently reels from plunging approval ratings. The new congressional map put forward last week, NBC News reports, quote, would shift district lines in ways that would target current Democratic members of Congress in districts in and around Austin, Dallas and Houston, as well as two already endangered Democrats representing South Texas districts that Trump carried last year. The Texas Democrats are showing they will not take this mid cycle redistricting lying down by leaving the state so the legislature does not have a full quorum. They hope to delay the work at the special session for weeks or longer. Here's Texas House Democrat Gene Woo in Chicago last night.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Governor Abbott is doing this in submission.

[Lisa Rubin]

To Donald Trump so that Donald Trump could steal these communities power and voice.

[Sam Stein]

We will not be complicit in the.

[Lawrence O'Donnell]

Destruction of our own communities.

[Sam Stein]

We're not here to play political games. We're here to demand, to demand an end to this corrupt process. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, meanwhile, is using threats, threatening the lawmakers who left in the last hour. He noted he has ordered the arrest of those he calls delinquent. He's talking about Texas House Democrats. He also has said that they, quote, may have committed felonies if they are soliciting funds to evade the fines they will incur. Under House rules, Texas House members face a $500 fine for each day they break quorum. In response to Governor Abbott's threats of expulsion and arrest, Wu, the Texas Democratic Caucus chair, simply said, quote, come and take it. This is not the first time Texas Democrats have left the state in order to try to stop the moves of their Republican counterparts. State Congressman Trey Martinez Fisher helped lead the action in 2021 in opposition to a bill that restricted voting rights. Here he is last night.

[Nicole Wallace]

Republicans are stealing our democracy right before our very eyes. But guess what? Texas Democrats are here. And we have a message for Donald Trump.

[Sam Stein]

Not on our watch.

[Jacob Soboroff]

We will not have our democracy taken on our watch.

[Sam Stein]

That's where we start the hour. Texas State Representative John Busey. He is in Chicago with many of his colleagues who left Texas to help walk the GOP redistricting plan. Thank you so much for joining us.

[John Busey]

Thanks for having me.

[Sam Stein]

We just reported the news that Mr. Abbott has ordered the arrest of you and your colleagues. Are you aware of anyone being arrested as of yet?

[John Busey]

No, not. I'm not. And I got to tell you, the second time this happened to me, we're getting used to their bravado. But I think you showed the main point of what's going on here, where you show Donald Trump's failing poll numbers. He's an incredibly unpopular president. He knows his policies are failing America, and he knows he can't win in the midterm elections. And that's why he's coordinating with Governor Abbott to steal five congressional seats in Texas. And Texas Democrats aren't going to stand for it. That's why we're here. We've run into the fight to protect the people of Texas so their voice isn't stripped away from them by Governor Abbott and President Trump.

[Sam Stein]

Is there any sign that the Republicans are backing down?

[John Busey]

You know, we saw a Republican congressman in California call file a bill today to say that we need to stop gerrymandering across this country. I couldn't agree with him more. And that's what we're hoping to do is shine a light on what Greg Abbott and Donald Trump are trying to do. They can't win the midterms, so they're trying to steal them. We can't let that happen. This isn't a Republican or Democratic fight. This also isn't a Texas fight. This is an American fight. And we need everybody to step up and do their part to resist what Donald Trump and Greg Abbott are trying to do. I'm proud that the Republican in California did that. But we must all be doing our part to stop gerrymandering everywhere that it stands. And we've got to do whatever we can to make sure that doesn't happen. Texans have a lot at stake that we need to be working for. We've got flood victims in Central Texas. We've got failing public schools because Governor Abbott refuses to support them. And we've got the worst health care in the nation. We could get to work to help the people of Texas instead of serving Donald Trump, which is what Greg Abbott's doing.

[Sam Stein]

Well, let's deal with Texas for a second. I mean, what is it that makes Texans vote for people like Ted Cruz who leave the state during natural disasters? Republicans who have failed on the flood warning systems? That could be something that everyone would come together and work on in the wake of a horrific natural disaster and tragedy. I mean, what is it that makes Texans vote for Republicans anyway?

[John Busey]

You know, Texas has some deep roots with the Republican Party, but I think actions like we're showing today is what leadership the Texans are looking for. They are fed up with the failures of Greg Abbott and Donald Trump. That's why they're trying to rig the elections. They know they're about to lose seats in Texas if they don't rig them. I think the people of Texas have woken up to their failures. They're looking for leadership, and they're seeing that Texas Democrats are delivering that leadership right now as we bring this fight to the entire country.

[Sam Stein]

One of the reasons the California Republican might have made that statement is that I think California, if they did with the Texas Republicans are doing, could gerrymander Republicans out of their seats. Right? I mean, do you support those efforts? Fighting fire with fire?

[John Busey]

Look, I don't support Jerry. I don't support gerrymandering at all. But I also think if you're going to be at war, you got to fight fire with fire. So hopefully it doesn't come to that. We're trying to bring awareness to what's going on, and we need Greg Abbott to back down. We're going to kill this special session and hopefully he will come to his senses. Remember that he serves the 31 million Texans, not the president of the United States, and that we will go if we call another special session will be to serve the people of Texas and help the Central Texas flood victims not to do political games. So I don't want gerrymandering at all. We're going to resist it where we can. But I got to tell you, I'm proud that other governors are willing to fight fire with fire. And I also believe that they are willing to walk away from this fight. If Donald Trump doesn't rig the game and if Greg Abbott doesn't support him and change the rules mid decade, what.

[Sam Stein]

Would get you on a plane back to Texas?

[John Busey]

Look, let's take this. Let's kill this special session. Let's not put this power grab back on the table and let's go back and help the people of Texas with Texas issues. That old sweat will get me home ready to fight for my constituents, for the 31 million Texans, and ultimately stop this charade of a power grab that will impact all 330 million Americans.

[Sam Stein]

Texas State Representative John Busey, thank you very much for joining us. Please keep us posted. We'll be here for another hour. If anything develops, please come back.

[John Busey]

Absolutely. Thanks for having me.

[Sam Stein]

Joining our conversation is Princeton University professor MSNBC political analyst Eddie Glubb. Ben Rose is still with us. Ben, let me bring you in on this. I remember when Jasmine Crockett joined our show every day. She had left Texas to come to Washington, D.C. she was in Washington to fight for the voting rights legislation. Here we are again, literally in Texas, the Republicans trying to not just gerrymander Democrats out of their districts, but rig the midterms as a nod to how incredibly unpopular Trump's second term is. There's some irony in there, but mostly it's straight up autocratic stuff.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, I mean, look, a couple of points I'd make about this. The first is this is, you know, the beginning of the autocratic playbook. And we've already seen the Republican Party gerrymander seats for a long time, way out of proportion. Anything Democrats do you have this kind of asymmetry where Democratic states like New York and California set up nonpartisan redistricting commissions for every 10 years. And then you've got Republican states just drawing these ever more bizarre districts to disenfranchise voters, to select essentially their own voters, which also, by the way, compounds the problem in a place like Texas because The whole Republican Party moves to the right because any Texas politician is no longer afraid of facing a competitive district. They're afraid of their own base, which is who they've put in power. So, you know, we've seen Viktor Orban do this in Hungary. He's had less than the majority vote in some national elections, but still maintains a large majority for his party. We've seen Vladimir Putin do this for his United Russia party back when he was transitioning Russia into an autocracy. So clearly there's a, an autocratic precedent for this around the world. And the Republican Party is doing it for some time here. And, you know, I think we're at a point here where the other piece of this we have to pay attention to is Trump's fixation on the midterms. And that's going to be part trying to select the electorate, right? Trying to redraw districts to create more safe Republican seats. But it causes concern for me. But what else is he going to do to put the thumb on the scales for that midterm? What is he going to do in terms of before the election, you know, marshaling the resources of the federal government to try to kind of intimidate people who might vote against him, but also to challenge the results. Right. Why would Donald Trump would challenge the results of the last election he lost, accept a result in which Democrats win the midterms? So I think we have to be vigilant, not just about Texas. I think this is a signal that we have to be vigilant all the way through those midterms. And it's just going to be a fight to have anything resembling a free and fair election.

[Sam Stein]

I mean, Ben, let me put up a tweet from Gavin Newsom. It's a retweet. It's a post by a data scientist of a California map that's all blue and says, quote, even in a bad year for California Democrats, like 2024, you can create a 52 Dem, 0 Republican map with no seat being less than Harris plus 10, it would eliminate 9 Republicans. What's your position on proceeding with that map?

[Charlie Sykes]

I think it's a no brainer. I mean, you know, Democrats have been behind the curve. This is not beginning now. Nicole, as you know, this kind of redistricting has been going on for most of the 21st century. And look, both parties have done it, but it's been heavily tilted in the Republican direction. You can see that in the discrepancy between the popular vote nationally for the House and how the seats tend to shake out. Now they're breaking even the 10 year cycles.

[Sam Stein]

Right? Right.

[Charlie Sykes]

It's usually every 10 years they're trying to interfere with that cycle. It'd be insane for Democrats to stand by and wait for some moment in which the Republican Party comes to their senses and returns to nonpartisan redistricting. It's not happening. So Gavin Newsom is exactly right. We don't prefer this outcome as Democrats, but if this is what the Republican Party is going to do, we have to do it. We have to use the tools at our disposal to defend democracy or else there's not going to be anything left on the other side of this. So I think, look, best case outcome, that's kind of mutually assured destruction. You're saying to the Republicans, if you go down this road, we can go down this road too. And hopefully that scares everybody off. And we have like, you know, we don't have to go down this road. But if this is how Republicans are going to go, I think Democrats have no choice but to do this.

[Sam Stein]

But I mean, I guess we're here already. This is how Republicans are going to go. Today, Greg Abbott ordered the arrest of all of the Democrats so that they come back so that he can get them in there and redo the map. That's plus five. I mean, are Democrats where you are that this is a no brainer, as you just said?

[Charlie Sykes]

I think you see it in Democrats like Gavin Newsom and J.B. pritzker and Kathy Hochul in Illinois, New York, you know, Kathy Hochul, you know, is not, not like as partisan a figure as Gavin Newsom. In some ways. The fact that you see this across the country from big blue state governors shows you how much the politics of this has changed. I don't think that would have happened a few years ago. So I do think maybe not all Democrats, but you know, the ones that matter, the ones who are governing these states and the state legislatures in those states are definitely indicating that they're ready to do this.

[Sam Stein]

I mean, I guess, Eddie, I'm flushing Ben Rose out on this because I think that one of the structural imbalances and asymmetry in our politics is that Democrats will always lead with what they don't want to do and Republicans will always lead with the power grab first and sell it second. And we never really know if they wanted to do it or not. And it's still, it still leaves democracy, which is right now at this moment in our country's story, in the hands of one of the two political parties. And it Ain't the Republicans in the hands of a reluctant guardian? Because right now to defend democracy, you have to do in California what Abbott is doing in Texas. That's how to defend democracy. That's how to make sure that Democrats don't get wiped out in the midterms because Trump has ordered all the Republican governors to change the map. That's all out in the open. That's not the product of investigative journalism. That is happening right now live in the state of Texas. And Abbott in the last two hours has ordered the arrest of Democrats who don't come back. So I don't know how that's going to end. Maybe they'll all get arrested and they'll never go back and they won't have a quorum. But at some point Abbott will likely have his way and pass these maps. So that's where the Republicans are. And they're not reluctant about gerrymandering. They're not apologizing for gerrymandering. They're not having a hard time selling gerrymandering. They have an information ecosystem where gerrymandering is what their supporters think they have to do to keep the things that matter to them. And even the most clear eyed Democrats hate gerrymandering. And I wonder where you think we are right now in this conversation.

[Nicole Wallace]

Well, I think you guys have laid it out very clearly. First of all, it's great to see you as always. You've laid it out very clearly. And the question will be will Democrats in some ways fall back on their fidelity to the rules, to process, to principle in relation to an opponent that doesn't give a damn about any of that? And in fact, the opponent presupposes that Democrats will in some ways show some fidelity to the principles, the norms, the process and the like as in some ways a check on their ability to check them. And that has played itself out over and over again in our politics over the last 10 years. But I want to say this, Nicole, as we talk about this gerrymandering and I understand the politics. We can understand the political corruption, the tilt Twitter, the autocratic. But this is the week. This week Here is the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights act, this week here. And what we're seeing right now is yes, it's political gerrymandering, but this is racist, Nicole. This is racist. What Texas is 40% white, but white voters control 28 out of 38 congressional districts. When we think about the four districts that the districts that the Justice Department directed Abbott to target, I don't know, if three of them are majority African American districts, another Latino district, we have to understand this as part of an agenda that I've been talking about that is, of course, bound up with autocrat, bound up with power grabs. But it's deeply racist, Nicole. It's deeply racist. And if we don't understand, if we don't name it as we're talking about all of this other stuff, then we're going to allow that to kind of be smuggled in under the radar. As we talk about what's going on, we need to understand who they're targeting, who they're disenfranchising, has been said, and what are the implications of that in the 60th year of the Voting Rights Act?

[Sam Stein]

Eddie, I need you to say more.

[Nicole Wallace]

I'm just, I think it's really important that we kind of stitch together all the things that we see, right? We know that this is political corruption. Brad Raffensperger's phone call. 11,000 plus votes. Give me five seats. We got that. But we know that the court has now taken up a case in order to what, deal with section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. We know what the immigration policy is talking about. We're going to deal with that later in the show. We understand what this is all about. They think they're going to lose the midterms. And what do they want to do? They want to disenfranchise black and brown voters because they don't believe the country is ours. They believe the country is theirs. Theirs is, of course, very deliberate in how they think about these things. So only thing I'm trying to say, Nicole, is that we have to name this for what it is. This is the white Nationalist project. It's a power grab, but it's a power grab on behalf of a white nationalist agenda, at least from my vantage point. And again, this is the 60th year of the Voting Rights act and these people are trying to gut it right in front of our eyes.

[Sam Stein]

Eddie sticks around. Ben Rhodes, thank you for crossing over both hours and spending time with us today. When we come back, Brad Groundbreaking. Since we have been on the air, two anonymous victims of Jeffrey Epstein with fiery new letters about how Donald Trump's Department of Justice and FBI are missing the point, protecting wealthy abusers and not prioritizing their victims. What those new victims are saying about Trump and how the Trump administration is failing Epstein's victims next. Also ahead for us, our friend and colleague Jacob Severoff for the powerful new end interview with the father of three U.S. marines who was violently arrested last month by masked immigration agents while doing his job as a gardener and landscaper. He is now out of ICE custody and speaking out about his ordeal and he has a message for Donald Trump. We'll get to hear that later in the hour. Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere breaking. Since we've been on the air in the last hour, two of Jeffrey Epstein's victims are speaking out in a pair of new letters written anonymously and directed to the federal court and to the Department of Justice. These victims make a plea for transparency and they slam the Trump administration's handling of the case. One of the letters reads in part, quote, I wish you would have handled and would handle the whole Epstein files with more respect toward and for the victims. I am not some pawn in your political warfare. What you have done and continue to do is eating at me day after day as you help to perpetuate this story indefinitely. Why not be completely transparent? Show us all the files with only the necessary redactions. Be done with it and allow me and us to heal you. Protect yourself and your powerful and wealthy friends, not enemies over the victims. Why another letter says this in regards to the memo released by the Trump administration early last month, quote, I am not sure the highest priority here is the victims. Justice for the victims or combating child exploitation or at least I do not feel this way. If there was justice for the victims we would see some kind of accountability for the years they allowed this horrible human being, if you can call him that, to prey on underage and young girls while jet setting around the world with high profile individuals and or entrapping his victims in his various mansions and or his notorious private island. I feel like the DOJs and FBI's priority is protecting the third party, the wealthy men by focusing on scrubbing their names off the files of which the victims know who they are. To learn that our own president has utilized thousands of agents to protect his identity and these high profile individuals is monumentally mind blowing. That's their focus. Wow. End quote. Joining us now is MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin. Lisa Rubin, this has always been a story. I want to say this carefully in the minds of some of the MAGA people as well about the victims. And here they are today speaking out bluntly, forcefully and calling BS on the scrubbing of the files that hundreds of FBI agents engaged in.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Yeah, and Nicole, it stands in marked contrast to some of the statements we saw from victims even after Jeffrey Epstein's death when the government moved to close his criminal case. In August of 2019, the judge, Judge Richard Berman, the same person to whom these letters are addressed, held a hearing and offered all known victims of Jeffrey Epstein an opportunity to come forward. And many did, either personally or through their counsel and read statements. And the overall tone there not only was one of sorrow at having their lives ripped apart by Jeffrey Epstein, but there was also a lot of gratitude at that point in time toward the government and toward the Southern District of New York in particular, for sort of seeing through that sweetheart deal that Jeffrey Epstein had negotiated with prosecutors in Florida in 2007 and 2008, and again, taking up justice on their behalf. These are not letters of appreciation. These are letters that express strong frustration with the government, not only because they don't know how Jeffrey Epstein died, and both of these victims say that they have ongoing questions about that, but for not centering the experiences of victims here and not thinking about the victims. As one of them said, sort of elongating this fight over what materials should or should not come out, making this torturous for the people who suffered sexual abuse at the hands of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, when most of them were underage.

[Sam Stein]

Lisa, let me ask you about this. One of the letters says this quote to the judge. I think I would. I think what I would request from you, you, Honor, is to consider having an approved third party review these documents to ensure that no victims names or likenesses are revealed through this release. It is imperative, with the scrutiny over this media frenzy, that the victims are completely and entirely protected. Obviously, if the judge appoints a third party, the Trump administration loses the tight grip they have on this. Sending Todd Blanche down to meet with Ghislaine Maxwell suggests this is being handled at the highest levels of the Department of Justice. One, what is the likelihood that the judge will respond to or consider this request from a victim? And two, how would the Trump administration respond?

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Well, first of all, the other letter makes a similar request request that the victim's lawyers have a say in how the redactions are handled. So you can see, again, that mistrust of the Department of Justice sort of permeating through these letters. How does the judge handle this? You know, Nicole, a judge has the power to appoint something called a special master. Oftentimes when materials in a case get too voluminous, and we've seen that in a variety of different circumstances. But again, here we know that at most, there were two witnesses in the grand jury, and particularly if later today the government says no, we're just seeking to unseal the transcripts and not the exhibits themselves. It's not clear that there's really a role for a third party to play solely on the basis of, I think it's going to come down to whether or not the judge believes that the judge can handle those redactions. And remember, the government has been forced to provide an index of and all of the grand jury materials to both of the judges involved, the one who oversaw Jeffrey Epstein's case and then the one who has come in to oversee the Maxwell case. So that's a possibility, too, that each of them say, you know what? This is not so bad. We can handle this sensitively without the appointment of a third party, but we understand that you don't necessarily trust the Department of Justice to do it itself. And certainly I think that when they have an opportunity to speak for themselves, the Trump administration will, of course, say that's not necessary. They have this well in hand. But you see here, just in two letters from victims, the level of mistrust in this administration with respect to the Epstein files isn't just a creation of the far right. It permeates all throughout the victim community. At this point, too, we have gone from a place where people were thanking the Department of Justice for taking their lives and their hurt seriously to feeling as if the primary inflictor of that trauma on them now is the same Department of Justice.

[Sam Stein]

Nicole, let me play something for you in light of. I read these letters real quickly, but I want to play an interview that our colleagues, Hallie Jackson, did with the brother of Virginia Jeffrey, who I think gives voice to what we're talking about. Let me do that.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

If Maxwell were to receive a pardon.

[Sam Stein]

At some point, what would that mean for you?

[Charlie Sykes]

It would unwind everything that my sister.

[Sam Stein]

And all the survivors fought for.

[Charlie Sykes]

It would be a disgrace of justice. It would be picking abusers over survivors again.

[Sam Stein]

Now, Trump has not pardoned Ghislaine Maxwell, but when asked, he always says some version of I could if I want to, which is basically an articulation of his pardon power, which is true. What is the level of unanswered questions and pain, as is clear there, from Virginia's brother, about moving Ghislaine Maxwell from a low security prison to an even lower security prison. And again, our colleague Kendallanian has reported that a waiver had to be agreed to. That waiver was agreed to, but a consultant to the Bureau of Prisons said he had, quote, never seen that done before.

[Vaughn Hilliard]

Yeah, Ken and I worked on that reporting together on Friday. Because of how unusual. No, no, no, that's, that's okay. Because of how unusual it was to see someone who has a sex offender classification transferred from a low security prison to a medium. I'm sorry, a minimum security facility. That's not supposed to happen without a waiver by somebody who is an administrator of a particular department at the Bureau of Prisons. And when we asked the Bureau of Prisons why they did that, we didn't get a straight answer. But as you could see at that interview that Hallie did with Sky Roberts, the damage that sexual assault and abuse do to people is not confined to the victims itself. And as much as it's painful to watch Danny and Sky Roberts, who are Virginia's brothers, struggle with that pain and the aftermath of her suicide, I also think it's so important for people all across the country to see what sexual abuse does to families. It's extremely powerful to see a man who is not himself a survivor of abuse, but who loves someone deeply, who could not overcome the demons in her life because of that abuse, just feel very viscerally the insult of either considering a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell or transferring her to this prison camp in Texas where people can generally walk free. You know, over the weekend of we saw pictures of Elizabeth Holmes, the Theranos founder, who is also at this same facility in Texas working out and lifting weights. The fact that a paparazzo could get that close to Elizabeth Holmes tells you everything you need to know about the difference between FCP or federal prison. Camp Bryan, where Ghislaine Maxwell is now housed, and FCI Tallahassee, the prison where she was housed before, where she might have been in an honor dorm, as Ken has reported. But that's a fortified facility. It has layers of security around it. FCCP Bryan, on the other hand, is sort of like being in a very, very bare bones camp at a national park, complete with recreation time and activities designed to rehabilitate people who you envision will have a future after prison. That's not usually how we conceptualize people who are serving 20 year sentences for sex offenses, including trafficking of minors with the intent to have them engage in commercial sex acts.

[Sam Stein]

And the victims alleged that she sexually abused them as well. One of the victims, right, said that she was the one who had her take off her panties, according to Julie K. Brown's incredibly harrowing report. Let me ask you one last question. We cover Donald Trump's deportations to Seekot together all the time. When he talks about the worst of the worst does he include convicted child sex traffickers in his colloquial description of who he's sending to seekot?

[Vaughn Hilliard]

So I'm so glad you asked that question, because several months ago the White House posted like wanted posters almost on the White House lawn, so that it was inevitable that our reporting colleagues who were reporting from the White House would have them behind them so you could see the people they considered the worst of the worst. And indeed, on those lists were multiple people either accused of or convicted of sex offenses with minors. And yet Ghislaine Maxwell, who is convicted of multiple counts related to child sex offenses, doesn't seem to be a person that Donald Trump would consider the worst of the worst. He was infamously asked what he thought of his of her conviction rather, and as you will recall, he said that he wished her well. That's not something we've heard Donald Trump extend to anybody who is an undocumented immigrant he sent outside the country, Nicole, much less to anybody who is convicted of a similar offense.

[Sam Stein]

Mr. Rubin, thank you for your reporting. I'm sorry that I neglected to point out that that great reporting is yours. Of course it is. Thank you very much for joining us today. When we come when we come back, Narciso Barranco, the California landscaper and gardener and father of three U.S. marines is speaking out for the first time. After masked immigration agents violently arrested and detained him last month, Barranco shared the story of his ordeal with our friend and colleague Jacob Soborough. Jacob will be our guest after a short break. The story of Narciso Barranco and his sons is one that captured the attention of the country and turned even some MAGA voters against Donald Trump's immigration policies. After the father of three US Marines was brutally arrested by immigration agents while working at his landscaping job in the in Santa Ana, California, earlier this summer. After 24 days in custody, Barranco was finally released on bond and reunited with his family. He's choosing to speak out about what he went through after his release from Adelanto Detention Center. He sat down exclusively with my friend and colleague Jacob Soborough for a moving interview, which he shared with us on the Best People podcast. Here's a look at that interview.

[Jacob Soboroff]

After one of the first conversations, after you were taken by the agents, one of the first things that your dad asked you to do was to keep doing his job for him. Yes.

[Sam Stein]

Yes.

[Jacob Soboroff]

Why did you ask him that after you got detained? Why was it so important for you to ask Alejandro to keep doing the work?

[Nicole Wallace]

La Response Primero.

[Sam Stein]

First of all responsibilities. I think that it was dignified, one.

[Charlie Sykes]

In which I was able to bring.

[Sam Stein]

Home something to eat in support of my household.

[Jacob Soboroff]

He told me, you're a person who loves this country, and you taught your boys to love this country, and your three boys joined the United States Marines. Why did you teach them to love this country so much?

[Sam Stein]

Because for us Hispanics, it's a land of opportunities.

[Charlie Sykes]

But simply, I've always told them, you.

[Sam Stein]

Want to be someone in life, watch your record, protect yourself.

[Charlie Sykes]

If you want to be good, you'll be good.

[Sam Stein]

And if you don't want to be good, then you can just throw your life away.

[Charlie Sykes]

It's different. It's just as this country can give.

[Sam Stein]

Us an opportunity, it can also destroy many of us. Wow. Joining our conversation is Jacob Sobra, who we are thrilled to say was today named senior national and political correspondent for msnbc. He's also my guest this week on the Best People podcast. He is most certainly one of the best people I know at, as is Eddie Glaud, who is still with us. Not on the podcast yet yet, but definitely one of the best people. Jacob, this interview was so powerful. Take us through what you heard from Narciso.

[Jacob Soboroff]

I heard a man, Nicole, who is so proud of his sons, he is so proud of this country, and he is reluctantly speaking out. I don't think he wanted Frank, frankly, to do the interview, but he invited us there, to his backyard in Santa Ana, in Orange County, I should say, to show us the life that he built over the last 30 years inside the United States of America. A life that resulted in his three boys becoming members of the US Marine Corps, and one of them, Alejandro the veteran, speaking out on his behalf to the point where he became, I think, a hero to so many across the United States. Mr. Barranco. Narciso was. We spoke in Spanish during. During the interview. I told you this on the pod. And by the way, thank you so much for having me. It was, I mean, what an extraordinary way to have a conversation with you. So deep, so moving, so personal. I didn't expect it to be so personal. Just like the conversation with Mr. Barranco. And he. We spoke so much in Spanish. He spoke so much in Spanish. But when we talked about his garden itself, he switched into English. It was like he was so comfortable with me talking about his life's work in the United States of America. Everything about him was surprising to me, how he could have had so much pride and so much hope despite what he went through. And, in fact, that was one of the I would love to show you. It was one of the other things that he and I talked about when he came out of Adelanto Detention Center. One of the worst, objectively. You know, Inspector general reports have said that this place and I saw with my own eyes had people curled up in fetal positions in inhumane situations. There were nooses that were found there. He said he found hope inside that detention facility while he was locked up. And I couldn't understand how or why. And it's one of the questions that I asked him. Watch this. Today I heard you describing being locked up in Adelanto. Even in a place like that, there's still hope. Why did you say that? Why do you feel that way?

[Sam Stein]

Put yourself in my place.

[Charlie Sykes]

What will you feel? Of course I'm a human being and they don't want me to be here. Outside, I'm with the people on the inside because they're my people, people I live towards.

[Sam Stein]

And I had hope. As I would always tell them, one day we're going to get out having faith.

[Charlie Sykes]

And we haven't done anything bad.

[Sam Stein]

It's just simply for working.

[Charlie Sykes]

And I see my reflection in their.

[Sam Stein]

Pain because it's my own.

[Jacob Soboroff]

I see their reflection in my pain because it's their own. Instead of thinking about himself, instead of thinking about whether or not he's going to get deported, he's thinking about the other people that he left behind. Nicole, inside that detention center.

[Sam Stein]

Eddie Glad I'm not sure that there's more important work that any reporter is doing than sort of bearing witness. Right. There's not a lot. Donald Trump has a lot of authority when it comes to mass deportations, but he doesn't have public support for deporting people like Narciso Barranco. I think fewer than 20% of Americans support the deportation of people here with jobs and around 9% support people with American born children. I'm not sure. I've never seen any polling on how many people support the deportation of men who are the fathers of three United States Marines to active duties. I'm guessing it's zero. But what do you make of what is being done sort of in the name of all of us, all of Americans, to people who, in Mr. Barranco's telling, only crime with working.

[Nicole Wallace]

Honestly. Nicole I think it's evil. It cuts against everything I was taught as a child growing up in St. Peter's Catholic Church on the coast of Mississippi. It cuts against the values that so many people associate with the American project. But coming out of the Tradition out of which I come, it seems familiar. Forcing us to be complicit with evil seems to be a feature of our days in these dark times. And one of the things that, you know, Jacob has done so beautifully right, is to give life to the people who are harmed by all of this, to break through the abstraction by forcing us to confront the human beings who have to bear the brunt and weight of our contradictions. We have to bear the brunt and weight of the evil. And one of the things that came out of that interview for me, and this is going to sound cynical, but I think it's in the gut. It's what I know, that when the country's experiencing a fever dream, Nicole, gratitude is never enough. Sacrifice is never enough. The bloodthirst is what it is. But, you know, he found hope in fellow human beings close to the ground, not at abstraction, but close to the ground. That's what I see.

[Sam Stein]

All right. As always, Eddie, you inspire a thousand more questions. I'm going to try to ask a few of them on the other side of a very short break. Don't go anywhere. We'll all be right back. We're back with Jacob and Eddie, I mean Jacob, try to pick up where Eddie left off on why you do this work and why it's important to like the reporting you just did in New York City at Federal Plaza.

[Jacob Soboroff]

It's the very specific reason that today, 10 years and one day after I first joined MSNBC, I am back full time with MSNBC in this new role. There is no place where we can have the space which is what is necessary to listen to people. I think so often we are painting a picture based on rumor, innuendo, or something that comes out of the White House that has no attachment to reality whatsoever. And it's all about getting the facts on the ground from the people who were there. And so to be with Mr. Barranco after, thanks to your program and you specifically, getting to meet Alejandro, his son, they got to tell us for themselves, and we will never understand. We didn't understand what family separation was until we heard the voices of those children crying out on that ProPublica audio, after we got to see it for ourselves inside those detention centers in South Texas. I didn't understand what was happening in the courthouses down here in Lower Manhattan until I saw them last week with my own eyeballs. That's what's important. That's what we do here. That's why I came back. And that's what we have to continue to do in order to tell these stories.

[Sam Stein]

Jacob Savaroff, I'm so happy about your news at MSNBC and that we get to continue to learn from and benefit from your reporting here on this show. So thank you for doing the podcast this week. We did go a little personal. I'm no Oprah, but we did try to go there. Eddie, glad you're next. Thank you for spending this hour with us today. That interview, as we've been talking about is on. It's featured on this week's episode as part of our conversation with Jacob Soboroff on this week's new episode of the Best People podcast. You can listen to the entire conversation by scanning the QR code on your screen or by downloading this week's episode of the Best People, wherever you get your podcasts. One more break for us. We'll be right back. Some more news breaking this hour to tell you about. Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered a grand jury investigation into the so called Russiagate conspiracy allegations made by the director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard. A senior Trump administration official confirms to NBC News that investigation was first reported by Fox News. These are unsubstantiated and largely debunked allegations by the Trump administration that former President Barack Obama and his aides in the intelligence community ordered a probe into the 2016 Trump campaign's connections to Russia to ruin his chances of becoming president. The source tells NBC News that a letter signed by Pam Bondi instructs an unnamed federal prosecutor to begin presenting evidence to secure potential indictments, although it is unclear what the charges would be and exactly who the grand jury will be targeting. We'll stay on top of that story. Thank you for letting us into your homes. We are always so grateful.