← Here's the Scoop
Here's the Scoop
Former AG Bondi Explains Errors in the Epstein Files; A Conversation with E. Jean Carroll’s Documentarian
00:26:50
Loading summary
Transcript78 lines
- [00:00]
A
I think in many ways, this testimony on Bonnie's behalf is an effort to paper over whatever responsibility she may have and to try and cast blame everywhere else, but not on her.
- [00:20]
B
Hey, everybody, and welcome to Here's a scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Bissugan. Today on the show, former Attorney General Pam Bondi is admitting that the Justice Department made quote, unquote redaction errors in its of the Epstein files, but says she stands by the DOJ's work. So what does her House testimony reveal about the Trump administration's handling of the case? Plus, we're going to talk to documentarian Ivy Meeropol about her recent film Ask E. Jean and the DOJ's new investigation into the nonprofit that funded E. Jean Carroll's sexual abuse and defamation lawsuits against Donald Trump. And Supreme Court season is almost upon us. We have got what you need to know about some of the biggest cases. So former Attorney General Pam Bondi testified on Capitol Hill today. The House Oversight Committee interviewed Bondi behind closed doors about her role in the release of documents related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Now, Bondi, who was fired by President Trump last month, has been heavily scrutinized for her handling of the Epstein files. In her opening statement, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, Bondi admitted to, quote, redaction errors in the files, but defended the DOJ's efforts as, quote, unquote, diligent and in good faith. But I want to be clear here. Bondi no longer leads the doj. Todd Blanche is now the acting attorney general. So what were lawmakers actually hoping to get out of her testimony? And are the Epstein files as volatile for President Trump as they once were? For that, I wanna bring in NBC News chief Capitol Hill correspondent Ryan Nobles. Hey, Ryan.
- [02:04]
C
Hi, Yat.
- [02:05]
A
Thanks for having me.
- [02:06]
B
Great to have you as always. Let's talk about Pam Bondi's testimony today on the Hill. What stood out to you about her opening statement in front of the House Committee?
- [02:17]
A
I was somewhat surprised that she took any sort of blame or even admitted an error in the release of the files when she alluded to the fact that there were some mistakes made in terms of the redaction process. But what I wasn't surprised by is any effort to take responsibility for those errors or suggest that the Department of Justice may not be fully complying with this law. I think in many ways this testimony on Bonnie's behalf is an effort to paper over whatever responsibility she may have and to try and cast blame everywhere else but not on her. She's now a private citizen. She doesn't have the responsibility of continuing to release these files or shepherding over the responsibility of the release of these files. And she seemed to be making an effort to try and say, even when she was the Attorney General, that it wasn't her primary responsibility and that she did not play that big of a role. So I don't think anybody, Republican or Democrat, expected this to be all that relevatory of a session. But it seems in many ways they were laying the foundation for future inquiries into how this all plays out, inquiries that may not manifest themselves until Democrats have control of either, both the Congress and the White House.
- [03:36]
B
So. So in that vein of what you're talking about kind of kicking the can down the road, especially with. With Bondi not necessarily taking responsibility, she did tell the House committee that when she was Attorney General, she delegated oversight of the Epstein files to her then deputy, Todd Blanche, who is now Acting Attorney General. Blanche, is he going to be subpoenaed now?
- [03:59]
A
Well, I mean, the committee would very much like to talk to him about this. They have talked to him about it before in broad strokes. I think that their Democrats in particular would like to bring him in a room and ask him very specific questions about this. But I do think if we could go back to the first part of this, the kind of the shifting of responsibility that Pam Bondi seems to be placing on Todd Blanche. She is saying in no uncertain terms that he was the primary person responsible for anything related to the release of the Epstein files and the compliance with the Epstein Transparency act, which is a little ironic given the fact that she bragged about the fact that she had the client list on her desk in the Attorney General's office. And she was the one that was behind that whole influencer moment where the conservative influencers came in and walked out with those binders that were largely filled with documents that were already public. She now seems to be trying to rewrite what the perception is of what went on inside of the Attorney General's office during that period of time. And, you know, even though she may want to place the blame on Todd Blanche, she was still the Attorney General. It was the Attorney General's responsibility to comply with this law.
- [05:08]
B
So I have kind of a controversial question, because the release of the Epstein files was a bipartisan effort, but we just saw Thomas Massie be ousted in the state of Kentucky as a result of campaigning from the President himself. Right. And the President was campaigning against Massie in part because of his Support of the release of the Epstein files. Is his loss a sign that the Trump administration's handling of the files is not going to cost them conservative votes?
- [05:46]
A
I do think it probably is in the back of the minds of a lot of Republicans that are dealing with this and are dealing with the potential backlash and fallout from it. You know, I think there's a difference between support for the president versus support for individual issues.
- [06:01]
B
And.
- [06:01]
A
And in the case of Thomas Massie, the President and his political team did a very good job of at least trying to convince Republican voters that Thomas Massie was a thorn on the president's side on a whole range of issues, not just Epstein. Was Epstein part of that? There's no doubt, but they certainly didn't make it the focal point of those attacks. Regardless, if you're a Republican who needs to win a Republican primary, you are going to have that in the back of your mind, because even if the voters aren't necessarily making that correlation, the president's political team certainly is. And the president's political team has a lot of money and power and strategic expertise in how to win Republican primaries that they could deploy on a moment's notice.
- [06:40]
B
A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration's $1.8 billion anti weaponization fund. And it was created after this kind of extremely unusual settlement between President Trump and the IRS that's going to play out in the courts. But how much pushback is the fund getting from congressional Republicans?
- [07:05]
A
It's overwhelming, Yasmin. And in fact, I would say it is. I mean, maybe you could put the Epstein Transparency act in this bucket, because that was one of the first times we actually saw Congressional Republicans willing to stand up to Donald Trump. But what we're seeing play out with this weaponization fund is that times 10 Democrats have nothing to do with this. The Republicans in the Senate have basically created a roadblock to the finalization of funding for ICE and Border Patrol through the end of President Trump's term. You'll remember this goes back to the DHS shutdown and the deal that was hatched, and they decided to do that through reconciliation, which would allow them to do it with only 51 votes. It's something that Republicans support universally across the board. They've put that on hold because they're so upset. There is a distinct possibility, it's almost an inevitability, that when you do something through reconciliation, that requires an unlimited amendment process and Democrats are prepared to bring to the floor a whole host of amendments connected to this weaponization fund that Republicans do not feel comfortable voting against.
- [08:11]
B
Do you really think they're gonna follow through with that? I guess, especially because this could potentially benefit the president of the United States. And we've seen how his endorsements tend to help Republicans versus hinder them. Everybody wants him on their side.
- [08:26]
A
The argument I want to have there is if you're John Cornyn or Thom Tillis or Bill Cassidy, there's nothing Donald Trump can do to hurt you. He's already hurt you to the point where you're losing your seat. And so in this narrow window of time that we're talking about, where you want this weaponization fund done, where you want this reconciliation funding for ICE and Border Patrol, when you want a potentially hundreds of millions of dollars for a supplemental package to fund the war in Iran, when you want to just straight out fund the government in September, well, you need that gaggle of Republicans to do all of that stuff. And there's not a guarantee that they're going to fall in line.
- [09:02]
B
Ryan Nobles, Happy Friday, my friend. Thank you.
- [09:06]
D
All right.
- [09:06]
A
Thanks, Yaz.
- [09:09]
B
Coming up, the Department of Justice has opened a criminal probe into the nonprofit that fund journalist Eugene Carroll's sexual abuse and defamation cases against Donald Trump. Her documentarian speaks out.
- [09:21]
C
That's next.
- [09:22]
B
And before we play the ads, here is an ad for us. If here's the scoop as part of your daily routine or you want to make it a part of your daily routine, please do go ahead and press the subscribe button wherever you're listening and also tell a friend so you have someone to listen with. All right, we're back in a minute.
- [09:43]
D
Does it feel like your student loans are a permanent part of your life? It doesn't have to be that way. With SoFi, you can consolidate your student loans and refinance with the shorter term, potentially becoming debt free Sooner. Join over 580,000 members who have already refinanced their student loans with SOFI to take control of their financial future. Getting started is easier than you think. View your rate@sofi.com Next Today, SoFi Student loans are originated by SOFI bank in a member FDIC. Additional terms and conditions are supply in MLS 696891 parents have you heard your
- [10:16]
E
kids say, I'm not a math kid? Well, with Mathnasium, every kid can be a math kid. They customize their math instruction so kids who are struggling are able to catch up and get ahead. And advanced kids are challenged to reach higher. Mathnasium makes math fun, so kids learn to love it. Parents say that mathnasium has not only improved their kids grades, it's given them a new level of content confidence in math and in school overall. Visit mathnasium.com to find a location near you.
- [10:49]
B
And we are back with here's the scoop from NBC News. So the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation involving the lawsuits of Eugene Carroll, the journalist who alleged that President Donald Trump sexually abused her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room back in the 1990s. Now, just to review here, in 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming Eugene Carroll, but not for alleged rape, and awarded Carroll $5 million in damages. Then in 2024, a different jury found that Trump repeatedly defamed Carroll before, during and after the first trial and awarded her another $83 million in damages. But she hasn't seen any of that money yet. Trump has repeatedly denied Carol's allegations, and last year he asked the Supreme Court to review the case. So then this week, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois who is running the new DOJ probe says they are not investigating Carol herself, but are looking into the nonprofit that was paying some of the legal costs, which was founded by billionaire Democratic donor Reid Hoffman and outspoken critic of President Donald Trump. One NBC source says the allegations under investigation are possible money laundering, obstruction and conspiracy. Now, throughout both of Eugene Carroll's trials, one woman had her eye on everything, filmmaker Ivy Miropole. Her documentary Ask Eugene about her life before, during and after the trials just came out. And Ivy is joining us now. Hi, Ivy.
- [12:25]
C
Hi. Thanks for having me.
- [12:27]
B
This is crazy timing because your film Ask Eugene just opened in theaters last week. You won a slew of awards at major film festivals over the past year or so. And now you have the doj, the Justice Department opening an investigation into how her civil suit was being funded. What do you make of what is happening in this moment?
- [12:50]
C
Well, I mean, it's kind of part of a pattern that you can recognize with the president. And I just see it as it's driven by vindictiveness. I mean, he sees Eugene as an enemy of his and he is lashing out in the way that he does.
- [13:09]
B
Have you spoken to her since this happened?
- [13:13]
C
They have so much going on between the Supreme Court decision or lack thereof. I mean, they haven't, it hasn't even been accepted or denied yet. So and then this coming, I mean, I text and I say, you know, thinking about you and, and I get, you know, thumbs up or, but that's it.
- [13:33]
B
Yeah. I want to talk about your Documentary. You have made a number of political films. You made a film about sharks on Cape Cod, the Indian Point nuclear power plant. Your first was actually about your grandparents, who are probably one of the most famous couples in US History. Ethel and Julius Rosenberg.
- [13:56]
C
Yeah.
- [13:56]
B
Why did you want to make a film about E. Jean Carroll? What drew you to her as a subject?
- [14:04]
C
Well, you know, it's interesting because it wasn't the big picture that it became. What initially drew me was just reading the excerpt in New York magazine where she told the story of what happened at Bergdorf Goodman. And it sounded unbelievable, but the way she wrote it, it made perfect sense. And I just thought, this is new. We had come out of the MeToo movement. Everyone's kind of saying, oh, the MeToo movement is dead. It had all this momentum, and then it kind of lost steam. And as we know, women are expected to embrace this kind of victimhood and shrink and not be as unapologetic as Eugene is. And so there was something about that. I just thought, we need this, and I needed it. And then I started digging into who she, you know, her background, and I was fascinated. I said she was a gonzo journalist on par with, you know, Hunter S. Thompson. I think even a better writer than Hunter S. Thompson. But she. She just had this career where she. She busted through the patriarchy in terms of her career, but yet she also was accommodating and suffering from misogyny. And, you know, the culture that. That keeps women, you know, from coming forward if. If they are assaulted.
- [15:32]
B
In spite of the president saying repeatedly that Eugene Carroll was just looking for publicity, you had a hard time getting her on board with this documentary. How did you do it?
- [15:40]
C
One thing that Donald Trump had done to her, other than assault her and defame her excessively and put her at risk of being attacked by his followers, is that she felt that what he had done was also reduce her life to those three minutes in the dressing room. And I would say, eugene, it's going to be so good for all of us audiences to know you and know your story, know your history. And I think that that meant a lot to her because she. She resented, and rightly so. And I think her story is so fascinating because she's a member of a silent generation. And she. What she accomplished during the, you know, 80s and 90s and. And early 2000s in, you know, New York City is remarkable. And she had been, you know, kind of reduced to a headline and called a whack job and a liar.
- [16:37]
B
I do want to note, the president has repeatedly denied Eugene Carroll's allegations. So let's talk about Eugene Carroll as a person. What did you learn about her over the course of this documentary? Because I think one of the things that she was criticized for, kind of laughing it off in a way. Yeah. But then, as you mentioned, became a leader in a way of extending, you know, the MeToo movement, a leader in her own right. In coming forward with the piece that she wrote, how did she change from being the person that was assaulted in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 90s to the person that walked into court every day facing the former President of the United States and the potential next President of the United States?
- [17:29]
C
Right. I mean, it's really interesting because I think she's still fundamentally herself and that's why she's the person who could do that. So you get to know that she is this force of nature. She was really a self made woman. People throw that around all the time. But she moved to New York City and made her way in the male dominated world of mag, the magazine world, and, and achieved a lot. So that's still her. But I think what what happened is, as we show in the film, she was inspired by the MeToo movement and these younger women, not just them telling the stories, but also the act of journalism that made it a story, put it all together, and that it was working. There was accountability. Men were losing their jobs. They were getting, you know, they were going to, you know, they were being. So she saw that happening, and I think she was 75 years old at the time. And I like to look at it as like she decided to care about herself more in this very, you know, and I just, I think that was this shift. And she'd been alone for a very long time, meaning not with a partner, but a lot of friends and family and everything. But she, I think, you know, it just was like a perfect storm of things coming together where she found herself open to it. But she was really listening to her readers who kept at her advice column and Elle magazine who were coming to her during the MeToo movement and saying, what do I do? I've been assaulted. I mean, can you, you know, help me? And so she is someone who knows how important it is to share each other's stories.
- [18:58]
B
You wrote not bad recently that you were, quote, unquote, shaking with fear when Eugene was asked on the witness stand when she finally did go to trial if she was taking part in a documentary. You were actually in the courtroom at that moment.
- [19:12]
C
I was.
- [19:13]
B
Why were you so afraid?
- [19:15]
C
Well, first of all, I had no idea it was going to happen, so I just was completely unprepared and I was already kind of laying low. Like, I just didn't want, you know, to be seen as. I mean, we weren't working on the film at that point, and I didn't know if it was going to come back, but I knew that it was a sensitive issue because the Trump team was going to try, potentially going to try to use that against Eugene, because they were always saying, oh, she's benefiting from it.
- [19:42]
B
She's.
- [19:42]
C
And really what they were trying to get to, the ultimate question in that line of questioning was, have you been paid to participate in Miss Miracles film? Or however they phrased it? And of course, Eugene said no. That's what they wanted to know. Somehow she's getting rich off a documentary, which is.
- [20:01]
B
I would love to know how that happens out there. I think that's pretty laughable.
- [20:05]
C
So that's where I'm coming from. So I'm sitting in this curb and intense experience in there. And I must admit, I think I just was. I called it in the op ed the Trump effect, which had already put its pressure on our film in other ways. And of course, I was seeing it in all the ways he operates and knowing that he learned a lot of this from Roy Cohn, who is ruthless and just. And, like I said, vindictive and wouldn't stop at anything. I mean, look, Donald Trump put Eugene's. Like his followers were threatening her with rape and murder relentlessly. So this is all stuff that I'm like, I'm aware of. It's already started. And I'm thinking, oh, my, am I in the crosshairs now myself? That's how it felt.
- [21:01]
B
You mentioned the Trump effect earlier. How did that affect the film?
- [21:05]
C
I mean, I can only guess. It's not like people were saying to me, oh, we're not going to touch this because of that. But I was convinced, and now that you've seen the film and you know who Eugene is, that this was something that everyone was going to want to see. But actually, it was harder for me to get any traction on this than any other film I've done. Even. Even it felt like making a film about a nuclear power plant, which is not the biggest, you know, the best pitch, I will tell you.
- [21:38]
B
People do love sharks, though. Yes, they love sharks.
- [21:41]
F
Sharks were.
- [21:42]
C
Yeah, that was. So. I think, you know, so that. That's one. One way. And then we had a lot of people who were working on the film once we did raise some money. Um, and I had to go very piecemeal and raise. We had to raise the money through equity investors and donations from individuals, because there was no studio or streamer that was picking this up or even giving me development money or whatever. So that's the route we went. Then people started to want to take their names off the film.
- [22:14]
B
Why do you think, you know, the folks that could have distributed the film, the streamers, people working on the film, why do you think they were so averse to distributing and. Or working with being a part of this film?
- [22:28]
C
Well, I think he has created such a culture of fear that it almost doesn't have to be. You know, it almost doesn't even have to be realistic. Right. This idea that's back to me sitting in the courtroom and kind of feeling like, what's going to happen to me? I think, you know, maybe people felt like he, you know, he could go after anyone who's connected to the film, like maybe try to claim defamation against us or just, like, tie people up who don't have a lot of money in court. So there. I. I'm sure that that was part of it. I don't. You know, all I can say about the. The streamers and the bigger companies is like, we don't have a lot of them left. You know, they're all. Everyone's merging and the mergers. When he got elected again, he has real power there to interfere with major mergers. And so I'm sure, you know, they just think it's not worth it.
- [23:28]
B
What do you hope people are going to take from this documentary?
- [23:31]
C
The main thing is to listen to women fully tell their stories. Right. I think just sitting. Just allowing someone like Eugene or giving her the platform in a documentary to really get to know her, that she's not. That there's. There's real nuance there. You know, she's. She's not a perfect person. She's not a perfect feminist. She's not a perfect victim. She's not. You know, she. And she has gone through so much. I just think that especially being able to watch the depositions, so you can really see what women go through if they bring a lawsuit like this. But I also want to think that you. I would love people to come away from this and say you can stand up to the bullies and win.
- [24:24]
B
Ivy, it has been a pleasure, and we wish you the best of luck with your film. Thank you.
- [24:28]
C
Thank you. Thanks for having me.
- [24:32]
B
One more quick break, and when we are back, it is SCOTUS season stay with us.
- [24:40]
D
Does it feel like your student loans are a permanent part of your life? It doesn't have to be that way. With SoFi, you can consolidate your student loans and refinance with a shorter term, potentially becoming debt free Sooner. Join over 580,000 members who have already refinanced their student loans with SOFI to take control of their financial future. Getting started is easier than you think. View Your rate@sofi.com Next Today SoFi student loans are originated by SoFi Bank NA member FDIC. Additional terms and conditions apply in MLS
- [25:09]
E
696891 Parents, have you heard your kids say I'm not a math kid? Well, with Mathnasium, every kid can be a math kid. They customize their math instruction so kids who are struggling are able to catch up and get ahead. And advanced kids are challenged to reach higher. Mathnasium makes math fun so kids learn to love it. Parents say that Mathnasium has not only improved their kids grades, it's given them a new level of confidence in math and in school overall. Visit mathnasium.com to find a location near you I really love the Start Today app.
- [25:44]
C
They care about how I feel.
- [25:46]
B
It's the staff on the app.
- [25:48]
E
It's the connections you make.
- [25:49]
C
Without good mental and physical health, you have nothing.
- [25:54]
B
It tells me how to cook to keep myself healthy.
- [25:58]
C
I look at my app and I'm like, wow, I didn't know I did 7,000 steps today.
- [26:02]
D
Start Today meets you where you are. Download the Start Today Wellness app now on your Apple or Android device. Terms apply. See app for details.
- [26:15]
B
And we are back with here's the scoop from NBC News. So June is right around the corner, which means there are some major Supreme Court decisions headed our way for the past month. My colleague, NBC News senior legal correspondent Laura Jarrett, has been talking to Supreme Court lawyers right here in our feed and discussing some of the top cases before the court this term, like who gets to be a US Citizen at birth, whether trans women and girls can play on girls teams in school sports. And on tomorrow's episode, whether President Trump has the power to fire the heads of independent agencies like the Federal Reserve or the ftc, and why that matters. Here she is talking to Canon Shan McGam, the head of the Supreme Court in appellate practice at Davis Polk.
- [26:58]
G
Say your youngest child came to you and said, dad, I don't understand. Like, why do I need to care about these executive agencies, right? We learn about the president, we learn about the judiciary, we learn about lawmakers in Congress. Like what are these executive agencies? And why do I, why do I care what they're doing?
- [27:15]
H
Well, our youngest child is nine, but he's very precocious.
- [27:17]
G
I picked him in particular.
- [27:19]
H
So I will start with how Henry would have thought about this and what he would have asked. And I think the answer to that, if you think about this in terms of Schoolhouse Rock and sort of basic principles of our government, the basic idea is that it's Congress's power to make the laws. It's the president's power to carry out the laws. When we talk about executive power, we're really talking about executing the laws, carrying them out. And what took place in the early 20th century was that Congress started to create so called independent agencies. And what it was really trying to do was to kind of have it both ways. On the one hand, to say that these agencies would do things that you would think of as exercising executive power, things like bringing enforcement actions against individuals and private parties, issuing regulations, and here issuing civil investigative demands. But yet Congress at the same time tried to make these agencies independent, tried to take them outside the executive branch. And Congress has done that in a variety of ways. But I think this issue of removal has really become the flashpoint for a lot of this litigation.
- [28:36]
B
So tune in tomorrow for more. And if you just cannot wait till then, you can go back in our feed and find the previous Supreme Court Edition episodes from the last few Saturdays. All right, that is gonna do it for us at. Here's the scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Desugin. We'll be back on Monday with whatever the day may bring. And if you like what you heard, subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. And you can also subscribe to our daily newsletter, the Inside Scoop. It is a deeper dive on the main stories of the day that comes out every weeknight straight to your inbox. You can sign up for the Inside Scoop as part of our paid subscription@nbcnews.com.
- [29:23]
F
The Supreme Court just gutted a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. Nothing to see here, just the systematic dismantling of our democracy.
- [29:31]
I
And it won't stop there. This year's SCOTUS docket is full of incredibly important cases. The justices will decide whether Trump can fire it, officials long considered independent, the future of birthright citizenship, whether the government can ban trans athletes from playing school sports, and if mail in ballots will continue to be legal in future elections. And that is only a fraction of the list.
- [29:50]
C
It's a lot, a lot, a lot.
- [29:52]
F
But don't worry our podcast. Strict Scrutiny is here to break it all down with sharp analysis and just the right amount of shade.
- [29:58]
I
New episodes drop every Monday. Listen, wherever you get your podcasts or Watch us on YouTube.