Podcast Summary: On with Kara Swisher

Episode: Inside Trump’s DOJ Power Play & the Future of Special Counsels

Date: October 23, 2025

Overview

Kara Swisher interviews CNN senior legal analyst and bestselling author Elie Honig, whose latest book examines the history of special counsels and the shifting role of the Department of Justice (DOJ) under Donald Trump’s administrations. The conversation delves into the legal, historical, and ethical issues surrounding the DOJ's increasing politicization—especially under Attorney General Pam Bondi—while reflecting on past independent and special counsel investigations. An incisive expert question from Monica Lewinsky centers the abuses and consequences of independent prosecutors, notably Ken Starr, and prompts a broader discussion about the future of justice and accountability in America.

Main Discussion Themes & Structure

1. The U.S. DOJ’s Evolving Role and Vulnerabilities (04:16–05:28)

• Opening Premise: The recent wave of indictments by Trump’s AG Pam Bondi signals a dramatic break from precedent—where the DOJ not only fails to hold the president to account but is actively used to target political enemies.
• Elie Honig: “If we have a president who cannot be held accountable, and can use the power of the Justice Department to go after his political enemies, that leaves us in a very dangerous place.” (04:38)

2. A History of Special Prosecutors and Counsel (05:58–10:17)

• Breakdowns of three historic eras:

  • Ad hoc prosecutions (Grant–Watergate): No clear rules; independent prosecutors were used for appearance’s sake until they threatened “the inner circle,” at which point presidents intervened.
    • Example: Ulysses S. Grant appointing a special prosecutor during the Whiskey Ring scandal only to fire him when he got too close (06:53).
    • “It was all ad libbed.” – John Dean via Honig (06:41)
  • Birth of the Independent Counsel (Post-Watergate): Congressional action following Nixon’s abuses, notably the Saturday Night Massacre and the firing of Archibald Cox.
  • Rise and end of the Independent Counsel Act (1978–1999): Formalized special investigations, but the system itself criticized for lack of accountability.

• Constitutional Tension: Balancing independence with accountability is always fraught.

  • “You don't want somebody you're giving this enormous power to, who can run mad… with no consequence.” (10:33)

3. Special Counsels in the Modern Era—Controversy, Overreach, and Erosion (11:34–13:35)

• Both parties ultimately soured on the Independent Counsel Act, allowing it to expire in 1999 after the excesses of Ken Starr.
• New regulations since 1999 led to only a handful of modern special counsels, with some (e.g., John Durham, Hunter Biden) criticized as inappropriate and institution-cheapening.

“Two of those in particular… cheapened this institution. The Durham case was ridiculous… and I think the Hunter Biden special counsel appointment was ridiculous.” – Honig (12:32)

4. Monica Lewinsky’s Expert Questions — the Ken Starr Reckoning (13:42–20:48)

• On Ken Starr’s Perjury: Starr lied under oath about asking Lewinsky to wear a wire; Honig and Lewinsky discuss why Starr wasn’t prosecuted for this—even as perjury was central to his own investigation of Clinton.
  • “It would have been up to and including [charging Starr]. I think the long-term consequence for Ken Starr is how poorly he comes off in historical memory.” – Honig (16:06)
• On the Exploitation of Personal Testimony: Massive sales and publication of the Starr Report—containing legally compelled, intimate details—prompt questions about intellectual property and personal rights.
• Legacy of Excess: Honig elicits rare admissions from Starr’s team, including that prurient detail went too far:
  • “There’s two points in the report [with] sexual detail… I was ready and asked… what did that have anything to do with perjury?” – Honig (19:02)
  • “‘Yeah, that may have gone too far.’” – Saul Weisenberg quoted by Honig

5. The Fitzgerald-Plame Case: Special Counsel Procedures Reformed (20:58–23:43)

• Transition from the independent counsel model to DOJ-regulated special counsels (e.g., Pat Fitzgerald investigating the Plame affair).
• Bush, at least publicly, supports transparency; the only prison sentence goes to NYT’s Judy Miller, not administration figures.

6. Failures, Lessons, and Fallout from Trump-era Investigations (27:22–35:12)

• Comey: Failed by violating DOJ protocol and arrogating power during the Clinton email inquiry; arguably impacted the 2016 election.
  • “He makes it all up as he goes along.” – Honig (27:45)
  • “At least [Kamala Harris] doesn’t have Jim Comey waiting to jump out and kneecap her.” – Hillary Clinton via Honig (29:56)
• Mueller: Failed by not explicitly declaring prosecutorial conclusions regarding Trump, leaving a vacuum filled (misleadingly) by AG Barr.
  • “Mueller left a vacuum and Barr filled it.” – Honig (32:43)
• Jack Smith: Never had a chance because of delayed appointment––no way to bring charges before the 2024 election. Garland’s hesitancy contrasted with Barr’s proactive (and distorting) intervention.

7. Weaponization and Retaliation in Trump 2.0's DOJ (40:28–46:53)

• Pam Bondi’s DOJ: Explicit political targeting (“Everything is on the table.”), pursuing retributions against Comey, Letitia James, John Bolton, et al.
  • “These prosecutions are absolutely retributive… completely inappropriate.” – Honig (41:29)
  • Bolton’s indictment (over classified document sharing) is considered more genuine but complicated by overall politicization.
• Tactics: Use of inexperienced, loyalist prosecutors (e.g., Ed Martin, Lindsey Halligan), firing and demoralizing career DOJ officials, and public enemies-listing by Trump.
  • “If at some point… one or both [Comey or James] gets thrown out, that would be it.” (42:44)

8. DOJ Resistance and Resignation (47:30–48:39)

• Hundreds of resignations and firings, with outgoing officials decrying the “administration's degradation of DOJ.”
• Honig supports resignations as a principled stand and signals alarm that public pushback becomes “background noise” amid the chaos.

9. Evaluating Charges and Legal Legitimacy (49:17–50:13)

• Honig defends only the federal Trump cases (docs and Jan. 6)—other state-level cases, especially Letitia James’, as overreach and politically constructed. However, "none of that… justifies what he's doing now" in weaponizing the DOJ against enemies.

Memorable Quotes and Moments

• On Accountability and American Character:
  • “A nation reveals much about itself by how it holds accountable its most powerful leaders when it suspects they’ve done wrong.” – Honig (04:23)
• On Starr and Lewinsky:
  • “She’s the only person who comes out of this thing with her dignity intact.” – Honig on Monica Lewinsky (16:25)
• On Comey’s Impact:
  • “Did that flip the election? The short answer is… probably.” – Honig (29:56)
• On DOJ Norms:
  • “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says there shall be a Justice Department and it shall be independent… It’s just the result of decades, centuries really, of good government and sound practice norms, all those things that are being trampled now.” – Honig (05:35)
• On Weaponization:
  • “The irony… of calling this the weaponization Working Group when you’re just over weaponizing it.” – Honig (41:14)
• On Systemic Failure:
  • “There is no perfect system here... but I think there are ways we can improve what we have now.” – Honig (53:16)

Key Reforms Proposed by Elie Honig (52:57–55:27)

Summary of Seven Reforms:

1. Create a semi-permanent special counsel’s office within DOJ, with professional staff and a standing mission beyond presidential targeting.
2. Statutory creation: Presidential nomination, Senate confirmation for added legitimacy and accountability.
3. Fixed term appointments to reduce presidential interference.
4. Explicit rules to insulate against politicized firings.
5. Political neutrality for special counsel staff.
6. Modeled after inspector generals—independent but with meaningful oversight.
7. Real protection against excessive or trivial charges; focus on proportionality and prosecutorial discretion.

Looking Ahead: Can the System Be Fixed?

• Will future administrations use or overhaul the weaponized DOJ?
  • Honig is skeptical, fearing that unless systemic reform happens, cycles of retaliation will continue:
    • “We need a post-Watergate 2.0.” (62:22)
• On Holding Trump Accountable:
  • “The ship has sailed on a prosecution of Donald Trump… even if what's happening right now is absolutely legally corrupt at the Justice Department.” (60:43–62:01)
• On Choosing Prosecutions Wisely:
  • “Just the fact that someone committed a crime… doesn’t mean now it must be prosecuted. You have to bring your prosecutorial discretion into play.” (56:02)

Notable Timestamps

• The State of DOJ under Trump’s AG Pam Bondi: 04:00–05:28
• History of Special Counsels: 05:58–10:17
• Constitutional Tensions: 10:33–11:34
• Lewinsky’s interview & Ken Starr’s legacy: 13:42–20:48
• Plame Affair and Fitzgerald: 20:58–23:43
• Comey, Mueller, Smith case analysis: 27:22–35:12
• Weaponization under Trump 2.0: 40:28–46:53
• DoJ Staff Resistance: 47:30–48:39
• Reforms and Outlook section: 52:57–62:38

Conclusion

Elie Honig and Kara Swisher map the past, present, and (possible) future of the U.S. Justice Department’s independence. They reveal how special counsels, once a bulwark against presidential abuse, have become both overused and undermined. The current era—marked by overt weaponization against political enemies—demands systemic reform. Without it, America's ability to hold the powerful to account remains perilously compromised.