← Deadline: White House
Deadline: White House
“Up you-know-what creek without a paddle”
01:26:36
Nicolle Wallce on the DOJ firing Maurene Comey, a prosecutor of Jeffery Epstein and the daughter of James Comey, Trump facing mounting pressure from MAGA over the Epstein case, and Senate Judiciary Democrats walking out of Emil Bove’s judicial nomination vote. Joined by: Mike Schmidt, David French, Kristy Greenberg, Claire McCaskill, Sean Patrick Maloney, John Heilemann, Maya Wiley, Tyler Pager, and Rep. Robert Garcia.
Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
Nicole Wallace
Deadline. White House is brought to you by Progressive, where drivers who save by switching save nearly $750 on average. Plus auto customers qualify for an average of 7 discounts. Quote now@progressive.com to see if you could save Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates national average 12 month savings of $744 by new customers surveyed who save with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations. The McDonald's snack wrap is back. You brought it back. Ranch snack wrap. Spicy snack wrap. You broke the Internet for a snack? Snack wrap is back. Hi there everyone. It's four o'clock in New York. The big stories we cover on this show on a daily basis are colliding in spectacular Trumpian fashion today. First, there's this Donald Trump cornered by his own voters over his Department of Justice's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, claiming over and over again that the Epstein files are actually a big hoax created by Democrats. Watch. I know it's a hoax. It's started by Democrats. It's been run by the Democrats for four years. You had Christopher Wray and these characters and Comey before him, and it's a bad group. I can imagine what they put into files just like they did with the others. I mean, the Steele dossier was a total fake, right? It took two years to figure that out for the people. And all of the things that you mentioned were fake. So I would imagine if they were run by Chris Wray and they were run by Comey and because it was actually even before that administration, right, they've been running these files. And so much of the things that we found were fake. With me, they found fake files in the Comey files. Oh, and newsflash, Christopher. Chris Wray is now a Democrat. That's probably news to Chris Wray. But then came news that the Trump administration had fired Maureen Comey last night. She's a prosecutor with the Southern District of New York. She worked on the cases against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. She's also the daughter of former FBI Director Jim Comey. On that, the New York Times reports this, quote, Ms. Comey was informed in her firing in a letter that cited Article 2 of the Constitution, which happens to describe the powers of the president. Though the reason for Ms. Comey's firing was not immediately clear, her dismissal immediately raised questions given her involvement in the Epstein related cases that have roiled the White House in recent days. MSNBC has obtained a copy of the email she Wrote to her colleagues in sdny. It reads, quote, every person lucky enough to work in this office constantly hears four words to describe our ethos. Without fear or favor. Do the right thing, the right way, for the right reasons, without fear of retribution and without favor to the powerful. But we have entered a new phase where without fear may be the challenge. If a career prosecutor can be fired without reason, fear may seep into the decisions of those who remain. Do not let that happen. Fear is the tool of a tyrant wielded to suppress independent thought. Instead of fear, let this moment fuel the fire that already burns at the heart of this place. A fire of righteous indignation at abuses of power, of commitment to seek justice for victims, of dedication to truth above all else. Her letter a night and day contrast to what is happening in the Trump administration. Because the one thing the Epstein case and the Epstein files is not is a fake thing or a hoax perpetrated by Democrats. If it were that logic, if you can even follow it, would suggest that Democrats made fake files and then sat on said fake files through three election cycles, two of them won by Donald Trump. It would also mean that Trump's own vice president, his own attorney general, the director of the FBI, and the deputy director of the FBI and Trump's son all were either in on or fell for a hoax. Release the list. Seriously, we need to release the Epstein list. That an important thing? How is it that my father could be convicted of 34 crimes, but no one on Epstein's list has even been brought to light? Who's on the Epstein tapes, folks? Who's on those tapes? Who's in those black books? Why have they been hiding it? 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. And let us know who the pedophiles are. Someone needs to make that into a T shirt. Put on your big boy pants and tell us who the pedophiles are. Amen. Cash. Sudden firing of a federal prosecutor at the center, the very real Epstein prosecutions eroding the rule of law in this country as Donald Trump tries to spin his way out of the greatest crisis of credibility he's faced among his own base of voters is where we start today. Investigative reporter for the New York Times, Mike Schmidt is here. Also joining us, opinion columnist for the New York Times, David French is here with me at the table for the hour. Former criminal division deputy chief at sdny, MSNBC legal analyst Kristi Greenberg's here. And former Democratic Senator, MSNBC political analyst Claire McCaskill is here. Mike Schmidt, the firing of Maureen Comey. Tell us what you know. You know, it's interesting reading that statement that you were reading the email that Maureen Comey sent out. It sounds just like her father. Yes. And look, she followed directly in the footsteps of him. He came up as a prosecutor in that office. That's where he made his name. That's where he made cases. Maureen Comey took on really important, serious as day cases for that office. You know, bringing the Epstein case, bringing the Maxwell case, bringing the Puffy case. Those were three major cases for that, that office. And at a fairly young age, she rose to prominence to bring those cases. And as I sit here today, I can't think about sort of the way that legacy that she's now facing, the fate that her father did. And I also think of her mother, Patrice, who has had to watch her husband get fired as FBI director, first be criticized and blamed for the 2016 election, then watch him get fired in the way that he did, watch him get investigated time and time again, watch him get audited, be with him while he was followed by the Secret Service. And now, after your daughter has climbed to the highest ranks of the biggest office in this country to bring some of its biggest cases, watch her get fired in what appears to be at least something related to who her father was or the cases that she was involved in. And that's just an extraordinarily difficult called awful journey that Patrice Comey has had to watch her family endure on the Trump story. And you know, obviously hits home for folks in Comey's world. You know, they were incredibly proud of the work that their daughter had done. Jim Comey himself sticks out too much like a sore thumb to have gone to the trial, the Puffy trial. But her mother was there and in the courtroom to watch some of it. And now she is sitting in a similar fate to what her father experienced, you know, just, you know, in the first year of Trump's administration. Mike, let me try to drill down on the timing because as you said, she's worked, she's prosecuted some of the highest profile cases, not just in this office, but in the country. Her name's been all over the paper. It wasn't news yesterday that Jim Comey's daughter works at sdny. But what was news yesterday was that Trump is up, you know what, creek without a paddle when it comes to the Epstein scandal. Do you know why she was fired? We don't know why she was fired. What we do know is that this Justice Department and this administration has dipped its hand down to fire line prosecutors in ways that we have never seen before. In Trump's first term, things like this didn't happen. They fired Jim Comey as the FBI director. He was essentially a political appointee that Trump could get rid of. This is different. This is a career civil servant who has been been fired for reasons that are unclear. Many other prosecutors have been fired, prosecutors that worked on the January 6 investigations. Other prosecutors have worked on controversial cases across the country. So. So as we sit here today, we don't know. But what we do know, and this is just this sort of remarkable thing about the Trump story, and I'm not sure where it leaves us, is that at the end of the day, there is probably no one that knows more about what's in the Epstein files than Maureen Comey. The evidence that the government had against Jeffrey Epstein, the the that they had used to bring their case was never disclosed to Epstein's lawyers because Epstein killed himself before that part of the prosecution could go. You know, Epstein kills himself about a month after he's arrested. While he's being held. Maureen Comey, one of the lead prosecutors on that case, knows everything that is in whatever the Epstein files are. And there probably aren't the Epstein files and whatever the discovery and evidence that the government has. And in only a Trumpian development, you know, and something relation to a Comey, Trump has now fired the one or, you know, few people who knows everything that the federal government knew about Jeffrey Epstein. So let me ask you, Christy Greenberg, let's just put the MAGA lens on this story for a second. And two of the things that those leading MAGA figures, including Donald Trump's son, a few of the things they've asked for. Put on your big boy pants and fire the pedophiles will go down as my favorite. But there are some specifics. They wanted flight logs and they wanted a boy. This is what my colleagues at NBC News have reported on what the flight logs in the Black Book show when it comes to Donald Trump. Flight logs show two instances of Donald Trump's name appearing. And again, I'm only raising flight logs because it's one of the things they want disclosed in magaworld flight logs they want released. Some of them were released in 2021 as part of Maxwell's trial. But Trump has denied that he was ever on Epstein's plane. So this might be one of the points of tension in terms of what MAGA has demanded be released. What has become not a policy request, not a platform, but almost a religion for maga. That's one of the things they want. Another thing they talk about a lot is Epstein's black book. Sounds like it's just an address book, but I guess black book sounds more illicit. And in 2015, Gawker published a version of that, and the address book included numerous phone numbers and emails for Donald Trump. Again, I'm not accusing Donald Trump of anything. I'm just speaking to two of the things that maga's demanding. One, flight logs. Two, the black book. We know Donald Trump appears in both of them. What is your understanding of why Maureen Comey was fired yesterday? I don't think Maureen Comey knows why she was fired yesterday. There was no reason given. It's pretty cowardly to fire somebody and not tell them why. That's also, I mean, there are in this country protections for civil servants. And Donald Trump has this view of the executive that he can just fire anybody whenever he wants, and that is not the law. And so I would hope that Maureen Comey fights just like we saw Liz Oyer, the pardon attorney in the Mel Gibson situation. She has filed a suit for wrongful termination. Maureen Comey should do the same thing. You have to give a reason. There is a due process in this country. When you're getting fired from a government job, you should be given a reason. You should be able to appeal that. And so she doesn't know. I have my suspicions just given the timing of all of this. We see Donald Trump taking a ton of heat about these Epstein files and why they weren't released. You have a number of the people in his MAGA base who are upset about that. And one of the people that they've constantly talked about is Maureen Comey. And now maybe he's using her as a fall guy of sorts. But if that's the road that goes down, can I stop you on the logic? So they haven't been released and Maureen Comey is in the government not releasing them. So who's more vested in her staying than Donald Trump? Yeah. There is no logic to it other than to say, look over here, don't look at me, don't blame me, blame her. Just like he's blaming Democrats who weren't even around when this investigation was initiated. December 2018. That was when the Epstein investigation was opened. That's in Jeffrey Berman's book. That's public knowledge. It was charged July of 2019. He died in August of 2019. None of the Democrats were around at this point. I mean, Biden didn't take, wasn't in office at that point. So, you know, all of this is nonsense. And I think he is just trying to deflect blame in any way he can. It doesn't have to make sense. It doesn't have to be true. And again, if that's where he's going with this, if that's what the timing suggests, that he's going to pick a fight with Maureen Comey, he picked the wrong person to have a fight with. She is tough as nails. She is incredibly competent, as you can tell from the email that she sent to her colleagues. She is not one to back down. She is not one to be afraid. So if he wants a fight, bring it on, because I think he's not going to like what happens. David French, you wrote the single best piece in explaining and illuminating. I don't know if illuminating and Jeffrey Epstein's scandal go in the same sentence, but informing my understanding of this. Your piece actually sent me on a journey. I listened to Joe Rogan this week. I watched Hours of Megyn Kelly. And what your piece explains is that the betrayal on cost of living for tariffs or foreign policy even, it isn't this thing they're willing to, I don't want to be dramatic and say die for, but it isn't this thing they're willing to fight for with the passion that they'll fight for Epstein because there's something righteous in their minds about this pursuit. Explain. Yeah, one thing that's important to know is this narrative of wealthy people exploiting children and trafficking children is sort of a core element of the hardcore MAGA base, that one of the reasons why they're in this to begin with is to end child trafficking. And this Epstein case really kind of perfectly fit within their worldview. And there's a small version of the Epstein case, which is the one that we know, which is very, very troubling and requires more investigation and more answers. Who all was involved? What were all of the details of the abuse? How did this person become so well connected? There's a lot we don't know, but I would call that the small version of the Epstein story. A lot of MAGA believes what I would call the big version of the Epstein story, that Epstein is essentially the key that unlocks the reality of the global pedophile conspiracy sort of this, I would call it like thinking man's Q anon conspiracy. And a lot of people who are deep, deep in maga, one of the reasons why they support Trump is they have been promised. They have been told that his poor purpose is to defeat child trafficking. I know this sounds strange to people I know, especially given all of his connections that you walk through to Epstein, what Donald Trump, this is why he was put on this earth. But a lot of people have grown to believe that, and it's one reason why they have clung to him so much. If you, if you think that this man is an instrument of vengeance against a global pedophile ped, you know, a global cabal of pedophiles, you're going to be willing to overlook and forgive a lot as long as he stays on task and on mission. And so this is one of the reasons why a lot of MAGA figures have not fallen in line immediately, because this goes to the very core idea of why they're in this in the first place. And so you've had a number of people who have stood up and you've also seen something very curious, which is Donald Trump tweeting something or posting something on Truth Social and getting just from rank and file users of Truth Social, who, people who are ordinarily his key supporters, just absolutely becoming volcanically angry. And this is not something that we have seen very much of. And the one last thing about this that is interesting, Trump has lied to MAGA a lot over the course of the last 10 years. But when he lies to Maga, he tends to lie to them in ways that they want. He tells them things they want to hear. The Russia investigation never should have happened or the election was stolen. These are things that would reinforce their priors. The deception here, the deception here is not welcome at all. Especially after so many Maga figures spent 2024, the lead up to the 2024 election, just promising all of this transparency, especially after Bondi said in response to a question about the list, saying, it's on my desk for my review. And then later, unsigned memorandum says there's no list, no blackmail. Epstein died by suicide. So this is a situation where MAGA feels lied to on a matter of core importance. Now, let's not get hasty and say that means they're going to abandon Trump. I mean, maybe some people will, but I do think this is a real preview of how vicious, how viciously MAGA can fight amongst itself. And once Trump is gone after this term, what's the future? Because he's brought a bag of scorpions under the same tent and they're going to fight each other. Claire. It's so, I think, humbling and important to acknowledge publicly how much of this story we missed. I mean, I remember when Savannah Guthrie in a town hall asked Trump about QAnon, and he's like, I don't know. I know they're good on pedophiles. I mean, he had this ludicrous answer. And first he tried to say, I don't know who they are. And she said, you know, you're not someone's crazy uncle. Like, you know who they are. I mean, just the whole flirting with this movement. He did it once from the White House as well. Asked directly about QAnon. I mean, he didn't stumble into the alignment with QAnon around this conspiracy theory about a global cabal of pedophiles. He grabbed it. And he probably knows better than anyone, maybe other than Maureen Comey, what, where he's mentioned in the context of an investigation to Jeffrey Epstein in terms of. And I'm not saying anything wrong, but I'm just saying where his name might show up in an investigative file. I read you the flight logs. I read you the contact book. What do you think his next step is? Well, I think he. I don't know, honestly. I mean, I'm supposed to sound smart now and tell you what's going to happen? I don't know. I know this. That 83% of the people who voted for Trump in the latest poll are very unhappy about these files not being released. 83% of his base. There's a bold truth I think we need to embrace at this moment. The MAGA faithful, the most loyal people that have put up with what all of us have sat around in wonderment going, how can they believe this? You know, bleep, bleep. They don't believe him. They know he's lying about this. They know this is not a hoax. I mean, Maxwell sitting in prison for 20 years. You don't sit in prison for 20 years over a hoax. I got news for everybody. You got to have evidence, hard evidence. And, you know, listen, I got a lot I can say about this, but I gotta just take one moment to say that, how badly I feel for this prosecutor. I can tell you prosecutors are a competitive lot. I had an office full of them. And there's a lot of sharp elbows among prosecutors, all for good causes. But. But they work hard. They care very deeply about what they do. And for her to be in the position she was in, in the Southern District of New York. Kristy doesn't have to say this, because I know this in my bones. She was really good at what she did. She was tough and smart. Because you don't get to that place in that office unless you're really tough and smart and don't pull punches and don't do favors for people. You just play it by the book. And the idea that she has been fired so this guy has something to throw to the masses that supposedly connects her with her father and that they were part of a hoax. And, you know, it's just so nonsensical and so tremendously unfair to this woman, this professional. And I hope she does fight, Christy. But I had to get that in there because there's a lot of prosecutors all over the country right now that are going, what is going on here? We're supposed to be the guardians of the rule of law, not political pawns in some kind of BS that the president of the United States is engaged in. I know this. He's in trouble politically over this. And I don't think it's going away. I really don't. And here's what's going to be fun to watch. The people who are running for president after Donald Trump, aren't they going to say, release the Epstein fellas? Of course they are. They're going to say release the Epstein. So this issue is not going away. It's going to be there forever. Courtesy of Donald Trump. No one's going anywhere. Still ahead for us, much more on this story. We'll show you how Trump has twisted himself in his party over and over and over again on issue after issue, describing all of them as a hoax. It's a strategy that until now might have worked. But we'll, we'll show you, we'll ask you what's the question? Is it running out? And later we'll talk with the top Democratic lawmaker demanding answers from FOX News about an interview on this topic with Donald Trump last year. This lawmaker has questions about how FOX edited comments Trump made about Jeffrey Epstein and the files. Plus, Senate Republicans ramming through a vote on the lifetime judicial nomination of a former personal attorney of Donald Trump's, allowing for zero debate on his qualifications. We'll show you how Democrats on the committee responded just ahead for us when DEADLINE White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere today. Welcome back to Listen to youo Heart. I'm Jerry and I'm Jerry's heart. Today's topic, Repatha Evolocumab heart. Why'd you pick this one? Well, Jerry, for people who have had a heart attack like us, diet and exercise might not be enough to lower the risk of another one. Okay. To help know if we're at risk. We should be getting our LDL C, our bad cholesterol checked, and talking to our doctor. I'm listening. And if it's still too high, Repatha can be added to a statin to lower our LDL C and our heart attack risk. Hmm. Guess it's time to ask about Repatha. Do not take Repatha if you're allergic to it. Serious allergic reactions can occur. Get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing or swallowing, swelling of the face, lips, tongue, throat or arms. Common side effects include runny nose, sore throat, common cold symptoms, flu or flu like symptoms, back pain, high blood sugar and redness, pain or bruising at the injection site, listen to your heart. Ask your doctor about Repatha. Learn more@repatha.com or call 1-844-Repatha Pandora makes it easy for you to find your favorite music. Discover new artists and genres by selecting 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. Did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? 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. I think the time has come for the administration to release all of the files regarding Jeffrey Epstein's investigation and prosecution. It's important that we protect the names of the victims. They should be excluded from any disclosure. But but whether or not the facts justify charges, I think that that anyone who participated or was associated with this despicable man ought to be held up to public scrutiny. Shouldn't there be some inquiry into whether or not those people should be exposed to criminal prosecution? Do you agree with that? I just think we ought to get the facts to the American people. I mean I always believed in transparency. And when the President says it's all the hoax, what is he talking about? Well, Jeffrey Epstein's prosecution began during the Bush administration. Continue. He's blaming it on Democrats, the Obama years. It's not a hoax. I know of no reason why this administration, once the victims names are protected, should not release all the all the files on Jeffrey Epstein. David Francis Nobody puts Mike Pence in the corner, weigh in on where the heat and credibility lie right now in MAGA world. You know, that's a really good question. One of the fascinating things that I'm watching happening is the people who are falling in line behind Trump are getting mocked, really, for the first time that I've seen in maga. So Charlie Kirk, for the founder of Turning Point usa, huge MAGA youth organization, basically says a day or two ago, let's, let's stop. You know, I trust my friends in government, and he just got attacked viciously. So people who are saying, hey, let's be quiet and just follow Trump's lead on this are finding for the first time that MAGA will turn on them. That's been the foolproof way to deflect criticism in the past in the MAGA world is just say, follow Trump, but it's not working for everybody. And the other thing you're seeing are some people now who have large followings who are persisting down this line. A Megyn Kelly, for example, a Tucker Carlson, for example. And Tucker's broken with the administration before, but they're persisting in it and they're, they're, they're staying the course, at least for now. And so I do think this is a bigger problem within MAGA than a lot of people thought going forward. Even those who knew this would be a big deal, I think, are being, are surprised at how big a deal, because they're surprised at how deeply embedded within MAGA this sense is, that they're confronting, again, a global pedophile cabal. And so I, I, you know, I think one of the interesting consequences of all of this is you're going to see a lot of bipartisan, bipartisan call to release as much as we can lawfully release. I think Vice President Pence is exactly right. You absolutely have to protect victims. You do not want child sex abuse material online, but you protect the victims and you release everything that can be lawfully released and let the chips fall where they may. And this was the clarion call of MAGA in run up to 2024. I mean, Patel, Bongino, all of these figures, Vance, all of them. And so I think you're actually building towards one of the very few bipartisan consensuses in the United States of America right now, which is, let's see, everything there is to see that we can lawfully see. I mean, Mike, it is the sort of thing that if Trump had a normal relationship with his Justice Department, he could say, look, my independent Justice Department, that I never talked to and my independent FBI director whose phone number I don't even have, trust them. In some ways, he's paying the price for tainting all of them. I mean, Megyn Kelly, to David's point, went on her show and said, well, Pam Bondi's just being directed by Donald Trump. I mean, nobody thinks. No one can name an instance where Pam Bondi, Dan Bongino, or Cash Patel have gone rogue in six months. Before Trump became president, there was this huge post Watergate norm where the President of the United States and his administration should not talk about ongoing criminal investigations, because if they are weighing in on it, it creates the perception that the President of the United States is putting their finger on the scale in one direction or another about a criminal prosecution. Trump being told in his first term not to do this, did this over and over again. And in his second term, they have basically taken it to a new level and have politicized the department in new. In new ways that would go far beyond the first term. But part of that creates this perception problem where you can't trust what law enforcement says because you believe it's being guided by politics and not the law. And the fact. And the reason why a president should weigh in is because a president taints that, because the president is so powerful. And because of that, there's a question. Is it. Can you trust what the Justice Department is saying? Is Pam Bondi telling the truth when she says there's nothing there, there's nothing to release? Well, Trump's base certainly doesn't believe that they had been told over and over again that there was something there. Now, if you're in the. In the media and you. And you look at that, you say, well, why should we accept Pam Bondi is saying, at face value, she clearly is. Is dedicated to doing the bidding of Donald Trump. That's something that attorney generals are supposed to avoid. But she's clearly signaled that she is open to doing that. She has, you know, in her public appearances, shown fealty to the president. And because of that, when she comes out and says something, you have to say, well, is she saying that because that's based on the law and the fact and what's really there, or is she saying what Donald Trump wants and we don't know? David French, let me come back to you. I mean, at this point, Trump, Trump Jr. Vance, Bongino, Patel, Bondi are all bathing in the stench of their own doublespeak. At a minimum, as most generous insult, I guess, who is rising in this moment, that's a very good question. And it's actually unclear because what is unclear is how much of a grassroots reaction will there be at the end of the day. So, for example, one person that I would say has absolutely distinguished themselves as being very independent minded on this is Megyn Kelly. Megyn Kelly has had people on her podcast, such as Ben Shapiro, who is maybe a bit more defensive of the Trump administration, really held their feet to the public fire. And, you know, this is a preview, I think, of coming attractions because, you know, as I've, as I've said, there is Trump is not going to be around forever. There is a battle for who leads this movement next. And so there's a big question that emerges when Trump departs from sort of core MAGA ideas and core MAGA ideals. Will anyone hold him to account? Will anyone carry that torch after Trump? And so what you might be seeing is one of the early previews of that struggle for succession. And on the one hand, you have, say, a Charlie Kirk who's saying, I'm going to trust the administration. Dinesh d', Souza, I believe, is also saying, like, we got to move on. You have a Tucker Carlson saying, no, we're not moving on. And Megyn Kelly, no, we're not moving on. And it is a very much an open question as to how this will work out and whether or not somebody like a Megyn Kelly or a Tucker Carlson is seeing as being on the leading edge of the next generation of MAGA or will be tossed overboard like so many other people who've dared to question Trump. It's amazing how low the bar might be, too. Like, we're going to get behind anyone who wasn't in the Epstein files, you know. And there's your new MAGA primary, David French. It's a fantastic piece. It's informed our coverage all week. Thank you for writing it and joining us to talk about it. Mike Schmidt, thank you for starting us off with your your reporting. Everyone else sticks around. And when we come back with the rule of law at stake. Republicans steamrolled their Democratic colleagues today in the Senate and pushed through one of the most controversial lifetime appointments to the federal court, someone opposed by the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page. We'll bring you that reporting next. An extraordinary moment today in the Senate Judiciary Committee as Republicans sought to rubber st nomination of Emil Bovey, one of the most controversial judicial nominees in history, to a lifetime position as a federal appeals court judge. The vote on Bovey was rushed through despite the mounting concerns over his conduct as a top Justice Department official doing Donald Trump's bidding. Those concerns coming from the most credible sources of all walks across the political spectrum. Federalist Society lawyers, hundreds of DOJ alumni, dozens of former judges appointed by Republican and Democratic administrations, as well as a credible whistleblower. But Republicans on the committee were not at all interested in even hearing concerns raised by Democrats about Bobby. Committee chair Chuck Grassley cut off debate which led to every Democrat on the committee walking out of the vote. And this plea from Senator Cory Booker. This is us simply trying to rush through one of the most controversial nominees we've had under this presidential administration. Sir. God bless America. You are a good man, you are a decent man. Why are you doing this? What is Donald Trump saying to you that are making you do something which is violating the decorum of this committee, the rules of this committee, the decency and the respect that we have each other to at least hear each other out. This is an abuse of power. It's an undermining of the well being and the integrity of this Senate and this committee that I, for so long I have been so honored to be a part of. This is wrong, sir. And I join with my colleagues in leaving. This is a shame. This is wrong. We're better than this. Republicans voted to advance Bovey's nomination to the second highest court in the land despite those protests. But Democrats now argue that it is an open question whether the nomination can move to the full Senate, claiming that several rules were broken. Joining our table, former Congressman Democrat from New York, Sean Patrick Maloney is here. Christie and Claire are back as well. Claire, I start with you because this is your, these are your peeps. What did you think watching this? Some of them are my peeps. I'm not Cory Booker. I mean, you know them all. You know them all. I know them all. So this, I cannot emphasize enough how bizarre. What Grassley did is explain it to people. What you do on the Judiciary Committee is you have a lot of confirmation hearings. And I am not aware of there ever being a time other than when McConnell refused to allow the Merrick Garland nomination for the Supreme Court to even be heard. That was, you know, certainly the height of breaking all the normal rules of the United States Senate when it comes to judicial confirmations. But this, them doing this this way, it really broke something in the Judiciary Committee. And I will tell you, having talked to some of my colleagues on the committee, they're furious and they're broken hearted because even at the height of disagreement, there's a civility and a decorum that goes on in these committees that somehow breaches the differences of opinion on various nominees, whether it's a Democratic administration or a Republican administration. So this is a low point for the Senate Judiciary Committee. So now the question is, what about Tom Tillis? He's not running again. What about Mitch McConnell? He's not running again. You've got Lisa Murkowski and you've got Susan Collins. You've got four votes to stop this clown from joining the Court of Appeals and the Wall street journal and 900 former lawyers of all political stripes, judges, they all agree this is a danger to our courts to put somebody like this on it, who has shown such disdain for the rule of law and who is so steeped in the politics of today instead of the rule. So we'll see what happens. But I notice right now to Tom Tillis and Mitch McConnell and Susan Collins, don't say that you're capable of independence of Donald Trump if you're willing to vote for this guy. Well, the other thing is Senate Republicans who, it's a small group, but you look at the two impeachment votes, they were looking for corroborated witness testimony. There's a whistleblower who brought the receipts with corroborated witness testimony about. And this is the whistleblower isn't a deep state actor, isn't a partisan. This is a career prosecutor who defended all of Donald Trump's immigration conduct. In Trump 1.0, that's the whistleblower. That's who the whistleblower is. So either a Republican or someone comfortable with Trump 1.0 immigration policy. Cuz that's what he did last time. He's the whistleblower against Bobby that they won't listen to. I mean, it's insane. He has documents. Chuck Grassley said, look, this was a hit piece in this complaint is false. But he brought the receipts, he has the documents. And not only that, just looking at the sequence of what happened in particular with the Boasberg case, the sequence corroborates what the whistleblower said that the day before this order came out from Judge Boasberg, the day before Emil Bovey had a meeting of prosecutors. He said to them, these planes, they were going to take off no matter what. And he said, if a court order is going to happen, then we should consider telling the court's fu. Next day, judge comes out with an order saying, do not let those planes take off. If they are in the air, turn around, don't let the people off the planes. What does Bovey do? There's an email documenting the fact that he told the Department of Homeland Security let the people off the planes. He said, f you to the order he did it. I mean, you couldn't be any more clear. So this committee cannot sit there and act like they have any respect for the rule of law. When you allow a nominee like that not to even have a debate about his qualifications, not even to hear from the whistleblower, it is outrageous. And in particular, Senator Tillis, who said that if he had any piece of evidence that this nominee condoned violence against police officers on January 6, he would not vote for him. Here's your piece of evidence. Amel Bovey said those prosecutions January 6, which were four people who were violent against police officers, he said those were a grave national injustice. And what did he do? He then fired the prosecutors. If that's not your compelling evidence that he condones violence, I don't know what is. He should be voting no, and he didn't. All right, we just need to get a break. We'll pull you in on what to do with the. Can we just call him the fu guy to the court? Go anywhere. We'll all be right back. Everyone's back. Sean Patrick Maloney, what do Democrats do? Well, Cory made a good case for how outrageous the procedure was, but I actually think the substance is what always matters to people. And here's the substance on this. This is about getting judges that will behave the way the senators are now behaving towards this. The Republican senator. Yes, because what Donald Trump has successfully done is he has cowed the Republican Senate into doing what they know is wrong. Now he has to do the same thing in the judiciary. And he can't take a chance that people who are just conservative or just in the Federalist Society or would have passed muster 20 years ago or even 10 years ago will be good enough. He wants to make sure that when the next Emil Bove is in the Justice Department saying f you to the judge, the judge says, no problem. And that's what this guy's going to do on the third Circuit. This is about undermining, really the last, still quasi independent branch of government. And that's why it matters. And because of that, you'll have increasingly judges like this do what the president wants and that just like the Senate doing what the president wants is the real issue. And how do you fight it? Well, I mean, you got to shine a light on it. You've got to. I'm glad they walked out. I do think, I do think the way you ultimately stop this is you win the Senate. I do think there are, there are, there are. There are really exciting things happening right now. If you look at the House, if you look at the Senate, you got to get to that election. You got to make sure they don't play games with it. But I do think seats are coming on the map. I'll defer to Claire on this, but I actually think what's going on in Texas without primary puts, Texas at least makes an interesting race. I think what's going on in Maine may still be something worth watching. I think North Carolina, now an open seat and what looked like a very tough map in the Senate, is now looking like it's competitive. So ultimately, the way to stop this is to beat them and to, and to win enough seats that they can't do this nonsense anymore. Last time we were here, we went around and around on how to fight. I have to sneak in a break, but let's pick up that conversation on the other side. You bet. We'll be right back. It's clear that the Democratic, not just the Democratic base, but voters. And Rachel Maddow does a great job highlighting this. They're in the streets. They're ahead of the political leaders. They've taken to the streets. They're opposing ice. There have been protests outside of Tesla dealerships since day one. Elon Musk isn't even in the government anymore. What is your sense of the political landscape right now, and where do you think it's moving toward? Ahead of the midterms. Right. My sense is that we're outperforming some of the special elections that we saw in 2017, in 2025. That gives me hope that you're going to continue to see our base activated and engaged. Watch the Virginia governor's race this year for signs that I think will echo what you saw in Wisconsin and even what happened in New York City, which is an indicator that the base is activated and coming out. But I don't think the electeds are ever going to provide that leadership on the opposition. I think that is great when it's in the street, when it's at the grassroots level, and they'll absolutely be there in spirit. But what I want from leadership is the next set of ideas that define the party and give people reasons to vote for us. Because my belief is that someone can disapprove of Donald Trump, but there's a long way to go before they start approving of us. And what we've got to do is raise the level at which they can find us an acceptable alternative. So we need to be talking about building a million affordable houses and apartment units in this country. We need to be talking about putting a man on Mars. We need to be Talking about a $25 minimum wage in the next five or 10 years for working people. We need to talk about ways that we can support people in this AI economy and have a real agenda for how AI is going to benefit people and will be in control of and it not just its victims. And I just think if we can start talking about real ideas like those and others. By the way, I'd give every combat veteran a muscle, a classic American muscle car when they come home. And I'd start talking to guys in ways that they can understand. And I would start pulling pieces of the Trump coalition back to us because we're for something they like and believe in. And the opposition is doing its job. And that's great. But the victory is going to come from painting a vision of the future that's better than this crap. Well, I hope that's a conversation that we can all pick up. To be continued. It's an important one. Thank you for being here. Thank you guys for being here for the hour, for the day with me. Coming up next for us, the boy who Cried Hoax. The next hour of Deadline White House starts after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. Hey there, it's Kelly Ripa. And if you've been listening to my podcast, we are knee deep in season three. And if you haven't heard it, it's time to get on board. After years of interviewing celebs on camera, I finally get to bring you the real conversations that take place when the cameras aren't rolling. Where else are you going to hear Michelle Obama talk about keeping her girls out of Page Six? Hilaria Baldwin's hilarious reaction to Alec running for office, or Jeremy Renner's lucid hallucinations about Jamie Foxx, nowhere else. It's raw, it's honest, and best of all, it's off camera. And believe me, that's where you get the good stuff. So download. Let's talk off camera with Kelly Rippa now. Wherever you get your podcasts, did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families with green light. 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. Coverage varies by plan. View contracts and exclusions@EnduranceWarranty.com this announcement is to all United States vehicle owners who own a 2003 or newer vehicle with a manufacturer's warranty about to expire or no warranty coverage. With a struggling economy and the cost of living on the rise, Endurance is offering an affordable low cost vehicle coverage plan to the general public. You could be one of millions of drivers who may qualify to have your vehicle protected under this coverage and have all future covered auto repairs paid directly to the repair shop for you. You pick your plan, your deductible and the repair shop. Roadside service, towing and rental coverage is included. United States vehicle owners who own a 2003 or newer vehicle with a manufacturer's warranty about to exp. Protect your vehicle now and save your wallet from costly vehicle repairs. For your free 5 minute quote and to see if you qualify, visit endurancewarranty.com endurancewarranty.com you know it's a hoax. It's started by Democrats. It's been run by the Democrats for four years. It's all been a big hoax. It's perpetrated by the Democrats. I call it at the Epstein hoax. Takes a lot of time and effort. They could look at this Jeffrey Epstein hoax also because that's the same stuff that's all put out by Democrats. But they ought to look into the Jeffrey Epstein hoax too because that's another hoax that's frankly put out by the Democrat pushing, pushing the Republicans and put out by the Democrats. And all my supporters want to talk about is the Jeffrey Epstein hoax. It's unbelievable. If it were a drinking game. Hi everybody, it's five o' clock in New York. He's right about one thing. Jeffrey Epstein is all his supporters want to talk about right now. That is the actual real controversy surrounding the so called Epstein client list. Now whether or not the list actually exists, we'll point out again and again that it was by and large elements of Trump's base, not a single Democrat who so fully embraced and parroted the conspiracy theories surrounding allegations of widespread sexual misconduct among so called elites that were being hidden. Now though, in a deflection that stretches even Trump's ability to mold truth and lies for his supporters consumption, he's suggesting that the whole thing is a hoax perpetrated by some Democrats. Now the word sounds familiar to all of us as it comes out of his mouth you can see him shaping the H, right. We've heard it so many times. For at least a decade, Donald Trump has sought to frame issue after issue that he finds politically inconvenient as a mere hoax, particularly when it benefits him to do so. So Obama's talking about all of this with the global warming and that a lot of it's a hoax. It's a hoax. They didn't know what to say, so they made up the whole Russia hoax. Now it's turning out that the whole hoax is turned around. A brilliant jurist, a man that did nothing wrong, a man that was caught up in a hoax that was set up by the Democrats. I think we had a tremendous week with the hoax, you know, the great hoax, the, they call it the impeachment hoax. Now the Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus. You know that, right? Coronavirus. Think of it, Think of it. And this is their new hoax. There is nobody that feels more strongly about our soldiers, our wounded warriors, our soldiers that died in war, than I do. It's a hoax. With this unhinged insurrection hoax that we're all going through now, but with this insurrection hoax that they're doing. But the insurrection hoax, the radical Democrats are putting our country into a two tiered system of justice because the public understands it's a hoax. It's a scam, it's a political witch hunt. I call it the Epstein Hoax. Takes a lot of time and effort. One of these things is different than the other. While he's employed that strategy of crying hoax to great political fact in the past, this time it doesn't appear to be working. The Jeffrey Epstein scandal. The Jeffrey Epstein prosecution is very real and it's still very much on people's minds, especially in his political coalition. Consider ESPN's ESPY awards ceremony last night and the opening monologue from comedian Shane Gillis. Donald Trump wants to stage a UFC fight on the White House lawn. The last time he staged a fight in D.C. mike Pence almost died. All right, you don't have to do that. It was fine. I didn't write it. Actually. There was supposed to be an Epstein joke here, but as it got deleted, must have probably deleted itself, right? Probably never existed, actually. Let's move on as a country and ignore that. How about the Maples? That's where we start today with some of our most favorite reporters and friends. With me at the table, Puck News chief political columnist, MSNBC national affairs analyst John Heilman is here. Also joining us, former Assistant U.S. attorney, President of the Leadership conference on civil and human rights. Maya Wylie's back and White House correspondent for the New York Times, author of 2024 How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America. Tyler Pager is here. Which book debuted at what number four on the New York Times bestseller list? Congratulations. Let's get it up. Let's get it. Come on, everybody, let's go push that thing up. We need the deadline White House effect here. Let's get that being number one by the time we. We did it once, we did it with you and Josh Dawsey, but let's do it again. I mean, I played the sound in the last hour of what Trump's own son, Trump's own vice president, Trump's own attorney general, Trump's own FBI director and Trump's own deputy director of the FBI have called for from the Epstein investigation. They've called for things like flight logs, and they called it black book. It sounds like just an address book, but Trump appears in both of them. What is Trump's state of panic about his own exposure if this real fervor for transparency is satiated for the base? Yeah, I mean, I think it's become clear that Trump was not so aware of how much this was really consuming his base online. For all of Trump's tweets and truth social posts, most of his media diet is newspapers, cable news, and Fox has not been covering this. This as relentlessly as it has been consuming his base. So I think there are real concerns within the White House about how much this has bubbled up and is not going away. And I think we've seen that because Trump has shown that he does not want to engage on this topic. He's repeatedly asked people to stop, don't talk about this. Let it go away. And I think, Nicole, one of the most interesting things is he sort of had it out for his supporters in one of those posts saying, I don't want those support anyway. Right. Which is reminiscent of when Nikki Haley was running against him in the primary and he said, oh, we don't need her voters. Maybe he didn't need those supporters, but it is hard to imagine that he does not need this fervent base that has stood by him and powered him and his coalition for years. 70% of his base doesn't approve of his handling of the Epstein. I'm not sure who the 30 are that are into it being called weaklings, but where do you think this story is just since the last time we talked about the beginning of the week? Well, I think that the change is. And crucial is this attacking his own supporters. Right. I mean, it's like Trump, you just laid out all of the hoax, the history of hoaxes as a rhetorical device. It could have gone for the whole hour, right? I know we could have, the number of times he's used it, but he uses it because it works. It has worked for him in the past. Right. And that playbook has won a lot of Super Bowls. Right. All of a sudden, the playbook's not working. And as we've seen over the last two weeks, he goes deeper and deeper into that same playbook. It's not working because the game has changed. And the game has changed because in all of those other situations, he was being attacked by Democrats, sometimes being attacked by moderate Republicans or never Trump Republicans. He was never being attacked by his base, ever. Now he's. He's on the field, he's under attack. That feels familiar. It's a blitz that he's facing, but it's a totally different kind of game and a totally different opponent when he's getting the kind of incoming from his base. So he goes back to the playbook and the plays aren't working. So you've seen him march from. I don't know why people are so into this story. It's not important. Just forget about it. To it's a hoax, it's a Democrat hoax on the basis of no facts whatsoever. That didn't work yesterday. The move to, in both on camera and in truth, social, to basically say, the people who believe in this are idiots and I don't want their support. They're stupid people. He's attacking the people who made him what he is today. Doesn't generally work. Doesn't work in business when you attack your own customers. It doesn't work in politics when you attack your base. And. And it's a super dangerous thing for Trump to do, given how much of his power is rooted in that base. And I think it is an expression of frustration. And I think when you understand the nature of the Trump base, which has always been grievance driven, has always been driven by the grievance that there are these people who are above us, who have more money than us, have more cultural power than us, who crap on us all the time, and we're pissed at them. Trump embodied that for a long time. Now he's crapping on them. He's made himself an elite now by being the person who says, we believe this crap. You are a moron if you believe this stuff. I just don't know that many people who, when their hero turns around and is revealed to be just another one of those elites who thinks they're dumb. And we have all pointed out that Trump has lied to his base a lot, but he's never attacked his base in this way. I think it's super dangerous to be doing this politically going forward because it raises the question. Question for a lot of them, I'm sure, is we don't think this is a hoax. He's called all these other things hoaxes. Which of those other things that he called hoaxes might not, in fact be hoaxes? That's going to be the question that starts to percolate among some of the higher IQ members of his base who will start to think about, wait, this is the pattern. Like, maybe we should go back and examine some of those other hoaxes and see if maybe they weren't hoaxes, too. And I think you've made this point since we've been covering the story. Jeffrey Epstein isn't a hoax. He's a monstrous, dead, sadistic sex criminal. So it's not the typical Trump spin where there's a kernel of truth. There's a whopping volcano of truth. I mean, he was a monster and powerful people did associate with him. So in defense of his base not being stupid, totally. The person who's playing with dynamite is the person telling them that all of their fears and anxieties and hopes, which explain why they bought all the lies as part of Trump's base, who really tested their, I don't want to say trust, but the bond, I think, over nine years, and we'd all sit here and say, really? They're going to defend a guy whose supporters beat up cops? Well, it was in service of this, I don't know, purpose or mission that he's now trying to taint or paint over with the hoax brand. It doesn't feel like the right. You know, if Trump is sort of playing whack a mole, it feels like he picked up the wrong mallet. He picked up the wrong mallet, but it is because he has his own personal history of creating the bonds through a bonfire. And the bonfire that he created was every dry twig he could find to create a deep state conspiracy. He pulled and lit a match and threw it on top of that stick. And he just kept adding them and adding them and adding them. And remember, even on Jeffrey, Jeffrey Epstein himself, when it was Bill Clinton who was being implicated, you know, then you had him throwing the dry twig of, well, we don't know if it was dry twig or not, but, you know, the twig of, of. Mm, yeah, something's really wrong there and they're trying to cover it up. And then the fact that every single time and on every single issue. Right. On multiple issues, there's another twig and another match about the deep state hiding things and running things. And that was such a big part of his conspiracy theory driving disinformation campaign that so often was feeding a group of people who did feel not served by government, who did feel like they couldn't trust government. And that reinforcement, reinforcement. But now in every single instance, it was when it served Donald Trump's political future and fortunes. And in this case, he is the person who is now over atop the deep state. One where he has already crafted a Department of justice in his own image. 1. One where I wish that all those who were concerned about the deep state were equally concerned about the fact that they're now literally firing prosecutors because they don't like how they did their career service. Or Emil Bove, who literally was threatening prosecutors, now poised to sit on a bench if this goes the way it should not go, even though he was letting rioters get off the hook for rioting. When you put all this together, all we keep coming back to is now the bonfire that he created is starting to blow back and burn him. Yeah. One of the ways that I was thinking, I've spent a lot of time, you know, I wrestle with how to cover the Trump story. I'm sure you do too. I know you do. And you help us sort of proceed the true victims. And I think that one of my reflections in the last couple weeks has been that we cover the news and we cover the people hurt by his policies. Sometimes it's also important to cover the heat. And all the heat is around this story. And there are a lot of people suffering. I mean, today there are people that have been denied due process, who are being detained. There's incredible reporting. And Trump has always benefited from that tsunami of victims of his capriciousness, his ignorance, and his all encompassing power of the Republican Party. But if you follow the heat, right, if you just have on like the infrared, this is where all the, where all the heat is. And it is akin to if he showed up tomorrow and told all of his voters he's going to straightjacket them and they all have to be injected with the COVID vaccine before they can go back to work on Monday. That is the primal scream you hear coming out of online MAGA voters, a lot of the media figures, at least the ones with enough sort of strength to stand up against him and those interested in their own. I mean, this new media landscape doesn't lend itself to alienating your listeners. And to side with Trump is to alienate your listeners. And I think this is one of the things when you run a campaign and a strategy premised on the deep state, the elites, and then you become those people in those positions of power and you're not able to, to substantiate the theories and ideas that you've been saying on podcasts, on tv, on whatever, for years. At a certain time, it comes to a head, right? And we're seeing someone like Dan Bongino, Kash Patel, they spent years building a base around this idea that had a lot of sway over not just hardcore MAGA supporters, but a swath of Americans. And they had expectations that when those people got into the positions of power, that they would deliver. And now there's this sense of confusion of what were you feeding me? As John was saying for years, And I think that is the. It is much easier. And we're seeing sort of Bongino say, you know, I don't like this job that much. It's much easier to be on the outside and criticize and pontificate about what might be there. But when you have access to real hard facts, it's not as clear cut. But let's be clear, we don't know a lot, right? And here's to your point before part of the reason why this is so combustible is because among the conspiracy theories that conspiracy theorists have followed, this is one that's not off in the high grasp. There's a high grasp version of this, where global cabals of pedophile rings and whatever, everybody in Hollywood and on Wall street is running some giant global sex trafficking operation. That's bonkers. But Jeffrey Epstein, over the course of a couple decades, consorted with many of the most powerful people in the world. He flew them around on planes. We don't know exactly what he did with many of them, but there are proven public associations with everyone from Bill Gates himself, at the center of a lot of conspiracy theories. Tons of people on Wall street, people in the Democratic and Republican parties, to Donald Trump to Bill Clinton, a lot of time with people like that. Prince Charles, Bobby Kennedy Jr. The current HHS secretary who has had a soft spot for Jeffrey Epstein, Alan Dershowitz, people in the law. All of these people have been linked in one way or the other. The question of what's there is really why Something like, I believe, according to this Economist YouGov poll, 79% of Americans, including 85% of Democrats and 75% of Republicans, want to see all the files brought out because, because he was a monster and his tentacles of this monster reached into the highest echelons. At least at a social level. At least at a social level, people wanted to get close to Jeffrey Epstein, to his money, to his social cachet and to who knows what all. And so the notion that there are a bunch of people out there who are like, why would we not release these files at this point, especially given the promises that the administration made, is not an unreasonable demand. And we don't know exactly what we would know. But I'll tell you that just on the basis of the way Donald Trump is behaving, it is not implausible. There is nothing conspiracy theory minded to look at that behavior on the part of a politician and say that is a man who is taking on a lot of political water right now and doing something he's never done before, attacking his own base. That is a guy who either knows or suspects or fears that somehow if things were made public, that he would be at least embarrassed by this them. That's a reasonable supposition. And I would include in that, what is it, 79%, Mike Pence, who is proving that revenge is a dish best served ice cold and release. The vibe, and we're seeing it just quickly from Republicans in Congress, from Democrats in Congress. This isn't just, you know, on the base. This is in Congress, too. There is a clear desire across the political spectrum for more transparency. 80% of Americans want something. Congress will, will look at that and go, I think I want to be on that. Unless it's gun safety. All right, no one's going anywhere. Our panel sticks around much, much more on the bind Donald Trump finds himself in today and his inability suddenly to get out of it. Also ahead, Congressman Robert Garcia, the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, is demanding answers today from FOX News about the way FOX News edited an interview with Donald Trump about Jeffrey Epstein. Congressman will be our guest later in the hour. Devlin White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. President Trump has called this a hoax and he said that it's just like Russiagate. It's a hoax. It's obviously not entirely a hoax, given the fact that Ghislaine Maxwell is currently serving 20 years in prison from her time as an associate and the former girlfriend of Jeffrey Epstein is A pedophile. So you can't say that it's a hoax. Put you in the uncomfortable position of asking if you agree with Laura Loomer. I used to like you, Nicole. I mean, she's absolutely right. I mean, and this goes back to John's earlier point, right? This is, this is a. This was a serious, serious case, which, remember, people are also upset because back when Jeffrey Epstein was first caught, it was the powers that be because of his political connections that got that quietly put away. Sweetheart deal. The sweetheart deal where if that sweetheart deal hadn't been made, there were many, many girls who may not have been groomed into what happened to them. And all of the stories that we were hearing from these real women about the experiences, again, John made this point about essentially being trafficked, being prostituted out to all these powerful people. So she's right, because we had the criminal prosecution, we had the case, we saw the evidence. And, you know, all I can say is this is an administration that has never been on the side of transparency or accountability. So there's nothing new here, except now his supporters want that transparency and accountability and we all deserve it. Or women alleging sexual abuse. 26 credible cases. And here's the other thing that I think is so both interesting, but also equally disturbing. People voted for Donald Trump after hearing a tape about him joking about what amounts to legally a sexual assault. People continued to support him despite all of these women coming forward with credible claims of sexual harassment or sexual assault. E. Jean Carroll wins a lawsuit, a defamation lawsuit, because his disclaiming what a jury found to be credible about being raped. So when we already have this body of evidence that Donald Trump has a very long history and we've heard the words straight out of his mouth around what can only be called sexual improprieties, depending on the degree. I'm being kind because I don't know why. Well, and just. E. Jean Garrett. Sexual assault. And it's sexual assault. It's predator behavior. And Trump denies the whole thing. But. But a jury finds him liable for sexual assault. Right. And sexual harassment is also predator behavior. So you have all these credible claims of predator behavior, and now you have a case in which we have the ultimate predator who then is proven to be a creditor, not just a predator, but has a deeply, deeply involved ecosystem of predation. Of predation. So she's dead. Right, because that's what the evidence has shown us. And if only we could be fact and evidence society. Well, and if only you controlled all the levers of power and can Order the files released. I mean, this is where he's in trouble with his base. Hey, you've got that. You know, I guess Pam Bondi put that white binder out. It said most transparent administration in history. I mean, again, you're really just walking into the Buzzsaw if you're going to do that. And again, there's no world where Donald Trump wants these things released. But Pam Bondi is holding it back because we know that in this administration, the Justice Department is run by the White House. In prior administrations, you might have been able to make a claim that the president's hands are tied because the Justice Department's independent. Here, we know that the entire Justice Department is basically a sock puppet for Trump. So, again, a logical inference is that Pam Bondi, who promised a certain thing and specific things and then went on to say things like, I'm looking up, reviewing these files for on my desk, the list that may or may not exist, although we have reporting that the list is a list, a Stringer Bell style list, does not exist, but the files definitely exist. There's lots of files. And she's basically now all of a sudden. What explains her change of heart on this? Again, a reasonable inference, given the operation of the White House and the Justice Department thus far in Trump 2.0, is that the president has decided he doesn't want those files out. So it's not just that he doesn't think they're interesting or thinks they're a conspiracy theory or thinks they're a hypocrite, hoax or whatever, but that he's actively taken measures to make sure that they don't come out. And again, I say if you're going to do that and you're going to suffer this kind of two weeks now of something that's never happened before, never happened before, his base turning against him and standing up to him when he keeps beating on them, trying to get them to back off. And very few of the Fox News, which really isn't his base, they're way too establishment. Everybody else is basically saying, nope, we're not going to back down because we really believe this and we feel betrayed. He's taking on this water because he has, I guess he has something he's doing cost benefit analysis. Trump understands political cost benefit. He's always understood that with his base. He has been incredibly serious. And you're saying the benefit of keeping them secret exceeds this political peril where he's on the other side of 80, 79% of his own base, of his own voters that seems to be his judgment at this moment. And again, I would say Trump has been very sophisticated about judging the tolerances of his base, what he can get away with, what will cost him, what won't cost him. He's making a real time calculation that all of this incoming, all of this potential fracture is worth it, because whatever's on the other side would be worse. And to avoid anyone inferring that you would just release the files, I mean, he has no issue, I mean, whether he knows it or not, and not to mix up too many film or HBO references, I mean, there's some political death that's already been had and he doesn't seem to know it. Because with the conspiracy theory, it's not a trial where at the end there'll be a verdict and everyone will accept it because they trust the jury system, his basis. He doesn't trust the system. And so conspiracy theory doesn't flame out when the files are declassified. It just grows a new head and it keeps going. Does he think he has a way out? Well, that is the interesting part of this entire conversation. Right. What is the path forward? We saw Charlie Kirk, one of the MAGA online influencers, very close to the White House, said he was going to trust the White House, that he felt his friends were going to do what was best. And it seemed that, you know, he had had a conversation with the White House and was clearly trying to release some of the pressure that the base was putting on the president. But then he sort of changed course again because they killed him. Even I saw it. But then it's not even that. Like, if you look at Lara Trump, who's going out and saying, you know, I think there's going to be more. The president's going to release some more, and there's going to be some more transparency. It is very clear that they are trying to have it both ways, in some ways outside of Donald Trump. And Donald Trump has been clear he does not want to talk about this issue. And so the question that I have and what we're trying to figure out from the White House is how are they balancing Trump's clear desire and express statements to move this away with the hunger from the base for more transparency? And I think it's going to continue to prove to be a challenge because he does not have a lot of allies out there who are on his side. Even someone like Laura Loomer, who has been a steadfast supporter of Donald Trump, she has stood by him. She went into the Oval Office, told him who to fire from the National Security Council. She has, you know, when there was the other times that his base has flared up at him, the bombing of Iran, there was a lot of concern from people like Steve Bannon who did not think that, you know, they thought Trump was breaking his promise of isolationism, of not getting wars. And so at that time, people like Laura Loomer and others came to his defense online. We are not seeing that this time around. And I think one, it's remarkable that this whole thing is blowing up over Jeffrey Epstein files, just to put a point on that. But more broadly that the administration has a real issue of how do you move forward. It does not seem that any strategy they've taken so far, Trump attacking his base, Trump telling his base to move on, nothing's working. And so how much longer does this go? Well, the off ramp that a lot of these people were giving him, Laura Loomer, Steve Bannon, others were like appointed special counsel, essentially kicked the can. You know, and today we see reporting, we saw just the NBC News alert just kicked across where Caroline Levitt's like, he's not going to appoint a special counsel. And just one thing to add on to that. I mean, it's one more thing. There's another off ramp that they're just speeding by or a potential off ramp that many people in the basin in the MAGA media universe was like, Benny Johnson the other day was like, we'll get a guest special counsel. That'll solve the problem. And Trump's like just 70 miles an hour right past the off ramp. The challenge with the special counsel is he has long railed against the appointment of any special counsel. So it's hard to then derail seeing Donald Trump inconsistency. There's never consistency. He always supported special counsel. It's just important to point it out when it's exactly here on earth. 1. Tyler Pager, thank you for being here and congrats on the book. Thank you so much. Number one. Number one. Let's get to number one. 2024 how. Give me the title again. 2024 how Trump retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America. There it is. Thank you. The title is hard to forget. I know. It's the definitive story of the election. Beautiful year, memorable year. Exactly. We'll all remember that year, John. And when we come back, Congressman Robert Garcia of California is our guest. He is one of the Democrats demanding release of the Epstein files. But he's also now asking for answers from Fox News about the way FOX News edited an interview with Donald Trump about Jeffrey Epstein that aired during the presidential presidential campaign. Congressman joins us next. We know that Jeffrey Epstein in 2008 was given a generous non prosecution agreement for sex trafficking charges. Now, that agreement let him continue his criminal activities. And that agreement was offered by Alexandra Acosta, who was Donald Trump's chosen Secretary of Labor. That's not all. We know that Donald Trump and Epstein had a long standing personal relationship. Donald Trump told New york magazine in 2002, and I want to quote this, quote, this is Donald Trump. I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It's even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do. And many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it. Jeffrey enjoys his social life, unquote. That's disgusting. Wrong. And we must inquire more information. House Oversight Committee ranking member Congressman Robert Garcia laying out the facts and the questions he thinks America still needs answers to about Donald Trump's friendship with child sexual trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Today, Garcia pushing even harder for answers, sending a letter to Fox News about Donald Trump's deceptively edited June 2024 interview with the network when Trump was asked about whether he would declassify files related to Jeffrey Epstein. In the letter, Congressman Garcia writes this, quote, on June 2, 2024, in the midst of his presidential campaign, Fox and Friends aired an interview with President Trump in which he was asked whether he would declassify files related to Jeffrey Epstein. President Trump appears to respond, quote, yeah, yeah, I would end quote. However, in the raw footage, President Trump clearly refuses to unequivocally endorse full declassification of the Epstein files. President Trump's campaign actively amplified his misleading edited answer, claiming that he had promised full declassification. It is obvious to the American public that someone is lying and someone is trying to hide something. Considering President Trump's well documented past social ties with Jeffrey Epstein, Fox News selective omission raises serious concerns that the network may have deliberately sought to shield then candidate Trump from any further association with Epstein on the horrific crimes he perpetrated for decades. It is legitimate to ask whether President Trump himself or those close to him may have actively encouraged this withholding of information from the American people. Joining our conversation is Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia of California, ranking member of the Oversight Committee. Tell me if you've heard from FOX News, Congressman. Well, we hope obviously to hear from them soon. I think this is just more information and quite frankly we have so many more questions now. About what the hell is going on with this Epstein case. There is now no question that Donald Trump is hiding something, that his attorney general is covering for him, that the FBI is in turmoil about what to do. And now we're going back and discovering more information that Fox News may have also been somehow involved in the messaging around Epstein. And clearly we know that at the same time that his comments are being edited by Fox and friends as they're being aired one day to another, his campaign is that they're promoting the edited version. And Nicole, let's not forget that Donald Trump settled with Paramount for I think 16 million for because he was upset about an interview with Kamala Harris that was edited. There is more information coming out every day about what is turning out to be a huge scandal and cover up. And we're going to ask the tough questions of FOX and demand that we get these answers. And also we need, of course, these files declassified and released immediately. You write in your letter something interesting on the side that you've put yourself on for transparency and facts. Let me read this quote. You write, it is legitimate to ask whether President Trump himself or those close to him may have actively encouraged this withholding of information from the American people. On June 5, 2025, Elon Musk, the former senior adviser to the president and head of doge, posted on X, quote, real Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. End quote. I mean, again, we see him struggling with his own base to find a way out of this and sort of throwing spaghetti against the wall, blaming Democrats. Everyone involved is a Republican. And the most prominent person suggesting publicly on X that Trump is in the Epstein files recently is Elon Musk. Have you heard from Elon Musk in the context of your letter to Fox News? I have not. But. Well, I'll tell you that we are interested in talking to Elon Musk and there are a lot of, a lot of investigations in the works and conversations that are happening. And I will tell you that we are getting more information every day from all sorts of sources, sources and people that are interested in the truth and transparency. You do not get to spend your whole presidential campaign saying that you're going to release the EPC files, have your own son tweet about it, talk about it dozens of times on air and on social media, have your entire campaign operation promote that you're going to do this for transparency, run this as bar of your big platform and then completely flip on this issue even after he Wrote AG says the files are sitting on her desk. And so I think it's clear to the American public that Donald Trump has not only betrayed his base, he's betrayed the American public, and he is lying. Elon Musk has a responsibility, and we hope that he's willing to talk to the Oversight Committee and to others about what he knows. He suspended a lot of time with Donald Trump and knows a lot of information. And all we have to do is look at past comments from Trump and the Trumps about Jeffrey Epstein. And we know that he was actually close. We know they considered him a close friend. We're talking about a sex trafficker, someone that abused young women. And so this is incredibly serious. The White House has a lot to answer for. And no matter how much they're going to try to divert attention from this, we are not going to give up until those files are declassified and the American public knows the truth about what Donald Trump did, what he knows. And now the major cover up going on right now at the FBI. Let me play Trump's original Fox interview from June 2024. This is the longer version. Congressman, let me play this for you and then help us understand the discrepancy and what you're seeking answers about. Would you declassify the Epstein files? Yeah, Yeah, I would. All right. I guess I would. I think that less so because, you know, you don't know it. You don't want to affect people's lives if it's phony stuff in there, because it's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world. But I think I would. Or at least do you think that would restore trust? Help restore trust? Yeah. I don't know about Epstein so much as I do the others, certainly about the way he died. It would be interesting to find out what happened there because that was a weird situation and the cameras didn't happen to be working, et cetera, et cetera. But I'd go a long way toward that one. The other stuff I would. So explain the two versions. We're having some technical difficulties. I wanted to play them side by side, but just explain the existence of two versions and what the difference is. So that's the unedited version, that's the longer version, where clearly you see Trump kind of maneuvering, saying he might release them, but there's some concerns and we're not really sure what's there. And definitely giving him some wiggle room. In the original version that was played on Fox and Friends, which has an average viewership of about 1.5, 1.7 million viewers. A lot of people watched. He basically that all he says in response to the initial question is that, yes, I think I would. And then it's cut off. And then it moves on to another question by Pete Hegseth, by the way, of all people. And so they only take essentially one sentence of his answer, which was part of that whole clip where he basically says, I'll release the files as I would, and it's cut. They don't show the entire rest of the clip. And then the campaign, the Trump campaign promotes that essentially very short clip they're talking about. They're going to release the, the files. So that we know now know and we have questions. Why didn't Fox actually air. The more nuanced actual answer was Fox and the Trump campaign communicating what were they saying? Is there communication between the two campaigns? So I think this just adds another layer. And you can better believe that we are now reviewing all of the other footage, the other interviews, to really understand what is going on and who's actually hiding what. Congressman, are you able to stick around? I'd like to bring in my panel and see if we can't find that shorter version of tape in a quick break. We'll do. Okay, well, I'll be right back. Don't go anywhere. Congressman Garcia and the table are here. John, I want to read you a little bit more from the congressman's letter about these questions. You. He writes, the question is more pressing given President Trump's efforts to punish Paramount Global, a media outlet, for airing two different clips of an interview with a political opponent. President Trump sued CBS News for editing an interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris and presenting what he claimed were doctored versions to Americans, despite the clips depicting two parts of the same answer that did not substantially change its meaning. This is. Well, this is new, right? Well, look, I will say that the practice of editing interviews and airing one version is a promo and one version in a show is common practice in television. It always has been. And editorial judgments are made. Sometimes they're good, sometimes they're bad. Sometimes we agree with them, sometimes we don't. The paramount thing was a pure shakedown. If you looked at the interview, the portion that aired, I believe, on Face the Nation and the other portion that they aired on 60 Minutes that night, they are almost identical, very hard to tell apart. And to the extent that you can tell them apart, it's not clear that there's one that makes Kamala Harris look better or worse, good or bad. And they don't fundamentally alter the meaning of what she said on the basis of journalistic ethics. What Fox News did is much more egregious than what CBS did in that case. I don't think CBS did anything wrong. And there was no legal basis for that case. Any court in the country, I don't care even who the judge was, the Trumpiest judge in America wouldn't have been able to rule in favor of Trump in that case. There's no basis for it. But that was just a, hey, you want to see your merger go through, Sherry Redstone, you want to have your jets, write me a check. That's all that was. That was a pure mafia shakedown. And of course, in this case, I think that Fox News was unethical in doing what they did. They altered the meaning because really, in the version that we hear, the long version, what Trump's really saying is there. Now. I'm not going to declassify these things. Got to be careful because blah, blah, blah. And the version that they put on was diametrically opposed to that. I still don't think that you should be sued for that. I don't think that the Fox News should have to pay monetary, to have a monetary penalty for that because I get really nervous about that when it comes to journalists and their editorial discretion. But on an ethical basis, their, their night and day. And it does illustrate something, as the congressman says, that that Trump should have to be fed some of his own medicine here. If that's going to be a standard against cbs, you know, we should apply the same standard, at least in terms of how we talk about it, to the Fox News case. Carson, please come back. If and when you hear from Fox News or any of the folks you're looking to speak to, Elon Musk or any of them will stand. Yeah, if Elon Musk calls, we want to hear about that. Exactly. Ask about his $8 million a day federal contracts, too, while you're at it. We have lots of questions. Please come back. John Heilman and Maya Wylie, thank you for spending time with us. You guys, please come back as well. We'll sneak in one more break. We'll be right back. On this week's episode of the Best People, legendary music producer Jimmy Jam takes us inside his childhood friendship with music icon Prince and the sibling rivalry between Janet and Michael Jackson. You can watch the entire conversation with Jimmy Jam on YouTube or download the podcast wherever you get your podcasts. If you listen, send me a note on Instagram or bluesky and let me know what you think. One more break for us. We'll be right back. Thank you so much for letting us into your homes. We are grateful. Hey, everybody, Ted Danson here to tell you about my podcast with my longtime friend and sometimes co host, Woody Harrelson. It's called where everybody knows your name and we're back for another season. I'm so excited to be joined this season by friends like John Mulaney, David Spade, Sarah Silverman, Ed Helms, and many more. You don't want to miss it. Listen to where everybody knows your name with me, Ted Danson and Woody Harrelson sometimes, wherever you get your podcasts.