← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“Undermine his candidacy and disparage his reputation”
00:42:44
Nicolle Wallace on Kash Patel's heated testimony to Congress over the Epstein files.
Loading summary
Transcript110 lines
- [00:01]
A
Hey, this is Jeff Lewis from Radio.
- [00:03]
B
Andy live and uncensored. Catch me talking with my friends about my latest obsessions, relationship issues and bodily ailments. With that kind of drama that seems to follow me, you never know what's going to happen. You can listen to Jeff Lewis live at home or anywhere you are. Download the SiriusXM app for over 425.
- [00:21]
C
Channels of ad free music, sports, entertainment and more. Subscribe now and get 3 months free offer details apply.
- [00:31]
B
Did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult.
- [00:36]
D
Life skill to teach?
- [00:37]
B
Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families. With Greenlight, you can set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on your kids spending with real time notifications. Kids learn to earn, save and spend wisely. And parents can rest easy knowing their kids are learning about money with guardrails in place. Sign up for Greenlight today@Greenlight.com podcast.
- [01:02]
E
This issue is not going to go.
- [01:03]
A
Away.
- [01:06]
E
And I think the central question for the American people is this. They know that Epstein trafficked young women for sex to himself. They want to know who, if anyone else, he trafficked these young women too. I think you're going to have to do more to satisfy the American people's understandable curiosity.
- [01:34]
B
Hi again everyone. It's now five o'. Clock. In New York, FBI Director Kash Patel getting his marching orders there from MAGA Republican Senator John Kennedy. Quote, you are going to have to do more when it comes to the Epstein files. This scandal has plagued Kash Patel and the Trump administration for months now, even following Donald Trump overseas today to the UK where he is for a state visit. Protesters have laid out a giant photo of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein on the path to Windsor Castle. But back here in the US Kash Patel's testimony before Congress did little to nothing to quiet the calls for transparency. Calls Kash Patel himself made repeatedly and dramatically before he became the director of the FBI.
- [02:20]
F
What the hell are the House Republicans doing? They have the majority. You can't get the list. Put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are.
- [02:31]
B
Put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are. Kash Patel now, after saying that and fueling the calls for the government to release what it's hiding, all of the material associated with with the Epstein files, material that inkash Patel's telling would tell us who the pedophiles are. Kash Patel wouldn't even answer basic questions today about the facts of this case, now that he has access to everything. Here is how and when tensions boiled over when Patel was pressed by Senator Adam Schiff about the Trump administration. Interviewing convicted sex offender, convicted perjurer Ghislaine Maxwell and her transfer to a lower security prison. Afterwards.
- [03:20]
E
Right after she gives this testimony in front of an FBI agent, among others, she's transferred to a minimum security prison not suitable for a sex offender like herself. Who made that decision and why?
- [03:36]
F
The Bureau of Prisons.
- [03:38]
E
The Bureau of Decisions made it in prisons. The Bureau of Prisons decided on their own, without any consultation with Blanche or anyone else, that they were going to suddenly, after this interview, completely unrelated to this interview, completely unrelated to anything she said, move her to a prison not suitable for a sex offender. You want the American people to believe that? Do you think they're stupid?
- [04:04]
F
No, I think the American people believe the truth, that I'm not in the weeds on the everyday movements of inmates. What I am doing is protecting this country, providing historic reform and combating the weaponization of intelligence by the likes of you. And we have countlessly proven you to be a liar in Russia gate in January 6. You are the biggest fraud to ever sit in the United States Senate. You are disgraced to this institution and an utter coward.
- [04:33]
E
I'm not surprised.
- [04:35]
F
I'm not surprised that you continue to lie from your perch and put on a show so you can go raise money for your charade. You are political buffoon at best.
- [04:47]
E
Well, you can take an Internet, take.
- [04:49]
F
It to the bank that the FBI is protecting this country and the state and citizens of the California historic reform.
- [04:58]
E
Internet point of order.
- [04:59]
F
But all you care about is a child sex predator that was prosecuted by a prior administration and the Obama Justice Department and the Biden Justice Department did squat. And what did President Trump do? Bring new charges courageously and what have we done? Chairman said I'm the most transparent FBI Director in History. 33,000 pages of information to you. I challenge you to say anything credibly to the truth. Go ahead and run to the cameras where you want to go now.
- [05:29]
B
But quote, why won't the House Republicans put on their big boy pants and tell us who the pedophiles are? Said Cash Patel. It's where we start the hour with managing editor of the Bulwark and MSNBC contributor Sam Stein. Also joining us, host of the Bulwark Podcast, MSNBC political analyst Tim Miller's here and former criminal division deputy chief at SDNY, MSNBC legal analyst, host of a new YouTube show called Courtside, Christy Greenberg's here. Tim Miller, I have to start with you. What did you think about Kash Patel today?
- [06:04]
D
Were you just impressed with his professionalism there, Nicole? And could you just imagine Bob Mueller or Jim Comey sitting there screaming like just crazed maniac leveling really wild accusations against senators as if he's a reply guy in the senator's comment feed with his eyeballs bulging? I don't know. It didn't give me a lot of confidence that somebody in a very high pressure job who has to make a lot of tough decisions, who has to deal with a lot of incoming, wants to deal with a lot of bad guys, has the temperament to kind of handle that job. I think that there's a good reason to doubt that. And I think that was the most fireworks of the hearing. And I appreciate Senator Schiff. Some of the other Democrats, I don't think were quite as pointed to say the least in their questioning of Patel. But Senator Schiff did a nice job there. But Patel in a bunch of other areas I think was demonstrating to be obviously hiding the ball. And Schiff was asking him about Glenn Maxwell and I think rightly pointing out the absurdity of the notion that there was not a decision at the highest levels of the Trump administration to move her to this Club Fed. I think that's obvious on the merits. There's actually a Republican senator, my Senator John Kennedy, that was asking him about whether there were any other co conspirators with Epstein and Maxwell and Patel gave just, I think, an answer that was so unsatisfactory that even Republican Senator John Kennedy ended his remarks by saying that is extremely unsatisfactory. Have to come up with something better than that if you're going to try to claim that there were no other co conspirators in the Epstein files. So there were a couple of other, I think, interesting things to go over about his management of the FBI. But on the Epstein front, those are the two most significant moments.
- [07:54]
B
I want to head down both those paths. I want to do, though, as I think I always try to do, I want to center this around the real victims who whatever Kash Patel says today, it's not just Kash Patel versus Kash Patel, who had this extraordinary and impassioned plea for Republicans at the time, put on your big boy pants and tell us who the pedophiles are, the folks who are deserving of that answer that Kash Patel once passionately believed in are the victims. Jess Michaels is someone I got to speak to on the show, but also for this week's Best People podcast. And here she is talking about why this all matters outside of our toxic moment in politics.
- [08:41]
C
I'm not just here just for me. I'm here for what happened in the past. And I'm here to say we cannot let this happen again continue to happen. Something has to change. And that feels painful, that there's not.
- [08:57]
B
Even a desire to change something.
- [09:00]
C
There's not even a desire to acknowledge that this happened to the point where they want to do something different.
- [09:08]
B
That's painful. I mean, Christy, this seemed to be where Kash Patel ran into trouble with Trump ally Republican Senator Kennedy.
- [09:22]
C
Absolutely. I mean, this whole thing was such a disgrace. I mean, he was treating a Senate hearing like he was on Jerry Springer and talking about something as important as this sex trafficking case, this network where again, his own Department of Justice has said this was the most infamous pedophile in American history. The idea that he wasn't in the weeds of the movements of inmates so he wouldn't know why Maxwell was moved to a different prison. I mean, that if you take, if you believe that, which I don't, but if you do believe that, then you are not doing your job. You should know why she was moved, should. She is a convicted sex trafficker. And this idea that he goes into whether or not there was credible information that he said the information was limited. The information wasn't limited. There were over 300,000 gigabytes of information. I mean, this was. I mean, there's a voluminous trove of information. And then he said, well, it's not credible information. And then when he was pressed on that by Senator Kennedy, he sort of backtracked and said, well, other administrations made these determinations that there were no investigative leads that were credible to investigate and prosecute. It's like, hold on, you're there now. You are the director of the FBI. What is your determination? You said in your memo that there was no credible information, you know, investigative leads and nothing to prosecute. Like, you said that. So stand behind that, put on your big boy pants, stand behind your own determinations and accept. Explain why that not a two page memo. You're there before Congress. Explain yourself. And the idea that he was hiding behind these other administrations and what other people may have determined, like, you're there now. You need to stand up for yourself and you need to explain yourself to these victims who deserve better.
- [11:17]
B
I just love that you reappropriated big boy pants and told Kash Patel to put his on. I want to show you, Sam Stein, something that seems significant. In the Trump Cabinet's shifting blame game, this was Patel with a new person he's holding accountable, Alex Acosta.
- [11:39]
F
Now, I know that there's a lot of talk about Epstein, and I'm here to testify that the original sin in the Epstein case was the way it was initially brought by Mr. Acosta back in 2006. The original case involved a very limited search warrant or set of search warrants and didn't take as much investigatory material it should have seized. If I were the FBI director, then it wouldn't have happened.
- [12:02]
B
So on that point, the Oversight Committee is going to interview and there'll be a transcript. Alex Acosta on September 19th. I think that's Friday of this week. Sam Stein. But Kash Patel is certainly building up the pressure on Mr. Acosta.
- [12:18]
G
Yeah, Tim and I were discussing this earlier. He ran him over with a bus, then put the bus in reverse and decided to run him over again. It was a notable decision by Patel because they had not at this point brought in Acosta because for obvious reasons, primary one being that Alex Acosta was Donald Trump's labor secretary. This was after he struck the plea deal with Epstein. So it does raise questions about whether Trump himself, why he would hire someone who was the author of the original sin in the Epstein saga. But it's clear for me from that sound bite that you just played that Patel wants to get out from under this, that Acosta is going to play that role for him where he can just push it all on Acosta. And it does raise the stakes for what Acosta says to the House when he does come in for an interview. And if we do see that interview, I'd be very curious to see what he says about it. The other thing that's sort of looming over this as well is that we have this whole Massey Rokanda discharge petition that in a matter of weeks, if the vote holds and this next Democrat is seated, as is expected to happen, they should get to 218 votes that they need to force a discharge petition. So, you know, while there were moments today during the hearing that were very electric with respect to the Epstein saga, the other thing to consider is that we have this Acosta transcript coming up. We have interviews happening with other officials, and then we do have this discharge petition in the weeks ahead that could keep this story in the news cycle.
- [13:49]
B
Tim, it's such a good point. I mean, there's what's happened in the past that Trump ran on making public. His followers voted for him for variety of reasons, but one of them was releasing the Epstein material. And then there's the things they've done since this became an epic scandal where for a time, Megyn Kelly and Joe Rogan and others turned against them. Let me show you Adam Schiff's questioning about Todd Blanche's interview with Ghislaine Maxwell.
- [14:23]
E
Let me ask you this. When Todd Blanche went to interview Ghisanne Maxwell, she said, but did I think these guys were coming for that? I really don't. If you met Epstein, there's no way that this cast of characters, of which it's extraordinary and some are in your cabinet who you value as your co workers and you know, would be with him if he was a creep or because they wanted sexual favors. A man wants sexual favors, he will find that they didn't have to come to Epstein for that. And the next question Todd Blanch, the President's former criminal defense lawyer, asked is not, who in the cabinet? Who are you referring to? His question is, so when's the last time you think you were with Mr. Epstein? When he got a massage. So let me ask you, who are those cabinet members that Josanne Maxwell. Jelaine Maxwell was referring to that.
- [15:21]
F
That.
- [15:21]
E
Were part of this cast of characters associated with Mr. Epstein? Who are they?
- [15:26]
F
The deputy Attorney general took the aggressive step that no one else did and interviewed Ms. Maxwell for two days, and we released the entirety of that Cabinet members. I do not have that transcript in front of me.
- [15:40]
B
I mean, I do. Here it is, Tim. I'll play it for you. I have the audio. Did I think these guys were coming for that? I really don't. If you met Epstein, there is no way that this cast of characters, of which it's extraordinary, some of you in your cabinet who you value as your co workers and you know, would be with him if he was a creep or because they wanted sexual favors. A man wants sexual favors, he will find that they didn't have to come to Epstein for that. Now did some. Okay. I don't know. I wasn't there. I didn't see it. So.
- [16:29]
G
When'S the last time you think you were with Mr. Epstein?
- [16:36]
A
When he got got a massage?
- [16:40]
B
I mean, I think Todd Bland should now launch a conspiracy theory of his own that there's like a missing minute. Because how does anyone who's trained as a lawyer hear this? If you met Epstein, there's no way that this cast of characters, of which it's extraordinary and some are in your cabinet who you value as coworkers, who on earth. I mean, I don't think you even have to go to law school. Who on earth doesn't want to know who in the Cabinet that he values? His coworkers hung out with Jeffrey Epstein. Like, how does that happen? And no one has followed up and asked who those people were until Schiff did that today.
- [17:19]
D
Yeah, I don't know, maybe he was distracted by her noxious fake Mary Poppins voice thing that she's doing there. It's really kind of hard to listen to given what she has been called culpable with. And I don't know that Blanche was even trying to get information. I can help a little bit. Unlike Blanche and unlike Ash Patel, I haven't had any access to the Epstein files. But I could tell you that at least one of the Cabinet members she's referencing is the Secretary of Health and Human Services, RFK Jr. Because he's admitted to being on the plane with Epstein and discussed it himself publicly. It doesn't seem like this administration is very interested in learning any more about that. I don't know anything about it, but I think that just tells you it's just such a blatant example of what type of COVID up this is. They're trying to do whatever possible to kind of check this box to throw some chum into the water that hopefully their base will accept. And they're really struggling. And they're now in this position where it's like they're obviously doing a cover up of Trump's mentions in the Epstein files, which they still haven't shown us, which we know they have in a shared drive. And they are obviously not interested in learning any more about RFK and, I don't know, maybe other members of the Cabinet based on what Ghislaine Maxwell said in that interview.
- [18:39]
B
It's just amazing that right now we have Ghislaine Maxwell making an allegation about members in the Trump Cabinet who were around Jeffrey Epstein, who she says, quote, you, Todd, Blanche, you, Todd, Blanche, quote, value as your co workers. And there's. There's nothing that's been put out and there's not enough access to any of these people to have the press have an opportunity to find out what the answer to any of those questions are. Christy, Tim and Sam all stick around with us. There's some news before we go to break. The suspect in the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk has just appeared in court for the first time. The judge ordered him to remain in custody without bail and will be appointing a lawyer to represent him. The judge also put in a protective order for trial. Charlie Kirk's widow, Erica Kirk, the judge also read the charges again. There are seven counts in total. Prosecutors for the state told the judge that they filed their intent to seek the death penalty for the suspect. The next hearing in this case will be on September 29th. Coming up next for us, we hear from someone in the room during today's hearing with FBI Director Kash Patel, member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Alex Padilla of California will join us after the break. Also ahead, Donald Trump is suing the New York Times. Why? Well, as the Times puts it, quote, for articles questioning his success, end quote. We break down his 15 billion with a B dollar lawsuit deadline. White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.
- [20:20]
A
Hey, this is Jeff Lewis from Radio.
- [20:22]
D
Andy live and uncensored.
- [20:23]
B
Catch me talking with my friends about my latest obsessions, relationship issues and bodily ailments with that of drama that seems to follow me. You never know what's going to happen. You can listen to Jeff Lewis live at home or anywhere you are. Download the SiriusXM app for over 425.
- [20:40]
C
Channels of ad free music, sports, entertainment and more.
- [20:44]
B
Subscribe now and get 3 months free offer details apply.
- [20:50]
A
You know who's surprisingly good with money? Greenlight Kids. The other day, mine stopped to think about the ROI on a bag of chips. Seriously. From getting paid for doing chores around the house to saving up for concerts, Greenlight's teaching my kids how to handle their money.
- [21:06]
C
Green light your kids financial future with the number one family finance and safety app. Try Greenlight risk free@greenlight.com podcast.
- [21:15]
B
Ever felt defeated by cravings?
- [21:17]
C
You're not alone. Henry Meds is here to help support.
- [21:20]
B
Your weight management journey. Since I joined four months ago, I've lost £25 and it has changed my life.
- [21:27]
C
Henry meds personalized compounded GLP1 meds shipped to your door. Take back control with treatments designed to reduce appetite. Schedule a free online evaluation with a licensed provider@henrymeds.com audio and get $100 off your first month. Results may vary.
- [21:41]
B
Not all patients are eligible. Compounded medications are not FDA approved. Consult a healthcare provider to determine if treatment is right for you. Despite the pushback and serious questions, the Jeffrey Epstein files continue to fuel from both sides of the political aisle. The embattled FBI director decided that making a joke today was a good choice rather than answering who was behind the Trump administration's memo that said there is no Epstein client list. That memo was released unsigned in July by the Department of Justice. Here's what FBI Director Kash Patel said today about it.
- [22:16]
D
In response to the blowback she received, Attorney General Bondi also pushed the FBI to review approximately 100,000 Epstein related records.
- [22:25]
E
On an arbitrarily short deadline in March.
- [22:27]
D
And the FBI was directed to flag any documents that mentioned President Trump. Nothing came of that review until July, when DOJ and FBI released an unsigned memorandum stating there is no incriminating client list. Why was this July 7th memorandum unsigned?
- [22:45]
F
Would you prefer I've used auto pen?
- [22:50]
B
I don't know if somewhere, anywhere someone's laughing. Joining our coverage, California senator, member of the Judiciary Committee, Alex Padilla is here. Senator, thank you for joining us.
- [23:02]
A
Thank you, Nicole. Thanks for having me back.
- [23:04]
B
I mean, your, your thoughts about the entirety of Kash Patel's appearance today on Capitol Hill.
- [23:11]
A
Look, I mean, well, just a clip that you just shared just shows how unserious he is about this job, the disdain and disregard he has for members of the Senate as we're trying to do our job of conducting oversight. He's clearly unprofessional. He's in over his head. But we knew this back in January when he came through first for his confirmation hearing. And our worst fears have actually come true. He's absolutely politicized the FBI. Forget the independence of the Bureau and the Department of Justice as a whole. But Kash Patel is simply serving a party of what he's exerting retribution on Trump's enemies to try to please the president and keep his job.
- [23:54]
B
Senator, I wonder if you have any sense that to see MAGA ally senator, Republican senator from Louisiana, Kennedy. So I don't know the right word because I don't want to lift it up too much. He's just stating the obvious. But to see a Republican state the obvious to Cash Patel, that his answers are nonsensical and unsatisfactory. Do you see this moving toward disclosure of all the Epstein files for the victims who have made a pretty concerted effort to ask the Republican women who seem to be moved by their testimony to continue to push.
- [24:35]
A
Right. That disclosure, it's only a matter of time. It can't and should happen. So the question of why hasn't happened yet leads you to the question of what does Donald Trump have to hide? Because if you recall, a year ago, candidate Donald Trump was going around saying, release the files, release the Epstein files. Just a couple of months ago. Oh, we have binders and binders of evidence. And now there's nothing to see here. Something's not right. Something smells fishy Deputy Attorney General Todd Bench visits Gillian Matt Maxwell in prison. All of a sudden, she shifted to a much nicer accommodation. And, you know, she claims that, you know, Donald Trump may be in the clear here. This is all being orchestrated. It is a cover up, and it's only a matter of time before the truth comes out.
- [25:22]
B
Kash Patel's sworn testimony today was that the decision to move her was made by, quote, the Bureau of Prisons. He actually corrects Senator Shift and says it again, the Bureau of Prisons. Do you think that was truthful?
- [25:36]
A
I think it is really, really hard to believe that, you know, Cash Patel is not in the room with Pam Bondi. And if not Donald Trump himself, certainly those protecting him in the White House, making these kinds of plans, making these types of calculations. It's all orchestrated, I have no doubt.
- [25:54]
B
You are in this extraordinarily unique position as a United States Senator. You were wrestled to the ground, forced onto your stomach with your hands behind your back, and temporarily detained by law enforcement. So you've lived with some of the consequences and the stories that we cover here every day in a way that no one else in your body fortunately has in the US Senate. I wonder if you can just take me through your thoughts about the kind of rhetoric you're hearing from the Trump administration, specifically from J.D. vance about what plans they have for speech on the left.
- [26:39]
A
Right. Well, I'll talk a little bit about the incident and what it means for speech and anybody willing to dissent with this extreme Trump agenda. And then let's get back to the FDA and the purpose of today's hearing. Look, when I attended that Homeland Security press conference a couple months ago and ended up in handcuffs for the audacity to try to ask a question, doing my job as a senator to provide that oversight and accountability, I think the administration was sending a message of how they will treat anybody who disagrees with them. I happen to be a US Senator with the question, but think about how many people, literally tens and tens of thousands of people across the country that are being detained, that are being arrested, many being deported without due process because of this extreme agenda by the White House. I mean, that should be a wake up call and post that press conference. I did come back and share with my colleagues, both sides of the aisle, that the Trump administration has laid the foundation to militarize, bring terror to any city in America on any issue. It was Los Angeles then. It's been Washington D.C. of late. And now there's chatter about Memphis, threats against Chicago. He's called out San Francisco New York, others, not a coincidence, municipalities with Democratic leadership. It is a partisan attack, blatant and transparent. Now, coming back to the FBI, because there's, there's actually a serious connection here. How many people have been redirected from their core jobs and mission to this quote, unquote, mass deportation agenda, the quote, unquote, immigration enforcement operation? Well, we know it's not working because the vast majority of people being detained, being arrested, being, etc. Are not the dangerous, violent criminals that they talk so much about. What really should concern people, in addition to all that, is what missions are going uncovered. Because agents have been redirected, this administration has shifted more agents away from their missions, whether it's cybercrime, white collar crime, drug trafficking, etc. To immigration enforcement with, you know, not significant result. More agents being redirected than we redirected after 9 11. Put that into context, Senator.
- [28:58]
B
Five FBI agents, three in a lawsuit and two in a rare public interview with the New York Times today, speak about the political retribution underway at the FBI. Would you like to hear from them? Would you like to understand better what you just articulated what is happening and how they are purging all this expertise, the kind of people that could protect us against threats that when a former FBI agent said on my program today, the chatter and the threat environment is more dire than it was even, quote, before 9 11.
- [29:35]
A
Yeah. So we would absolutely love to hear from them. And again, it's not just about proving the administration wrong or proving the lies that some of the nominees that have come through the judiciary for confirmation spewed at the time, but out of interest for public safety, because with so many people having been purged, we're losing institutional memory, we're losing expertise. And the morale impact on the agents that remain at all levels is hindering the FBI from doing its job, hindering the FBI from keeping us as safe as possible. That's the result brought to you by Kash Patel, Attorney General Bondi, and Donald Trump.
- [30:16]
B
Let me just quickly ask you one last question. The rhetoric coming from Donald Trump is in such stark contrast from the reaction to the tragic shooting of Charlie Kirk, from George W. Bush, from President Obama, from President Bill Clinton, and from any president in the past at any incident of political violence in America. Has, has his reaction and his administration's public rhetoric scared you at all?
- [30:45]
A
Well, certainly it's not shocking, but it's what we've come to expect from Donald Trump. And let me be clear, political violence is unacceptable in any way, shape or form, or form, whether it's from the left or from the right or anywhere. A real leader would be using an incident like this to unite the country. Donald Trump can't help himself. He continues to divide and try to fan the flames.
- [31:06]
B
Senator Alex Padilla, thank you so much for your time today. Coming up next for us, Donald Trump's latest salvo and his years long fight against the press. He has sued the New York Times, four of its journalists, and Penguin Random House, to which the New York Times responded by saying, quote, it will not be deterred by intimidation tactics. We'll have much more on that story next.
- [31:34]
A
Pandora makes it easy for you to.
- [31:35]
D
Find your favorite music.
- [31:36]
A
Discover new artists and genres by selecting.
- [31:39]
B
Any song or album and we'll make you a personalized station for free download on the Apple App Store or Google Play and enjoy the soundtrack to your life.
- [31:46]
A
You know who's surprisingly good with money? Greenlight kids. The other day mine stopped to think about the ROI on a bag of chips. Seriously. From getting paid for doing chores around the house to saving up for concerts, Greenlight's teaching my kids how to handle their money.
- [32:02]
C
Greenlight your kids financial future with the number one family finance and safety app. Try Greenlight risk free@greenlight.com podcast businesses that.
- [32:12]
D
Are selling through the roof like Untuck it make selling and for shoppers buying simple with Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. And with shop Pay, you can boost conversions up to 50%. Businesses that sell more sell on Shopify, upgrade your business and get the same checkout Untuck it uses. Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com podcast free all lowercase go to shopify.com podcastfree to upgrade your selling today.
- [32:42]
B
In his latest attack on the free press in America, Donald Trump announced overnight in a social media screed that he is suing the New York Times and four of its reporters. He's accusing them of defaming him ahead of the 2024 election. Donald Trump is claiming that a series of articles published by the New York Times were, quote, specifically designed, end quote, to undermine his candidacy and disparage his reputation as a businessman. The lawsuit asked for damages of at least $15 billion. The defendants named in the suit include New York Times reporters Suzanne Craig and Russell Ross. Buettner, who's reporting about Donald Trump's finances, was the subject of a book by Penguin Random House, also a defendant. The suit also named New York Times reporter Peter Baker, who reported that Donald Trump has been accused of wrongdoing more than any other candidate for the office of the President in American history. And Michael Schmidt, who published an audio interview with Donald Trump's former chief of staff, General John Kelly, saying that Donald Trump would rule like a dictator in his second term. As the host of this broadcast, it is important today to disclose that Michael Schmidt is my husband. He, along with Sue Craig and Peter Baker, have all spent a lot of time on this program, specifically as well as contributors and analysts on MSNBC and NBC News Network. The New York Times has responded to the lawsuit by saying this, quote, this lawsuit has no merit. It lacks any legitimate legal claims and instead is an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting. The New York Times will not, not be deterred by intimidation tactics. We will continue to pursue the facts without fear or favor and stand up for journalists. First Amendment right to ask questions on behalf of the American people. Penguin Random House has also responded to the lawsuit saying this, quote, this is a meritless lawsuit. Penguin Random House stands by the book and its authors and will continue to uphold the values of the First Amendment that are fundamental to our role as a book publisher. Sam Stein, Tim Miller and Christy Miller are all. Christy Greenberg are all back with us. Tim, you and Christy somehow became family members in my re intro. I'm sorry about that.
- [34:54]
D
An honor.
- [34:57]
B
I would love to be related to Christy Greenberg. Christy, let me start with you on, actually, let me start on the tactic, because to be honest, what CBS and ABC have done is clear the path for a big money settlement, right? I mean, that is the muscle memory that Donald Trump is leaning on when he sues the New York Times for $15 billion overnight. Tim Miller.
- [35:28]
D
It is. And them folding is going to have extreme long term ramifications, them being specifically CBS and abc. And I think it's important to, to talk about in this context. The New York Times lawsuit is just preposterous on its face and it's written in such ridiculous manner. One of the complaints against Sue Craig, I believe, was that she reported that Mark Burnett resuscitated Trump's career and his celebrity, and she's getting sued for libel over that. And they cite in the report that Trump was on WrestleMania before he was back on the Apprentice, and so he was already famous. It's like a completely ridiculous, laughable lawsuit in many ways, including one way where he says he's worth $100 billion, which if true, is a pretty big sign of the corruption in the White House. So that might be a follow up for Sue Craig. But look, here's the thing. The 60 Minutes lawsuit was ridiculous. Was completely ridiculous. They sued CBS under the premise that they edited an interview. When 60 Minutes edits every interview that they do. Nicole, I'm sure back when you were a flack, When I was a flack, I had politicians that did 60 Minutes interviews, that they follow you around for a couple days. They get hours of footage, they cut it down to 60 minutes. It's right there in the name. It happens every week. They do more than 60 minutes of interview and then cut it down. And that was the premise of the lawsuit. Cbs, in a totally craven move, in a greedy move and a corrupt move, wanted to have their merger, or Paramount, rather, the parent company, wanted to have their merger approved. And so they settled on this preposterous lawsuit. And so now you go forward and Trump is emboldened to do things like this. I don't expect that the New York Times will fold in the same way, but it creates a chilling effect across the industry. And obviously, Trump is culpable here ultimately for these attacks on free speech that are unprecedented for the president. But the media companies that folded are almost as culpable as he is.
- [37:32]
B
Kristen, say these proceed and you sit down and you take discovery on, for example, Mike's audio interview with John Kelly. Do you really, if you're Trump, want to depose John Kelly about who said suckers and losers? I mean, John Kelly is recounting things that Trump said that many other people says he's. I mean, is this really what they want, or is it the shakedown that Tim describes?
- [37:58]
C
It's absolutely the shakedown. They do not want discovery. I think we want discovery. I think we want to see this go to trial. My plea to the New York Times would be, do not settle. Do not cave. This lawsuit is ridiculous on its face. I mean, there were multiple points reading it that you would just laugh out loud. I mean, yeah, he's really upset about the fact that his claim is that Mark Burnett didn't transform him into a celebrity. That that's somehow knowingly false. That, you know, the book disregards the fact that his fortune was developed through business genius, creativity, perseverance, talent, authenticity, and other unique traits. I mean, it's. It's a ridiculous document. And unfortunately, if you just cave to him and you pay him some amount of money. It's not about the money. Don't throw money at the problem. It's about sending the message that, that this kind of a shakedown is okay, that, that somehow that there was something true to what he is claiming here, which it obviously Isn't. I mean, again, Mike has an audio interview he can back up. He has sourced his reporting. You have sue and Russ in their book Lucky Loser, which I've read. It's so meticulously sourced. They went through 20 years of his tax information and business records. They conducted, did so many interviews. I mean, you know, let them go to discovery, make them try to back it up. I mean, who, who is Trump going to call? Are we going to get, you know, his sons again, like we did at the civil trial, where essentially Don Jr. Basically put on a timeshare presentation of how great all the Trump properties are and they're all worth, you know, billions? I mean, it was ridiculous. Like, let, let them take this forward. Let them back up their claims. Don't just have them file a ridiculous complaint. Make them actually go into a court of law and have somebody defend this nonsense.
- [39:59]
B
No one's going anywhere because it isn't just the lawsuits. There was a remarkable exchange with ABC's Jonathan Karl today that we want to show you. That's next.
- [40:14]
F
And what do you think Pam Bondi.
- [40:16]
B
Thinks she's going to go after hate speech. Is, is that, I mean, a lot.
- [40:19]
E
Of people, a lot of your allies.
- [40:20]
B
Say hate speech is free speech. We'll probably go after people like you because you treat me so unfairly. It's hate.
- [40:26]
F
You have a lot of hate in your heart. Maybe they'll come after ABC.
- [40:30]
B
Well, ABC paid me $16 million recently for a form of hate speech.
- [40:35]
A
Right.
- [40:35]
B
Your company paid me $16 million for a form of hate speech. So maybe they'll have to go after you. Sam. Tim and Christy are back. Sam. In 2017, none other than Charlie Kirk said that there's no legal basis for going after hate speech. Was an advocate for free speech. A lot of folks on the right are not happy with Pam Bondi's comments about pursuing speech and criminalizing speech. The memo hasn't reached Donald Trump, clearly, who in that clip accuses John Carl of, quote, your heart is full of a lot of hate. Your thoughts on this moment for journalists? Us?
- [41:16]
G
Well, it's a really delicate moment, obviously, for Drillists. I think the purpose of this Times lawsuit is not about necessarily looking back and making these reporters pay for anything they've done, because, as Tim noted, it's ridiculous and meritless. I mean, some of the accusations, putting aside his fame in Home Alone 2 and WrestleMania, some of the accusations are just absurd and they don't form any foundation for a lawsuit like this. But this is really about us trying to dissuade future reporting around him, him and into his finances and into his politics. And it's meant to have a chilling effect on other publications and news outlets, so that when they go about doing the type of reporting that traditionally is done for the President of the United States, they may think twice. And frankly, I worry that that's going to happen. I worry that outlets are going to say, well, do we really need to use that adjective or describe it that way, or do we even need to do that story? Because if we do, we risk getting hit with a lawsuit for, what was it, 15 billion dol. Billion. It's crazy. And then, of course, you see this bleeding in, not just into journalism but elsewhere in that press exchange. He went after a reporter from Australia saying it might affect diplomatic relations with the country because they asked a question that he didn't like. So it's bleeding into the other politics as well. The one upside of this, and I'll stop talking after this, is that when Pam Bondi did utter her comments trying to distinguish between free speech and hate speech, there's a torrent of pushback from people on the right who said, that's absurd, it doesn't make any sense. It's legally indefensible. And Bondi did have to walk back what she said. The problem, as you note, though, is that it's not Bondi who's just saying this, it's Trump who's echoing this. And when you file these frivolous suits, it's clear that he doesn't really see or care for any distinction.
- [43:04]
B
I mean, Tim, you made a great point yesterday on social media that if anyone on the left in American politics had said any of the things that Vance said yesterday, it would be all that anyone talked about about. Sam is correct that the reason the brakes may get put on some of what Vance and Trump are saying is because there's pushback on the right. But why isn't the left even a player in pushing back in terms of how we talk about or think about this stuff?
- [43:29]
D
Yeah, I think it would be smart for the left to take up the mantle of free speech in this moment. And I think that at some level, there definitely was an attempt in some corners of the left to cancel people over speech over the last few years, and I was opposed to that in most cases. This is a different category from that, though. This is the President of the United States telling a reporter, John Carl, who's a good, really good reporter, I bet some Democrats would say he's a little tough for their taste. Too, telling him that he practices hate speech. You had J.D. vance telling people yesterday that if they see a mean tweet about Charlie Kirk that they should call the person's employer and rat them out. And you had Pam Bondi yesterday saying they should go after a hate speech. So look, I am not for hate speech. I am not for, I do not think people, people need to be smearing somebody that was just assassinated. But the idea that the federal government would use the power and levers of the government to target people through the Justice Department or to target people through their employer based on a tweet that they sent or a post that they posted on Instagram or Facebook or whatever, that is deeply chilling. It is anti free speech. And I do think it would be smart for someone to left to really try to recapture that mantle. So there's a big spirit in this country that is cross partisan of wanting to protect people's speech and not wanting people to fear the government going after them if they say something errant on social media.
- [44:56]
B
I mean, it's also in the Constitution. So there's that. Sam, Tim and Christy, thank you so much for spending time with us today. One more break. We'll be right back. Officials at the Federal Reserve have gathered today ahead of a vote on interest rates tomorrow. Except like everything else in Trump 2.0, they're doing so under the cloud of Donald Trump's desperate jockeying to gain control of the board to undermine its independence and get his preferred economic policies enacted. It is sure to be an awkward meaning of the minds after an appeals court ruling blocked Donald Trump's repeated attempts to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook late yesterday, allowing her to participate in today's meeting. And after confirmation process, the U.S. senate last night confirmed Stephen Myron to the board just in time for Donald Trump. The Fed is set to announce its decision on interest rates tomorrow at 2pm Eastern. We'll stay on top of that story. One more break. We'll be right back in the broadcast. You heard from Jess Michaels. She's one of Jeffrey Epstein's survivors. She's also my guest on the Best People this week. Our conversation is available now. Scan the QR code on your screen to watch on YouTube. Thank you for letting us into your homes today. We are grateful. You know how everything's a subscription now. Music, movies, even socks. I swear. If to continue this ad, please upgrade.
- [46:23]
D
To premium plus platinum.
- [46:24]
B
Uh, what?
- [46:25]
C
No.
- [46:25]
B
Anyway, Blue apron. This is a pay per Listen ad.
- [46:28]
D
Please confirm your billing.
- [46:29]
B
Oh, that's annoying. At least with the new blue Apron. There's no subscription needed. Get delicious meals delivered without the weekly plan. Wait.
- [46:36]
D
No subscription?
- [46:37]
B
Keep the flavor. Ditch the subscription. Get 20% off your first two orders with code APRON20. Money terms and conditions apply. Visit blueapron.com terms for more.