Epstein Scandal Roars Back on Capitol Hill

Summary

---

The Beat with Ari Melber

Episode: Epstein Scandal Roars Back on Capitol Hill

Date: May 7, 2026
Host: Ari Melber

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, Ari Melber breaks down the re-emergence of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal on Capitol Hill, focusing on the testimony and shifting public narrative around Trump Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's links to Epstein. The discussion includes recent revelations, bipartisan Congressional action, and the broader impact on the Trump administration. The episode also transitions to wider issues, such as DOJ/FBI overreach, attacks on press freedom, and reflections from Barack Obama on Colbert, all set against the political turmoil within the current administration.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Howard Lutnick, Epstein, and New Congressional Testimony

[01:00-06:35] Ari Melber’s Lead Story

• Howard Lutnick, Trump’s Commerce Secretary, is under fire after evidence and testimony contradict his past denials of visiting Epstein Island.
• Lutnick was named over 200 times in newly released Epstein files, with emails and photos confirming closer ties than he'd previously acknowledged.
• Bipartisan Congressional leaders, notably Democrat Ro Khanna and Republican James Comer, are pushing for continued investigation, countering the narrative that Congress is not pursuing accountability.
• The scandal returns to the forefront due to new testimony despite Trump's and some D.C. insiders' wishes to move on.

“We now know Lutnick was named over 200 times in the Epstein files… including the emails arranging the very island visit that we just showed you... Those long, secret emails from Lutnick... have served to publicly shred those men’s past denials.” – Ari Melber (03:16)

2. Lutnick’s Blackmail Claims and Contradictions

[06:36-13:00] Analysis of Testimony and Congressional Fallout

• Past comments from Lutnick allude to Epstein using video for blackmail, including possibly trading them for leniency.
• Lutnick’s story on the number and nature of visits to Epstein Island changed under oath—a significant contradiction with implications for public trust and professional responsibility.

“This guy was the greatest blackmailer ever…My assumption is there was a trade for the videos because there were people on those videos.” – Caller/Commentator, reflecting Lutnick’s earlier claims (06:36)

"He lied in the interview and told the truth under oath… Turns out with a lot of these folks, you put them under oath and they tell the truth rather than expose themselves to criminal prosecution.” – Ari Melber (12:47)

• The top Republican on the panel admitted Lutnick was "not 100% truthful"—an unusually frank bipartisan rebuke.

"If you’re not 100% truthful about going to Epstein Island with everything we know now... while you’re working in the federal government, that is a big deal." – Ari Melber (08:51)

3. Survivor Advocacy and the Pattern of Elite Complicity

[15:55-20:09] Panel Segment: Nancy Erica Smith & Emily Bazelon

• Survivors and advocates argue that repeated lies and lack of consequences for high-level officials are “triggering” and perpetuate injustice.
• Documented timeline of Lutnick’s ongoing links to Epstein after his 2008 conviction undercuts claims of ignorance or one-off meetings.

"It's really triggering that these very powerful people keep lying and lying and lying and there’s no consequences. People as close to the president as you can get in his cabinet." – Nancy Erica Smith (15:55)

• The pattern of Cabinet members maintaining ties with Epstein post-conviction is seen as evidence of systemic wrongdoing and tolerance at the highest levels.

"He has been hanging out with a convicted pedophile since 2008. He was grossed out in 2005? What a liar." – Nancy Erica Smith (16:38)

4. The Broader Political and Media Backlash

[14:47-15:01; 18:31-21:52] Chatter and Analysis

• Even MAGA-aligned media figures are criticizing Trump’s handling of the Epstein scandal, arguing redactions and evasions “look terrible.”
• The scandal is depicted as self-inflicted, with the DOJ accused of covering up for administration allies.

"Current DOJ under Pam Bondi is covering up crimes, very serious crimes." – Ari Melber (15:01)

• Calls intensify for Lutnick’s resignation as lawmakers on both sides label his testimony dishonest and enabling of a “cover-up.”

“Howard Lutnick is a pathological liar who is enabling the most egregious cover up in American history.” – Democratic Lawmaker (20:09)

---

Highlighted Quotes & Memorable Moments

Lutnick’s Contradictory Testimony

[12:20]

"I was never in the room with him socially for business or even philanthropy. If that guy was there, I wasn't going because he’s gross. I did have lunch with him as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation. My wife was with me, as were my four children. We had lunch on the island. That is true." – Howard Lutnick (Testimony Readout, 12:20)

Survivor Advocacy

[15:55]

"It's really triggering that these very powerful people keep lying and lying and lying and there’s no consequences." – Nancy Erica Smith (15:55)

Congressional Calls for Accountability

[20:09]

“Howard Lutnick should resign. That was absolutely mind boggling... He was evasive, nervous. He was dishonest.” – Anonymous Source/Democratic Lawmaker (20:09)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [01:00] – Opening of Epstein story, context around Lutnick evidence
• [03:16] – Lutnick in the hot seat; released evidence
• [06:36] – Lutnick’s blackmail allegations
• [12:20] – Reading of Lutnick's testimony; admission of island visit
• [15:55] – Nancy Erica Smith on victim impact and timeline of association
• [19:46] – Congressional reaction: “should resign” calls and evaluations of credibility
• [21:52] – Discussion on political fallout and Trump’s reluctance to part with Lutnick
• [22:02] – Smith’s call to sustain pressure for accountability

---

Further Discussions in the Episode

DOJ and Press Freedom Under Fire

[23:05-32:09]

• Kash Patel’s FBI launches unprecedented investigation into leaks tied to unflattering coverage, raising alarm bells about First Amendment threats and misuse of power.
• Analysis draws parallel between autocratic approaches and the Trump administration’s attempts to intimidate critics and centralize loyalty in the DOJ and FBI.
• Ruth Ben-Ghiat explains historical patterns—autocrats erode judicial independence and target legal/press adversaries, using institutional levers for political gain.

“For wannabe autocrats, there is no concept of judicial independence or impartiality... Now a journalist is a threat because the press, the free press, is always the enemy of autocrats.” – Ruth Ben-Ghiat (27:09, 28:38)

---

Obama’s Colbert Interview: Ethics, Economy, and Political Culture

[33:26-43:04]

• Obama, appearing on Colbert, draws contrasts with Trump without directly naming him; criticizes presidents having “side hustles” and profiting from office.
• Highlights the economic struggles of Americans under Trump: rising gas prices, debt, and criticism of administration “grifting.”
• Obama emphasizes the historical norm of presidential ethics, saying, “The president of the United States shouldn’t have a bunch of side hustles.”
• He calls for Republicans to act as a “loyal opposition” grounded in facts and law—not simply obstruction.
• Obama’s communication style praised—his use of clarity (“no gobbledygook”) is cited as a model for both Democratic and Republican politicians.

"What I'm more interested in for Democrats is do you know how to just talk to regular people? Like we're not in a college seminar." – Jason Johnson (41:49)

---

Conclusion

The episode spotlights not only the renewed relevance of the Epstein scandal but illustrates the broader crisis of honesty, accountability, and trust in this administration. Howard Lutnick’s testimony, shifting congressional dynamics, and persistent survivor advocacy fuel calls for more rigorous action. The episode threads these developments into wider questions of government transparency, legal restraint, press freedom, and the critical role of clear, ethical leadership, as exemplified by Barack Obama's recent commentary.

---

Transcript

[TextNow App Narrator]

Your phone is your lifeline. Calling your kid to say goodnight, waiting on a job callback, or just sending a meme to your best friend when it's been that kind of day. Wherever life takes you, the Text now app keeps you connected for free. Get a real phone number, unlimited talk and text and 5G data for your favorite apps, all for $0 a month. No fixed contracts, no hidden fees, no panic when bills pile up. Just phone service that's there when it matters most. Text Now. We've got your back. Download TextNow in your app Store today. Wireless plants require the purchase of a sim card. Visit textnow.com for terms and conditions.

[Nicole Wallace]

Subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus content to all of Ms. Now's original podcasts, including the chart topping series the Best People with Nicole Wallace, why Is this Happening? Main justice and more. Plus new episodes of all your favorite MSNow shows. Ad Free and ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, including Rachel Maddow Presents Burn Order. Subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.

[Ari Melber]

Welcome to the Beat. I'm Ari Melbourne. Tonight we're reporting on Americans revolting against Trump over these ongoing high prices as he craters to his lowest approval ever amid the war and the hypersensitive woes of FBI chief Kash Patel. He's turned out to be really probably the largest snowflake in the whole administration as he takes drastic steps to attack criticism, which actually just tends to be part of the job when you run the FBI. So we have that story coming up later. And Barack Obama making waves with his star turn on Colbert. You're gonna see some of that here by the end of the hour. It was of interest to many. You'll hear exactly what he said. But our top story starts right here with that Trump official caught lying about his visit to Epstein Island. You have Epstein in the foreground and the gentleman in blue behind him, Howard Lutnick back in the hot seat today. Congress grilling the Commerce Secretary about those Epstein links and his Epstein lies. He has been forced to address a lot of it after what was a very unusual law that no one at the time expected to come out. But it did. We lived through that. And that law forced out evidence, including the photograph on your TV screen or your YouTube or your phone. However you're watching us. But wherever you're watching us, that evidence is on your screen. That's a photograph that they never thought would come out. They never wanted it to come out. It was only the huge, unusual pressure that made it come out and contradicted this Trump official's claims. We now know Lutnick was named over 200 times in the Epstein files. Those are the ones we've seen, including the emails arranging the very island visit that we just showed you his assistant relayed. It was nice seeing people there. And those long, secret emails from Lutnick and his team and other Trump allies like Elon Musk have served to publicly shred those men's past denials. And so, even by the low standards in D.C. today, it was too much. As we showed you in our beat case timeline, which started with the missing video and Ghislaine Maxwell, but ultimately moved on to include, over on the right, Mr. Musk and Mr. Lutnick, and Lutnick's blackmail claims, which I'll mention in a moment, all of that came out only because the new evidence. And while Trump and his Cabinet would like those past evidence dumps to be the end of it, some in Congress have pressed on. Which leads us to this scene you have today. Mr. Lutnick there being escorted in for private testimony before the House Oversight Committee. And we'll tell you what we're learning about that. But before I go any further, some might wonder, well, how is Jeffrey Epstein back in the news tonight, months after the files came out amid this war and the gas crunch and other big news developments, Donald Trump certainly doesn't want this to be the top story again. And part of the answer has been something that is not only unusual, but really cuts against the narratives that we hear so much. There's a lot of simple narratives out there. Some of them are true. When you hear the narrative that Wall street and big business and big money controls too much of your government, no matter which party is in charge, that's kind of a. A macro narrative, I would say, that has a lot of evidence of truth behind it. But there are other narratives that simplify and sand things down, like the idea that everyone in Congress is on the take, nobody's doing anything. That's actually not the case. It's a little more nuanced. And so I have the men you see up on your screen because they are part of a bipartisan push to follow the leads from those Epstein files that Congress forced out. You can get the docs and everyone can have their day reading about it. But if that's all it was, then that's not really a lot of accountability. It's certainly not a lot of actual investigative information to come out. If you Just drop it all. And yet Democrat Ro Khanna, Republican James Comer have pushed to follow up on those documents to use the actual powers of Congress, this co equal branch even, and perhaps especially when Donald Trump would rather they didn't. Now, there are still differences between those men and the parties, including about which interviews are prioritized, taped and broadcast. But let's be clear. Some members, including some Republicans, are still staying on this issue, which is why it's back in the news tonight with new testimony. Even if the White House wishes it worked, this is coming over Trump's objections and over the objections, frankly, of a lot of D.C. insiders, including some Democratic figures like a former treasury secretary, Larry Summers, who's been ousted from his post. He was largely a kind of a centrist Democrat in several administrations, those type of elites. And of course, a lot of the Trump officials would like to just wind this down. Well, it's not winding down tonight on Capitol Hill. And pressing Lutnik is actually key, given that. We also know that Trump's DOJ dropped the ball on things that Lutnick was saying in public. He was sounding off about how Epstein, his former neighbor, might use videos or quote, blackmail against government officials. And if that's true, it would mean against fellow Trump officials and Trump officials in the first term, who of course were dealing with Epstein as a defendant. Now, that pitted Lutnick against people like then AG Bondi, who had claimed there was never any blackmail and she'll be up for testimony soon. There's also news on that tonight. But here's the context of that past Lutnick claim.

[Caller/Commentator]

This guy was the greatest blackmailer ever. I assume way back when they traded those videos in exchange for him getting that 18 month sentence which allowed him to have visits. Must have been a trade. So my assumption, I have no knowledge, but my assumption is there was a trade for the videos because there were people on those videos.

[Ari Melber]

There's a lot going on in there. But at bottom, at its core claim, and we're not reporting that is true or fact checked tonight, we're reporting that a top Trump official said it at one point in time. But what he alleges is a type of government wrongdoing, possible crime if it includes blackmail or trade in government services. I mean, people could go to jail for that. And he's referencing a deal that was struck by a later Trump official, Alex Acosta. So the allegations of blackmail and dirty dealing to protect Epstein over alleged videos is coming from inside the Trump cabinet. Now, that's just where we started I told you I'd update you on what's happening. Here are the reports from inside Lutnick's session today. There was a suggestion that he now is backpedaling that he only met with his former neighbor Epstein three times total, that he didn't see him with young women. And yet he at the time felt unsettled to be invited to Epstein's island. But he went, as we showed you. Lawmakers noting this is a changing story at best. Democrats suggesting Republicans wanted to avoid testimony video of what they would expect to be a tough interview for the Trump Cabinet. Well, now we know why that interview was not videotaped. If Donald Trump had seen the video transcript, he would have fired Howard Lutnick. It was really embarrassing. It was just contortions and lies and no acknowledgement that he misled the American public. The top Republican on the panel, which is the counterpart there of Mr. Khanna, added that Lutnick was not 100% truthful about that key point of whether you visit the island. And that's not like a minor thing like I didn't remember whether it was coffee or lunch. If you're not 100% truthful about going to Epstein island with everything we know now and you lie about it in public while you're working in the federal government, that is a big deal. Now, like others caught up in the Epstein saga, it stokes the larger question, and I'm not trying to be unfair. It does stoke the question, why did you lie about going to the island? Why continue the problem for years? Was there a reason? Maybe there was no reason and he's just a bad liar. Still a problem to lie while you're serving the federal government. But maybe, and this would have to be looked into, maybe there was a reason because that's the whole thing. Lutlik lied about this for so long and didn't face consequences within the Trump administration. We'll let the American people judge whether the credibility was damaged or not. At the end of the day, I haven't seen wrongdoing in the email correspondence, but he wasn't 100% truthful with whether he or not he had been on the island. He was not 100% truthful. That's the Republican side there. And again, as I said, counter to some of the narratives that were told, whenever you think of how Republicans or Donald Trump has handled the Epstein issue, the voice you just heard is of a top Republican who did push to get this testimony and is saying, straight up, you got Trump officials still being not 100% truthful. Which might be their sort of politically sanitized or PC version of saying he's lying. Now, I also want to be clear. It is true that the authorities have not suggested criminal wrongdoing by Lutnick. Done cash that out as the current state of play about the authorities. But a top official lying about his own personal dealings with this deceased sex trafficker is a type of professional wrongdoing in office. It's exactly what the Senate vets when advising and consenting to nominees under our Constitution. Are they competent? Are they truthful? Will they uphold the Constitution? Will they lie to the public or the government about matters of import, not lunch or coffee, but important matters, as this individual did while you paid his salary with your tax dollars, which might have been better spent on your gas? This is very recent. We're not dredging up just the old thing. If you had just the old thing and you said, oh, that was a mistake, didn't know about it, then let me be honest, let me be helpful to everyone looking for the truth, including the survivors, that might be a very different response. That's not what happened. Lutnick was being compensated by tax dollars. He's working for a party which claimed and ran in 2024 on getting to the bottom of the Epstein crime spree, not hiring and then maintaining officials like Mr. Ludnick, who still has Donald Trump's backing, to lie to the public and misrepresent Epstein evidence that was inside the DOJ's possession to obfuscate its own supposed probe. Because if the government is trying to get to the bottom of whether there was blackmail or other misconduct in the past, sweetheart deal that Epstein got, it's a problem if its current officials are lying about said evidence. Here's some of the contradiction of his own personal history, Lutnick going to the island and his dealings with Epstein, which both members of the committee on the left and the right, both parties mention with regard to his lack of veracity today.

[Caller/Commentator]

I was never in the room with him socially for business or even philanthropy. If that guy was there, I wasn't going because he's gross. I did have lunch with him as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation. My wife was with me, as were my four children. We had lunch on the island. That is true.

[Ari Melber]

That is true. So he was lying. He lied in the interview and told the truth under oath. And for anyone who gets cynical and says they get away with everything, turns out with a lot of these folks, you put them under oath and they tell the truth. Rather than expose themselves to criminal prosecution. I don't think Mr. Lutnick is worried about this DOJ which had his evidence and didn't ever publicize it until the law made them. I don't think he's worried about this DOJ charging him for lying about that to Congress. He must be worried that things could change real soon. Now, context in other administrations, in both parties, Cabinet officials have been removed for less than the lies about the sex trafficker that I just showed you that Mr. Lutnick lied about. Now, there are calls for Lutnick's removal. Others have been ousted from positions based on their ties to Epstein and other alleged misconduct or misleading statements. Again, not everyone here is necessarily facing any allegation of criminal wrongdoing, but we have meticulously shown that they've been ousted from jobs or faced civil subpoenas. Testimony demanded, a type of accountability that Lutnick has not faced as of tonight. Now, some Trump allies claimed that turning the story away from Epstein over the last few weeks. If you notice, this story has not been front burner the last few weeks. That turning it from Epstein to anything, anything would help Trump remember that. I'm sure you've heard about that, but that hasn't actually been the case if the new thing is this costly, flailing war. And so for people who inhabit the MAGA media discourse, which has proven to be influential on the right and part of the center, keep in mind there's been a series of Trump criticisms from major MAGA voices who have been supportive of Trump for years. And it really picked up steam late last year around Epstein and has continued up through this week. And it includes the objections to what are seen as both Trump's failures and lies about both Epstein and Iran.

[Commentator 1]

How come you redact some people and you don't redact other people? Like, what is this? This is not good. None of this is good for this administration. It looks terrible.

[Commentator 2]

It's the way they've handled the scandal has been so bad.

[Ari Melber]

Completely agree. This is self inflicted. Current DOJ under Pam Bondi is covering up crimes, very serious crimes.

[Commentator 1]

It looks terrible. It looks terrible for Trump when he was saying that none of this was real. This is all a hoax. This is not a hoax.

[Ari Melber]

There is something there and it's being

[Commentator 3]

covered up and the president blessed it.

[Ari Melber]

There's something there. And this is part of the cratering of Trump. It's not like the no Kings movement and the resistance or the immigration opponents. The ICE opponents have changed Trump's trajectory over the past couple Weeks. It is a conflagration that started with Epstein, that continues with Iran. And today is back with the lies around Epstein and Trump on Capitol Hill. Our guests tonight are lawyer Nancy Erica Smith and legal writer Emily Bazelon. Nancy, your thoughts.

[Nancy Erica Smith]

My thoughts are again, we had a triggering day for the survivors and the victims. Not everybody survived Epstein. Virginia Giuffre did not. It's really triggering that these very powerful people keep lying and lying and lying and there's no consequences. People as close to the president as you can get in his cabinet. And it's important to note that Epstein pled guilty to trafficking a minor for prostitution in 2008. Lutnick met with him at his house in 2011, the island. 2012, went into business with him. Co investors. 2013, 2015, Lutnick, this is all in the files, invited Epstein to a political fundraiser. 2017, Epstein gave $50,000 to a dinner honoring Lutnick. He forgot all that. That's not possible. So not only is he a liar, he has been hanging out with a convicted pedophile since 2008. He was grossed out in 2005. What a liar.

[Ari Melber]

Is this the kind of professional wrongdoing that should lead to his removal from the Cabinet?

[Nancy Erica Smith]

Absolutely. But this is the Trump Epstein cabinet. You know, RFK was on the flight. Dr. Oz invited Epstein to a Valentine's party. Eight years after he pled guilty. Acosta, you know, covered up. He was Trump's labor secretary. Bannon got Christmas presents in 2018 and 19 from Epstein. I mean, this is a close knit group of people who hung out with Epstein after he pled guilty. They knew he was going to be convicted, but he pled guilty to soliciting a minor for prostitution. Who hangs out with somebody who's done that. And it went on for years and years and years and it kept going on. So, and I think it's really interesting that he, that Lutnick brought up possible blackmail because one of the important emails is, and there's a lot of emails where it looks like Epstein is gonna blackmail people. He says it directly, I'm gonna keep your secrets. But one about Trump is, you know, I've received lots of calls about Donald Parentheses Mildefart, who is a Norwegian ex girlfriend of both Epstein and Trump, beauty contests, Mar a Lago, et cetera. But my answer is always, I have nothing to say. That sounds like somebody who's got something to say and is keeping it secret.

[Ari Melber]

Right. And with Ludnick, you can say, well, maybe he exaggerated own ends. But then why not Clean it up and explain it. And why did you think this was something to say, the fact that he pulled out of the air this blackmail thing and then you're saying years later evidence shows that that's how Epstein talked. But if you weren't on those emails, how would you know that? And so again, it's a pile of questions. Emily, your thoughts tonight and your view of why this has roared back on Capitol Hill today?

[Commentator 3]

I mean, I'm struck by a similar question to the one you asked. Why not just admit it and apologize? Given the pictures exist, the footage of him pretending to distance himself, you know, with lots of kind of glee at sort of remarking on Epstein as gross, like Nancy was saying, why not just admit you were wrong and move on? Is that the kind of lesson of Trumpism, that you just don't apologize no matter what? Or is there more lurking here that somehow trying to whitewash this particular set of allegations, even with this visual proof just makes it not worth admitting to this part because then people will somehow find out about the rest of it.

[Ari Melber]

And Democratic lawmakers were hammering this today. Take a look. Howard Lutnick should resign. That was absolutely mind boggling what we just heard in the room. He was evasive, nervous. He was dishonest. Howard Lutnick is a pathological liar who is enabling the most egregious cover up in American history. He wasn't willing to be in a

[Anonymous Source]

room with them, but he was perfectly

[Ari Melber]

okay with his wife and family being in a room with Epstein. He's lying. I think of all of the depositions that we have done so far, I

[Nancy Erica Smith]

find Howard Lutnick to be the least credible.

[Ari Melber]

Emily, we are speaking about this now months into it, when we began these type of discussions. Very few top officials have been ousted from this cabinet and the mood was, oh, nobody's going. This is sort of the Trump 2.0 thing now. The AG's out and she was wounded by this issue, among others, although Trump would never publicly admit that as a rationale. DHS chief is out. Other border officials are out partly over what Trump called, however cynically, the bad press of ice, not the cruelty of ice, perhaps does that fit into the equation here where Trump would never admit this reason? But it's not like Mr. Lutnick is so involved in commerce and things that are more vital than those other folks portfolios.

[Commentator 3]

I mean, for sure it's bad politics. That seems clear. I imagine that it will depend whether this is one day of news or it continues. It's also kind of amazing that Lutnick, whose family has made so much money during the second Trump administration, is not also on the hook for that. But we know that he's been one of Trump's key negotiators in the Middle east and obviously the war in Iran is, you know, giant issue for the administration. So it's possible that Trump just doesn't feel like he can or wants to lose Lutvik right now, even though this kind of coverage is obviously bad for the administration.

[Ari Melber]

And Nancy, in closing, I have less than a minute, but the role of pressure here, even when it seems to get out of the headlines, as mentioned, some of the pressure continues to work.

[Nancy Erica Smith]

Yes, we have to keep the pressure on the victims, the survivors. They deserve it. We all deserve it. We deserve not to have people enabling pedophiles in the highest levels of our government.

[Ari Melber]

Nancy, Erica Smith and Emily, as this issue stays alive in Washington, thanks to both of you for your expertise. Coming up, we have that FBI story and Obama's warning about and independent DOJ. I'm back with you in 90 seconds.

[Nicole Wallace]

Subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus content to all of Ms. Now's original podcasts, including the chart topping series the Best People with Nicole Wallace. Why is this Happening? Main justice and more. Plus new episodes of all your favorite Ms. Now shows ad free and ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, including Rachel Maddow Presents Burn order. Subscribe to MSNow Premium on Apple Podcasts.

[Ari Melber]

Turning to new reporting from MSNow, Cash Patel's FBI is investigating what seemed to be fully lawful leaks to an Atlantic reporter who was reporting on Kash Patel, his conduct in office and allegations regarding his conduct, behavior and possible drinking. Now that is standard for any public figure, especially an FBI chief. You are going to face criticism and coverage. Now Patel, we should report, has denied any such allegations, including regarding the misuse of alcohol and he's filing suit for defamation. The article, though, shows that the issue is not between Patel and the reporter, but rather the many, many sources cited.

[Anonymous Source]

Our sources say that it's troubling on two fronts. One, there was no known disclosure of classified information in this long Atlantic magazine article. They're even more troubled by what they say is a focus on the journalists, which is very unusual. There is a focus now on trying to figure out who Sarah's sources were, including and up to obtaining her phone records, potentially running her name through FBI databases, taking very intrus steps.

[Ari Melber]

There are times where the government has legal authority to investigate classified leaks or the misuse of government information. That is a focus on people inside government who might have broken the law. Right now, there's no public evidence of that kind of classified information even coming into this topic. And so it appears to be that Mr. Patel has trouble handling criticism that he is hypersensitive. And if that's the case, that may affect how well he can do his job. Again, that's part of First Amendment protected discussion of his competence, his emotional baseline. Maybe he is too emotional and erratic to handle the type of scrutiny that comes with this job. Maybe he is, as they say in MAGA land, a snowflake. But the bigger issue is how the FBI is, as the Atlantic puts it, making this attack on press freedom. And it's not a one off. The doj, which works with the FBI on investigating and prosecuting cases, has repeatedly been caught abusing these powers to go after Trump's perceived opponents. That includes all the people you see on your screen who are from all types of backgrounds, including Republicans. What they have in common is that Trump doesn't like their First Amendment criticism. Pam Bondi was also reportedly ousted, partly because she didn't get far enough on these failed installed cases because they usually lack legal merit. Now her acting replacement, Todd Blanche, is trying to show that he will go even farther. And so you have that alongside Patel, who's upset about press coverage and criticism and attacks on the Southern Poverty Law center, misuse of legal powers. A new Comey indictment. When you look at Comey, the trend is so pronounced, it actually got this fact check from Obama.

[Jason Johnson]

The White House shouldn't be able to direct the attorney General to go around prosecuting whoever the president wants to prosecute.

[Nicole Wallace]

Right.

[Colbert]

Because technically, it's under the executive branch. The norm is that it's independent.

[Jason Johnson]

The idea is that the attorney General is the people's lawyer. It's not the president's consigliere.

[Ari Melber]

Or worse than a consigliere, it's not the president's hatchet person who might be doing things that themselves are more illegal than the targets. We're going to get into all of this next.

[Jason Johnson]

The idea is that the attorney General is the people's lawyer, it's not the president's consigliere.

[Ari Melber]

President Obama speaking out. We're joined by NYU history professor Ruth Ben Guyatte, author of Strongman Mussolini to the Present. How do you view this contrast? None of these revenge cases have succeeded with a conviction, but the new acting AG is going even harder than the old one.

[Ruth Ben-Ghiat]

Well, yes, they're compelled to do that because for wannabe autocrats, there is no concept of judicial independence or impartiality. And the very purpose of government institutions such as the doj, it changes, it mutates under autocracy. You know, when the pardon attorney Ed Martin said we go after people, not crimes, that was very instructive, because, for example, the judiciary is not about the rule of law anymore. It's about protecting the president and going after his enemies who have to become the enemies of the nation. Because there's no divide between the personal and the public, the public and the private in autocracy. So the very purpose and methods change when we have somebody like President Trump in power.

[Ari Melber]

President Trump's been through this once before. He's keenly aware of the midterms. He wanted to abuse these powers to get a different economic outcome from the Fed. Again, that failed. He knows that failed. But he's looking at what he sees as a shorter timeline. How does that figure it and that there are practical constraints, even if he wishes they weren't, he seems to be planning around them in a possible loss.

[Ruth Ben-Ghiat]

Yeah, but what happens is the more desperate, the more they realize that there's what I call autocratic backfire, where they've done things that have alienated the population. The bad outcomes of their policies start to manifest in daily life. So popular discontent rises, and then there's now splintering in maga. They're upset about Epstein. So autocrats never course correct. They just barrel ahead even stronger. So it's not surprising that they're becoming more aggressive. And the same with the FBI, with Patel, again, the purpose of the institution has to change. Now, the FBI may still go after domestic threats, but the criteria for those threats is changing. Now, a journalist is a threat because the press, the free press, is always the enemy of autocrats. And they're a journalist sitting in prison in Turkey and in every autocracy around the world. So I'm not surprised that this is happening. And they're going after a person, a journalist, on what seems to be spurious grounds.

[Ari Melber]

We see also pockets of judicial sort of sanction, but that system moves very slowly. But there was a report this week of a judge who basically found that a lawyer was obviously withholding information and misleading in court on behalf of doj. From what you could tell reading the court record, it sounded like someone who was in a tough spot. And the Trump has put a lot of those folks in those spots. And so they were, I guess you could say, somewhat honest, late about prior dishonesty and saying that was the buying they were in based on what DOJ and the administration wanted them to do. And they've been referred for professional punishment. I wonder where you think that fits in. Because someone listening might say, okay, Ari, some random lawyer we haven't heard of, like, how about going to the top? And yet the people in the middle are actually the ones carrying this out day by day. And if judges and others have those sanctions and they are real, you will have fewer people who are going to risk, what, their whole career over this.

[Ruth Ben-Ghiat]

Yeah. I mean, you know, there are always three levels to autocracy to make it work. There are the grassroots, the people who cheer no matter what, the people who are the thugs on the street. Then you have the cabinet officials. And by the way, Ari, often, certainly in fascist Italy, there were people who were chosen because they had personal weaknesses that were very evident and they became very hated by the population. But it meant that the leader puts people who are are challenged in their position or unqualified because they can be bought or they can be controlled more easily. But in the middle are all the bureaucrats. And now we've seen a lot of resistance, the legal resistance that we've seen with many Trump appointed judges turning back. They're either slowing down the operation and the processes of this administration or turning them back. But so that middle tier, which is easy to forget about in our focus on cabinet officials, is actually really, really important and we need to watch carefully. Even small things, as you say, there are moral dilemmas that people are living every day and we have to pay attention to this.

[Ari Melber]

Yeah, all fair points. And again, with some of that historical context. Ruth Benghiat, thank you. I'll tell folks coming up. We have the pressure on the war that is getting as unpopular as Vietnam and far sooner in its life cycle. And Barack Obama, he's back. He's talking economics, conspiracies, a little bit of maga, some clear references criticizing Trump that weren't using the T word. We're going to show it all to you next. And a lot more.

[Jason Johnson]

Probably.

[Colbert]

When you look back at the tan suit, what a occurs to you?

[Jason Johnson]

Why?

[Nicole Wallace]

Tuesday, May 12, from New York City, a special live taping of Ms. NOW's chart topping podcast, the Best People with Nicole Wallace. Join her for an urgent conversation with legendary documentarian Ken Burns. As America approaches its 250th anniversary, they'll explain explore the state of our country today through the lens of our past. Ken Burns and Nicole Wallace in conversation. The American Experiment at 250. Get your tickets today at 92ny.org

[Ari Melber]

if

[Jason Johnson]

you work, you should be able to make a living wage and support a family and retire with dignity and respect. And you know, we should not allow companies to just run roughshod over the rights of workers.

[Ari Melber]

Barack Obama on jobs and workers rights at a time when those are weaknesses for the Trump administration. This is a new Colbert interview. Americans mad at Trump over high prices. Today a top Trump advisor said maybe it would be good. This is a huge gaffe if people have to rack up credit card debt to buy gas and the basics. Just as Secretary Besant said, credit card spending is through the roof. They're spending more on gasoline, but they're spending more on everything else else too. Yes, they are spending more, more than they have and more than gas costs because it's up 50% from a few months ago. You don't want an economy that forces people into credit card debt for the basics. Half of Americans say what they're making doesn't keep up with the Trump economy. This is one of his biggest broken vows. Today, the average gallon of gas is over 450. Everybody knows why. The war. Trump is now backtracking on a plan that he said would help ships navigate the strait during this blockade. Excuse me, he said pause on an idea. Just a day after announcing it, there's conflicting reports about a memo that is designed to extend what has been a fragile ceasefire. Iran downplays that success, saying this is just a list of American wishes, what they want in the memo. This is a costly war. It grinds on. And against this backdrop, Trump is doing something that is wrong anytime. Which is why no other president has tried anything like it. But looks especially, especially tough for his midterm chances because enriching yourself amidst the economy I just told you about is not good politics. Air force updating Trump's $400 million gift. Some say bribe from Qatar. Lawmakers say retrofitting the jet will cost a billion dollars. Again, this is a Trump personal thing and there's much more that they are grifting in their crypto plots. Estimates between a billion to $4 billion, depending on how you count it. Obama carefully avoids saying the word Trump, but he talks about what I mentioned, that no president's ever tried to do this. And while technically president has a lot of power. So if you wanted to run a law firm or a consulting company out of the White House, there isn't a law that prevents it. But a side hustle is not exactly presidential.

[Jason Johnson]

The president of the United States shouldn't have a bunch of side hustles that there's companies and that foreign entities can invest in.

[Colbert]

How much of that is just jealous that you didn't think of selling a sneaker because your sneakers were flown?

[Ari Melber]

Colbert's joke, of course, is true. Obama was always far more popular than Donald Trump in both his terms. If he wanted to do the Trumpian branding thing and sell, literally, a sneaker or even tan suit merch, he could have. He didn't. That's called judgment and ethics. Now, they were discussing, as you see the footage here, the presidential library. That's a sneak peek inside, and they covered lots of ground.

[Jason Johnson]

For those of you who still think that we've got little green men underground somewhere, one of the things you learn as president is government is terrible at keeping secrets.

[Colbert]

When you look back at the tan suit, what occurs to you? Why is a hot dog a sandwich?

[Jason Johnson]

No, hot dog's a hot dog.

[Ari Melber]

Okay.

[Colbert]

Is it ever okay to put ketchup

[Commentator 2]

on a hot dog?

[Jason Johnson]

Never.

[Colbert]

How dumb do you think it is for people to say that I should run for president?

[Jason Johnson]

Well, you know, the bar has changed.

[Ari Melber]

That is true. That is true. The bar has changed. Also, a subtle Trump dig. This is interesting, a fun one, important one. When you look at some of the comments the president made and we have Jason Johnson on it next.

[Jason Johnson]

I'm worried about the Republican Party, not just the Democratic Party. When I was president, people would ask me, what change would you like to see in Washington? I'd say, I'd love a loyal opposition. I'd love a Republican Party that was conservative in some ways, that didn't agree with me on a whole bunch of stuff, but believed in rule of law and judicial independence and empirical evidence. Empirical evidence and science, and wasn't constantly tapping into our worst impulses.

[Ari Melber]

Former President Obama speaking out in that Colbert appearance. Jason Johnson's here. Your thoughts on what the great leader and communicator is conveying to us right now.

[Commentator 2]

Three big things I got from Ari. One, former President Obama still remains probably one of the best political interviews of a generation. He is good at dropping wisdom. He is still witty. He is still engaging. I thought it was very, very fascinating when he talked about his subtle ways of attacking Trump. He's like, hey, President shouldn't have side hustles. Which is great. We've been thinking for 20 years, you can't knock the hustle. Apparently Obama can, and especially when it's talking about a president who's been using the White House to enrich himself. I also appreciate him talking about.

[Ari Melber]

That's a Jay Z anniversary reference, everyone. Credit. Continue.

[Commentator 2]

I also really liked what he said about Mamdani and saying the idea of political. Can I play that about speaking clearly?

[Ari Melber]

You're ahead of us. Can I play? And then folks will get your thoughts on it. This was that part.

[Jason Johnson]

You look at somebody like Mondami, who I think is an extraordinary talent. He wants people to be able to afford housing in New York.

[Colbert]

Not only does he talk like a normal person, but he lives a normal life. But he also. He names what is obviously wrong.

[Jason Johnson]

Yes.

[Colbert]

And he goes, we should change that thing.

[Jason Johnson]

That doesn't make any sense. And not have a bunch of gobbledygook around.

[Commentator 2]

Was fantastic. It was fantastic. And Ari, this is a lesson for Ken Martin and Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and everybody else like, that Mamdani's politics are way to the left of President Barack Obama. They're way to the left of former President Barack Obama. But he sees talent and he recognizes talent, and he's embraced it. And that's what you can do if you want to be successful as a party. Everybody doesn't have to be ideologically aligned, but if you recognize someone is resonating with the public and resonating with voters, you gotta let them cook. And that's what he was sort of saying there.

[Ari Melber]

Feels like my big brother was big's brother. But yes, you say game recognizes game. And Mamdani has clashed with Wall street the last few weeks about both policy and style. And it's a whole big, rich debate. And that's fine. But your point is that if Barack Obama, who is the most effective, winningest Democrat of our lives, can see some of the tools there, then maybe others can look for that, too, even amid what can be good faith economic disagreements. He also, again, and this is Obama always does. And I remember there were years when people would get really annoyed with Obama's intramural constructive criticism and advice. I think the humility and the setbacks the last several years politically, have changed that mood. And people are really actually a little more ready to listen. Which again, goes to like, if you're talking to Phil Jackson and he's telling you, you know, here's what you got to do in the fourth quarter, you might want to listen, even if you're like, but I didn't do it that way, and I'm offended and yada yada. So on the Democratic front, he was. We mentioned that word gobbledygook came up in the Mamdani section. And it came up again here. Take a listen.

[Jason Johnson]

What I'm more interested in for Democrats is do you know how to just talk to regular people? Like we're not in a college seminar.

[Ari Melber]

Right.

[Jason Johnson]

You know, can you talk plain English to folks? What I'm looking for is there a strict no gobbledygood. No gobbledygood here at.

[Colbert]

You should carve that into the wall somewhere of the Obama center.

[Commentator 2]

You know what?

[Colbert]

No gobbledygook. Just talk.

[Ari Melber]

So Jason, I'm not going to ask you about the meta discourse implications of that blah, blah. No, I'm going to say, what do you think of what he said there?

[Commentator 2]

It's brilliant. And I love, as a college professor, I love hearing a law professor say stop talking like a law professor. If you're running for office, got to walk it like you're talking. That's, that's how people connect. That's how people appreciate you. You could actually line up Donald Trump, Barack Obama and as clear examples of how you speak to and galvanize the base. And those people could not be further apart from each other. With Obama sort of taking up the middle. That's the best advice. I'll tell you this, Ari. If it was probably up to former President Obama, the autopsy of 2024 will probably be released. He has a level of humility about his own party and what they need to do that I think a lot of the current leadership doesn't have.

[Ari Melber]

Yeah, yeah, it's, it's all well put. Politics sometimes is about making friends or migos, as you might, as you might put it. Jason, good to see you. We're out of time. We'll be right back. Thanks for spending time with us on the Beat. I'll see you tomorrow night at 6pm Eastern.

[Nicole Wallace]

Tuesday, May 12th from New York City, a special live taping of Ms. NOW's chart topping podcast, the Best People with Nicole Wallace. Join her for an urgent conversation with legendary documentarian Ken Burns. As America approaches its 250th anniversary, they'll explore the state of our country today through the lens of our past. Ken Burns and Nicole Wallace in conversation. The American experiment at 250. Get your tickets today at 92ny.org.