← The Jim Acosta Show
The Jim Acosta Show
Epstein Survivor Calls on Trump to Testify on the Files plus Rufus Gifford on Greenland and John Della Volpe on the Youth Vote
00:55:49
Loading summary
Transcript123 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign. Welcome to the Jim Acosta show. And it's another day that ends in Y and the Epstein files cover up. It's also another day that ends in Y and the ice assault on America. It's another day that ends in Y and Trump's bizarre quest to acquire Greenland. We still can't figure that one out. But we will talk about all of that in just a moment. First, let's welcome Jess Michaels to the program with the great group of Epstein survivors that have been in the news over the last several months on this. They have fired off a letter just today. This is breaking news. They have fired off a letter today to the Department of Justice Inspector General asking for an investigation into the release of the Epstein files. Jess, great to see you again. Thanks for coming on.
- [00:49]
B
Thanks for having me. Thanks for getting this, helping us get this letter out there. It's really important.
- [00:54]
A
Yeah, I mean, there's the letter right there. I can read a little bit from it. I mean, it's, I think it's very important. It says, we write as survivors of Jeffrey Epstein to formally request that the DOJ Office of Inspector General conduct a review of the Epstein related records already released pursuant to the Epstein Files Transparency act and oversee all future releases to ensure full compliance with U.S. law basic standards of survivor protection. I the, the meat of this, you know, is basically there are failures in the redaction practices. And Jess, you were saying that you guys have big problems with the way things have been redacted. Let's lay this out.
- [01:35]
B
So it's a list of things, right? It's not just the redactions. It's the lack of actually releasing files according to the deadline, the 19th. It's a lack of giving reasoning. There was a deadline for giving the reasons for why all the redactions happened. And that passed, like came and went and there was no response. There was no communication. There was also no accountability on the part of Congress. And here we also wanted to outline how badly these documents have been redacted or not redacted. And I think I had told you the last time I was on, there was a whole page that was blacked out. And the only thing that was there was a survivor's name. And I was just talking with other survivors today and they were telling, they were sharing that, you know, someone's phone number is out there, their families, family members, names are out there. I mean, it's, it's horrific what is actually being shared versus how badly things are being redacted. I mean, there were emails that are Specifically outlining the names of the co conspirators that they were looking at back in 2019. And that's redacted.
- [02:49]
A
Yeah. And. And let's talk about the amount of files that have been released. I mean it's a fraction, it's a small. Yeah, can you talk about that? Because to me that, that is sort of the, the whole enchilada in all of this. I mean, you know, it seems to me they are, they are slow walking this. I mean, that's just putting it mildly. It's a cover up, it's continuation of the COVID up. And it's a violation of the law, is it not? It is.
- [03:15]
B
And they're doing it in plain sight. The public can see what's happening. And I think the American people are really starting to feel how frustrated we are and have been for a very long time. I think I told you that the first time I spoke to the FBI and it was at the request from the hotline that they put out for Epstein victims to please reach out to this phone number. This was back in 2019. And the response I got from the FBI back then was, well, it was 30 years ago. What do you want us to do? And so this is just exactly what I know I've seen in the last six years. This is what survivors have been seeing since 2006 and what Maria and Annie had to deal with back in 1996. I mean, this is nothing new. It's just gotten larger and clearer that the protection is there because you can't say, you can't say there's nothing here. We found nothing. And then say, but we also have 5 million files. You can't say both of those things. You don't collect 5 million documents or files for no reason over decades.
- [04:32]
A
Well, and you also say in this letter that the selective nature of the redactions raises concerns about whether decisions were influenced by factors unrelated to survivor protection. Does that mean that there's a concern that there is predator protection going on? That there is offender protection protection going on?
- [04:50]
B
Predators, co conspirators, enablers? Yes, 100%. We are very concerned that the people involved that are supposed to be being, being addressed because of what they know, that that all of that is being covered up?
- [05:13]
A
And has the group of the survivors. Have you guys tried to go to the Justice Department and say, can we meet with you? Can we go over how this can work? Can you hear our concerns? Has anything like that been attempted? What can you say.
- [05:31]
B
Speaking for me, and just the very light, not deep conversations. But we don't have a lot of trust in this Department of Justice after the last few, five months of advocating. And so I'm not going to feel comfortable going to this DOJ and asking for a meeting. I don't know that any of us are going to feel safe and comfortable to do that, especially after what we've just seen of who they're protecting and who they're not protecting based on the recent rollout.
- [06:02]
A
Right. And you know, the other aspect of this is whether the White House is involved, whether Donald Trump is involved in, and you know, you know, he has made it pretty clear in some of his statements that he's been concerned about. You know, Marjorie Taylor Greene has said publicly that Donald Trump expressed to her that, that he was concerned about certain people's names getting out there. It doesn't sound like he was talking about the, the survivors or the victims. It sounds like he's talking about somebody else. But this is something that happened yesterday in Detroit. He went to Detroit yesterday to give a speech to the economic club there. And he was, I guess, meeting with some auto workers at one point and one of the auto workers yelled something at Trump and then he did something back. Let's, let's watch this. Little hard to make out there. Somebody says pedophile protector there, and then he mouths back to the person, fuck you. And I believe he does it twice. I, you know, my, my question to you, Jess, is, is that by definition one could make the argument, and I don't know what you think about this, that he, that they have been protecting pedophiles. Ghislaine Maxwell was moved to a minimum security prison. He has talked about, well, I don't want certain names released. I mean, I mean, what do you think?
- [07:40]
B
And she's still in that minimum security prison. I mean, it's not as if anything has changed. Even though we voiced those very publicly that, those concerns very publicly. I, I think that the case could be made for saying you're protecting pedophiles when you're not doing everything in your power to get to justice, period. Like, just, just try to get, just, let's figure this out, let's investigate. But closing the investigation, sealing the files back in July is, is, is protecting. I mean, this is something that, and.
- [08:12]
A
Slow walking the release of the files now.
- [08:14]
B
And slow walking. I mean, these files, as we've talked about, could have been released way back in January. I'm not January in June. And this is, this is clearly, clearly, sadly and upsettingly not about protecting victims. At all. There's nothing in this experience that we feel comfortable saying is protecting us. Nothing. Nothing. And that is how it has been for decades. And it's another reason why we hope that the American people will stay with us. And we know we can't do this alone. We need the support of a bipartisan support. And I think this is also why it can be really frustrating because, Jim, you and I can have this conversation, but my conservative family members or conservative friends or colleagues, like, they never hear this conversation. They never get to see what is actually happening because it just doesn't air on any news sources for them. So I've never been asked to go on a conservative news network.
- [09:21]
A
And that, and that's, that's a crying shame because last night Hannity said on Fox, he made this statement that Donald Trump has never been on Epstein's plane. He said that on Fox last night. He said that on Fox last night. And I, you know, I, I reposted it and I said, you know, the bullshit meter is going off now.
- [09:39]
C
Yeah.
- [09:40]
A
And what concerns me is, and it's exactly what you're saying is that in the conservative media ecosystem, in the Trump propaganda ecosystem, they're not getting this information.
- [09:50]
B
They're not, they're not, they're not even getting the files. They're not even hearing. I, I had a friend who was dating somebody that was conservative. And she said, so, so what do you think about those Epstein files? And this was back in like October, November. And they said, well, I think that stuff's over. Right? They, they think it's over.
- [10:08]
A
I think it's over.
- [10:09]
B
Yeah.
- [10:10]
A
Well, and the chairman of the Oversight Committee, James Comer, is making a big deal out of how they've subpoenaed the Clintons to come and testify. And the Clintons are saying they're not going to do that. And, you know, I mean, you and I have talked about this, I've talked about this with others on my show. Let the chips fall where they may. If the investigation leads in a direction of Bill Clinton, that's the way it goes. If it leads in the direction of Donald Trump, that's the way it goes. The American people deserve the truth and the survivors and the victims families deserve the truth. And so, I mean, what's your response when you, I mean, I don't see the chairman, I don't see Chairman Comer, you know, issuing a subpoena for Donald Trump to testify. Help us unpack this.
- [10:53]
B
And I'm stating more a fact.
- [10:56]
A
Yeah.
- [10:56]
B
Donald Trump's name appears in the files.
- [10:59]
A
Yes.
- [10:59]
B
He is someone that has knowledge. He should be deposed equally. Bill Clinton's name is in the files. He should be deposed equally. I think that whoever's name shows up in those files and has any connection to Epstein, because we all know that there were people that, regardless of whether they participated, they. They either enabled or they sought. And when you do nothing, you are also enabling. So there are people that enabled by doing nothing. Great. If their name is in the files, they need to be deposed. So to say. To say you knew nothing, I think is a blatant lie. And we need everyone to be participating and being deposed and willing, like, let the chips. Like you said, let the chips fall where they may.
- [11:46]
A
And so you'd like to see Donald Trump be issued one of those subpoenas?
- [11:50]
B
I think it's fair to ask. I think it's reasonable to ask, yeah.
- [11:56]
A
Especially in light of the way that the Justice Department has handled the release of the files. I mean, something's going on here, it seems to me. Yes, you know, we're not getting the information. It's required by law and so on.
- [12:09]
B
The law is being broken right now. And what I want to know, and this is a personal next step of research, is who is it in Congress that gets Congress to act to hold the Department of Justice accountable for breaking the law on December 19? 26 days ago? 26 days have gone by, and we've had no communication and we've seen no files in 2026. Zero. Nothing has come out in 2026 at all. And that should be concerning to any administration that talks about law and order as a selling point.
- [12:49]
A
Yeah, well, and. And people can make up their own minds on that when they. When they use those words. But the other thing I want to ask you about before you go, Jess, is you made a comment, you know, and maybe we were talking about this before we came on, but a little bit during. It sounds as though you're. You're a little worried that the public may move on. There are so many distractions right now. There's so much happening. It almost feels purposeful on the part of the White House that, you know, they would rather the American people talk about anything else. You can see how touchy Donald Trump gets in that video. He is very touchy on this subject, does not want to talk about it, doesn't like being called out on it. And, I mean, I think you're well within your rights to say, you know, and I wouldn't be surprised if you said, you know, you are worried that this, that this is going to get pushed to the back burner when it's, when it should never be.
- [13:42]
B
Yes. And that's a really important point. So I'm so glad that you brought it up.
- [13:46]
A
Yeah.
- [13:47]
B
This is the one bipartisan issue happening in our country right now that everyone can agree on. And in my very biased opinion, it is the one issue American people, as a collective, could get behind and make some difference in the world. And so we're really hoping that people will stand with us both, both sides of the aisle. I've seen, I've seen politicians do it in support of this effort. So we needed the American people to do it in support of this effort, because the truth in this case is going to reveal a lot of evil that's been happening in the world and prove to the American people that the Department of Justice is actually caring about victims. Because right now, it does not look like it.
- [14:40]
A
Not at all. And that's why you're asking for this inspector general investigation and keep us posted on the progress.
- [14:47]
B
We actually have to ask the DO for oversight over the doj. That's, that's.
- [14:53]
A
They're the ones who, who are supposed to be in charge of upholding the law. The last time I checked.
- [14:57]
B
Yes, they are supposed to.
- [14:59]
A
Well, Jess, always great to see you. Come, you know, text me anytime, ask me anytime, anytime you want to come on and talk about this. Happy to get it out there. I will tell you just to, you know, let the audience in, into the discussion for a second. I mean, they tell us repeatedly not to let this go, and we're not going to let it go. So, you know, I feel that way, but the audience really feels that way. And so we're not going to let it go.
- [15:23]
B
Thank you so much.
- [15:24]
A
You bet. Good to see you. Appreciate it. And there are, I mean, there are lots of distractions these days. The Epstein files is just one of them. In terms of Donald Trump's mind, he would rather move on to other things. There are so many things that he's trying to distract from the Epstein files. And, you know, one of the issues that we've seen flare up over the last several days, you know, I feel like I've covered stuff in Washington for some time. I can't make heads or tails of this. Why Donald Trump would want Greenland. But let's bring in somebody who might have some insights into all of this. It's Rufus Gifford. He is the former US Ambassador to Denmark, longtime Obama team player, I guess you could say. Rufus, you've been on Team Obama for quite some time, but also served as a very important ambassador for the United States, Denmark. Rufus, great to see, as always. Thank you so much for coming on. Oh, can. Rufus. Rufus, can you hear me? Can't hear anymore. Let's. We'll get Rufus to. To come out and come back in. Can you come out? Come back in? Maybe come back. Yeah, let's see here. Come out and come back in. Sometimes this happens, folks, but just to give you a little sense as to what is happening with the Greenland story, we'll get Rufus back in here in just a second. I was noticing there that he was like, wait a minute, what's happening here? But, but basically, if you saw earlier today, it's been covered in the news. There's Rufus. Rufus is back. Rufus, can you hear me now?
- [17:00]
C
Hey, Jim. Yeah, sorry I couldn't hear you there for a bit, but I'm back.
- [17:02]
A
That's okay. No, no, no. This stuff happens. I guess one of the reasons why I wanted to bring in here Rufus is to talk about this. This wacky Greenland stuff. I've covered stuff in D.C. for a long time. This is one of the weirdest things that I've covered. Why Donald Trump seems to want Greenland. He keeps saying over and over again, it's important to. I and others have noted. I'm sure you'll note as well, that we have a US Military base in Greenland. It just doesn't make any damn sense. And sometimes I think some of these things are intended to be distractions to distract the public away from things like the Epstein files and so on. Like I was talking about with this survivor just a few moments ago. But your thoughts on all this, watching this unfold? You were the ambassador to Denmark. Greenland is technically a part of Denmark, a NATO ally. Your thoughts?
- [17:50]
C
Yeah, Jim, it's extraordinary. I mean, I think so. Look, and I mean, let's also be clear. I mean, extraordinary is not a big enough word. It's because in my mind, this policy is clueless and it's reckless. And those are the things that I think you need to highlight. So just talking about the national security arguments that they love to try to say. There are three reasons why the national security argument is bogus, Jim. The first thing is that if Greenland were, God forbid, attacked by one of our adversaries today, five years ago or 60 years ago, because it's a NATO ally as part of a founding, one of the founding members of NATO, Article 5 would be invoked and the entire alliance would be compelled to respond. And remember, NATO has been the most extraordinary deterrent against any hostile action as we've ever seen in the world. Article 5 has only been invoked once, and that was after 9, 11 in defense of the United States of America. The second thing is what you just said. You mentioned we have a military base there now, but what you didn't mention is we used to have 17 military bases there at the end of World War II. And it was the Americans who decided it was time to scale it back. But you know who would welcome us with open arms? The Danes and the Greenlanders if we wanted to come back. So if we have real legitimate national security concerns on Greenland, they'd welcome us back with open arms. Let's sit across the table from our best friends and allies and get it done. Third thing, real quick, real quick, because I think it's really important that the idea that you strengthen American national security by driving a stake through the heart of NATO, which is what we're doing right now, is insane. All a fractured west does is empower Russia and China. So it's a terrible argument across the board, as far as I'm concerned.
- [19:34]
A
Well, and apparently Mitch McConnell, I mean, you know, no shrinking, Violent himself, said that Trump's seizure of Greenland would incinerate the NATO alliance. He used the word incinerate. And so it's, it's Democrats and Republicans who are worried about what this might mean for NATO. But is it, is it wrong for me to say that we kind of already have Greenland? I mean, you know what I mean? I know it's not part of the United States. No, they're just, they're on our side. Denmark's on our side. Like, you don't need to take it. It's, this is where, this is where it just comes across as childlike and stupid to me, if I may just put things delicately.
- [20:13]
C
Right. It's, it's, it's, it's like spoiled. I sort of call it spoiled brat diplomacy. It's like, yes, I want it. I want it now. It's like, I. No, no, but you can't. You don't get it. It's a, it's an independent country. You don't just get something you want on the world stage. And I, I think it is. I don't think you're wrong. And by the way, that is the purpose of NATO. What you just articulated is it was formed in an attempt to ensure that NATO allies didn't have to sort of create a hostile relationship with another country near their border in order to defend themselves, because it's Very much a three musketeers approach to foreign, foreign policy. It's all for one and one for all that our national security is fairly consistent across the NATO alliance. So the argument is just so flawed, Jim. But I don't think it's about that. I don't think it's about that. General.
- [21:05]
A
Yeah. What do you think is about? Because I have to think that your phone is blowing up, that you have your friends in Europe just contacting you and say, what the hell is going on over here? And I mean, we should show everybody the White House tweet. They put this, I'm sure you saw this, this bananas tweet came out today. It shows a snowmobile, two snowmobiles, one heading towards Russia and China, the other, other heading towards the United States. I guess that's what the Greenland flag on the back of the sled with the sled dogs. And it's just bananas stuff. I mean, they do a lot of wacky stuff with their social media. This is also pretty wacky. Yeah.
- [21:40]
C
You know what, though, too? And people think it's funny. Oh, you know, this isn't all that serious is Donald Trump likes to have a sense of humor. This is the thing though, Jim, and this is why it matters. I so obviously that post is in essence, which is completely false to begin with, mocking kind of the, the Danish military as not being particularly strong. They've had this kind of famous dog sled patrol. They obviously have more than dog sleds, but they still have them. And I've had the honor of actually being on some of them. It's actually quite extraordinary. That being said, obviously we've modernized our military in the last 100 years. But remember, this is a country that has been in lockstep with the United States on every major foreign policy issue for decades and decades and decades. I was the guy you'd have to go to the prime minister or the foreign minister or the defense minister, ask them to send young, their young men and women into harm's way. They lost more people per capita in Afghanistan than any country in the world other than us. And to disrespect them in this way, Jim, to talk to them like this, to mock their military, which is what a post like that does, it is just so petty and it really makes all of us look small as far as I'm concerned. And it just is. Why always so grateful to be able to have these conversations? Because it matters. It matters.
- [22:59]
A
Yeah.
- [23:00]
C
Not just Americans to hear it. You know, I don't think really Americans get Greenland. So it's understand Greenland. So it's important for us to talk about it. But even more so, it's so much, it's important to have our allies remember that there are normal Americans who believe in this, who believe in these alliances that have kept us safe and have marched alongside us. And so, yeah, I think we got.
- [23:20]
A
To talk about it. Yeah, no question about it. I mean, and there's a poll that came out, I think it was Reuters just today that shows that the American people are almost overwhelmingly, unilaterally opposed to this. Only 4% of Americans, according to a Reuters poll, 4% support a military takeover of Greenland. That is a shitty poll number for Donald Trump. 17% approve of any acquisition of Greenland. So the American people are dead set against this. And it just speaks to, you know what I asked earlier, which is you must be hearing from your friends in Europe who are wondering what the hell is going on, because this is so nuts and so bonkers, it's almost madness of King George stuff. And it makes me wonder, you know, do our allies think that our President has just gone one flew over the cuckoo's nest here?
- [24:08]
C
Well, I think that latter statement is a little baked in in Europe right now, unfortunately. Yeah. That being said, we got a lot of work to do to ensure that they don't believe that not all Americans have also gone one flew over the cuckoo's nest here. Polls like that are really important. I'm working with Congress right now. There is a bill introduced today. We gotta help try to encourage Congress to pull back some of their Article 1 powers and ensure they check, just like the Constitution orders them to do. The Executive branch, especially in instances like this where there's so much at stake. I also think it's important to note that we could have everything with Greenland that Donald Trump articulates without taking a sledgehammer to one of our best alliances the modern world has ever seen. We could have the military bases, we could mine for natural resources. We could, we could work with them on shipping routes. We could counter the Russians and the Chinese at every step were we to treat them with respect. And of course, we're not doing any of that right now, which is just so depressed, so depressing.
- [25:14]
A
Yeah, we were just showing some video a few moments ago of the Danish officials who met with Rubio, I guess, and some other folks earlier today. And they seem, I mean, they're just, they, I mean, I may be reading too much into the body language. They just seem a bit shell shocked over this and, but the White House says that they're serious about this annexation thing that they want to do here. And I, I guess the big question is, Rufus, what, what do the European allies do? What do the NATO allies do? If Donald Trump does something crazy and, and does something like what he did in Venezuela, he just sends in the US Military. I mean, my sense of it is, and I said, I was saying this the other day to somebody, my sense of it is that the U.S. that, that NATO allies should do, do nothing that they should not. There should be no response militarily or any, anything along those lines. It should just be like, okay, crazy man. You know, he, he lost the remote control under the couch. Let's just let this play out. We'll have a lot of talks and just play this thing. I, that's, that's my sense of it. What, what's your sense? Do the Europeans need to get tough and say.
- [26:17]
C
No? You know, I think that public opinion here really matters, Jim. And I honestly, American public opinion matters more than likely anything as it relates to this issue. The one thing that I worry about, and I think it gets lost in this entire debate. And I've been to Greenland nine times. It's, it's just one of the most extraordinary places in the world. I've had some of the best experiences of my life there. We are forgetting the Greenlandic people in this. And I think that that's pretty. So it's sort of an answer to your question, because I think it's part of, it's an important part of it, and that is that, you know, this is a, this is largely, obviously the country is 57,000 people, which is tiny, largely. Inuit do get a tremendous amount. I mean, think about it. Do they, you think they want to be independent where. They do want to be independent, but the. Currently they're getting free health care, they're getting free education, they care a tremendous amount about climate. They're ground zero of climate change. I mean, these are not. This is for them to Also don't.
- [27:16]
A
Want to get on Obamacare with no subsidies, like.
- [27:18]
C
Well, it would be a bit, the whole thing would be a bit, a bit of sticker shock, I'm afraid. So it doesn't, none of it makes logical sense. And I know it doesn't necessarily make sense to insert inject logic into a debate about Trump, but it is. I do think our NATO allies need to remain very unified here. I think Donald Trump is a bully. Bullies respond. I think, I don't think the strategy here should be to fed him with red Carpets and state dinners. I think, I actually think bullies respond to one thing, and that is strength. And you got to show unity and you got to hit back. Obviously, I don't mean physically. I mean, I, I mean, but show a degree of strength, I guess.
- [27:57]
A
What would that be? I mean, would they be economic sanctions? I suppose you could try to do something. I don't know what that would be, but.
- [28:05]
C
I don't know.
- [28:06]
A
So, not to put you on the spot. Yeah.
- [28:09]
C
If we're playing out hypotheticals and you're talking about a military invasion of Greenland, that's such a rewriting of the world order that I don't even know which way would be at that point. You would, I think the Europeans would talk about things like sanctions and say, closing our, our military bases, of which we have a lot in Europe. You know, things like that. Perhaps boycotts. Boycotts or massive tariffs on US Products. This stuff is unthinkable, but it is the tools they have. Remember, their economy is quite significant. So it could be painful for Americans, and that's the last thing we want to see. My goal here is to try to prevent this ridiculousness from ever happening and to talk about it so much that hopefully we get enough Americans, especially members of Congress, to do the right thing here.
- [28:56]
A
Yeah. And I can't imagine the Winter Olympics coming up, what the reception is going to be like for American athletes. And Rufus, you and I, I mean, I'm sure you've been to Europe maybe more times than I, but I've been, I've been there a bunch, traveled a bunch with the president and so on. And by and large, Europeans are very supportive of Americans. They sometimes grumble about us here and there and that sort of thing. To me, my understanding is, and I've witnessed this up close going over there last year, a lot of people in Europe are very concerned about America right now and think that we have just gone batshit crazy. I mean, to put it, to put it a technical term on it, I.
- [29:30]
C
I, I, I just, you know, incidental info on that. You know, I have friends, American friends, who I'm close with, even folks who worked at the embassy but live in Denmark, say married Danes and live there. And they say it's never been so hard to be an American living there right now. Not that they don't love and they don't trust me, I mean, personally, but that it's, it is the palpable distrust. It's that word, the trust, which is, in my mind, one of the most important words in the English language. And one administration, one president has just decimated that trust so quickly.
- [30:04]
A
Yeah.
- [30:04]
C
It's going to take a long time to build it back, Jim. And you know, those of us who care about it, you know, we're going to have to do the hard work in that post, in that post Trump era, which hopefully comes sooner rather than later.
- [30:16]
A
I couldn't agree with you more, Rufus. And I think, you know, it's almost one of those things that I think it's Bill Clinton or maybe Obama said this, that the Democrats always come in, they get elected to clean things up, and there's gonna be quite the, not just the gold stuff that's been put all over the White House, which I'm sure you've been in the White House so many times. You're probably like when. When you see the TV and you see the gold stuff everywhere, that must send convulsions through your body.
- [30:40]
C
I really, I mean, if you think the East Wing was, was a shot to the heart for me, without a doubt. I can't. I still really can't believe it.
- [30:50]
A
That's right. You used to work over there. I remember that.
- [30:52]
C
I did. But I'll tell you, I think you're right. But let's just say I think that there in, in, in times of great crises, there will be great opportunities. And I do think whoever the next president of the United States is, whoever tries to seize that mantle of leadership, we got a ton of work to do. And as long as you think about it that way, I think we can right some of these wrongs. But it is going to take some time and a lot of hard work.
- [31:19]
A
All right, well, Rufus, great to see you as always. Thank you so much. Let's do it again soon.
- [31:24]
C
Anytime, Jim. Anytime. Thanks for having me.
- [31:27]
A
Thank you. Thanks a lot. Let's hope the Greenlanders can hang in there. My goodness. But as we were having that conversation there just towards the end, we sort of dovetailed into this issue of what can Democrats do moving forward. And I've got the perfect guest for that. It's John Della Volpe, veteran pollster at Harvard. And John is a big specialist when it comes to where Gen Z is right now. And that's, I think, such a critically important issue. John, great to see you. Thanks for coming on.
- [31:58]
D
Hey, thanks for having me, Jim. Good to be with you.
- [32:00]
A
Good to be with you, too. And I mean, one of the things that we should step into right away is I saw that you wrote for Substack about ice and the way that Gen Z, the way that younger voters are responding to this, and you're saying you're. What you wrote about is that they were. They're responding to this emotionally as an emotional matter more than a political matter, almost more than anything else because they're seeing these videos and we played them on the show. We can play them again here a little bit, John, while we're talking. These videos of these people just getting tackled and basically mugged by ICE officers in the streets of their own cities. And just curious what your thoughts are on all of this. And then we'll get into the Democratic politics and the polls and everything else.
- [32:44]
D
Yeah, I mean, and tackled by fellow Americans, I think.
- [32:47]
A
Right.
- [32:47]
D
Is really what we're talking about. And to me, the lens that is so important, Jim, having studied young American political attitudes for a couple generations now, is that there is young voters. First time voters in the midterms, first time voters into the 2028 are developing their political ideology and preferences in real time. And this is what they're seeing every day on their social media feed and other places. And it is, as young people say, when I talk to them just about every night, it makes them sad, makes them concerned, and it makes them fearful about our country. Letting aside, you know, what it means about the Republican Party right now. So I think the point is that younger people are making their preferences in real time about what values they have and which party stands up for those values. And this is not good, I don't think, for communities for the country, for the future of the Republican Party right now.
- [33:56]
A
Yeah, I mean, and this is after a poll you guys put out, I think was it back in December on young Americans and where they see the country going, 57% say wrong track, 13% say the right direction. Those are devastating poll numbers for Trump and the Republicans because, you know, Trump did have a decent number of gen zers and young Americans backing him in 2024 is part of the reason why he won. And I have to think that what is happening with ICE right now has supercharged that rift in the poll numbers for Trump.
- [34:30]
D
Yeah, it's certainly kind of a backlash because there were. I don't think that he'd be in office today, Jim, if it weren't for support of young people, young men in particular. Okay. In 2024, we saw roughly 10, 11, 12 point shift from 2020 to 2024among younger men under the age of 30 who voted again, 10 points more favorable towards Trump, Republican than Biden just four years ago. And what they voted for was to have some Economic stability to make them feel better about being able to provide for themselves and the people that they care about. And they look at the news they're seeing on their phones and they're asking themselves, how is this making my life better? How is this giving me more stability? And that's really the lens. And this is not helpful, I think, to Trump as he thinks. This reminds me, Jim, of, of 2017. You know, in 2016, Trump gets elected. 2017, we saw two significant events that impacted younger people that I think led to historic levels of turnout and Democratic success in the midterm elections. We had the October 1st slaughter at Mandalay Bay followed just a few months after. By February 14th, Parkland. The combination of those two events and young people in the streets organizing, I think led to record turnout and record levels of support. 70% plus in some congressional districts.
- [36:04]
A
Wow.
- [36:05]
D
And we could be headed to that same place, I think, if young people and Democrats can kind of take advantage kind of of this moment and channel that into something that is productive for them.
- [36:17]
A
Well, and the polls show that the public is pretty opposed to ISIS tactics, if you can speak to that. And also I believe I just saw a poll, a brand, a couple of brand new polls that show that they do not, that the American people do not support what took place with the killing of Renee Goode, that the officers actions were not justified in that. But this says 53% of voters disapprove of the way ICE is enforcing immigration laws. I mean, 35% say justified. That's the baked in, I guess Trump base. I guess that's what that is right there.
- [36:49]
D
Yeah, when you look, that's a Quinnipiac poll that was released within the last day or two. When you look at that, you know, you'll see 70, I think it was 77% or so of Republicans of this cross tab saying it was justified. You know, that's three and four. But clearly strong majorities of independents and Democrats strongly oppose that. My message would be that for Democrats is you need to do a couple of things. Right. We need to recognize that there has been chaos at the border.
- [37:20]
A
Yeah, right.
- [37:20]
D
We need to recognize that we need to have some fairness and order. It doesn't mean we need to be, you know, using these, the tactics that are being used and obviously ending in the killing of Renee Goode. We need to do both. We need to recognize there's a challenge that needs serious kind of public policy, conversation, debate and tactics and policy, etc. But it doesn't need to be where it is today. And I think Democrats have had a hard time admitting the first part.
- [37:52]
A
Yeah. And John, I mean, just overall, the approval numbers for Trump are abysmal. He's in the high 30s, low 40s. Those are terrible numbers. I covered the first Trump administration. I saw the wipeout that he had in 2018 in the midterms. These are similar poll numbers or even worse, I think, than what he was up against in 2018. And you were taking us kind of into the territory I was hoping to go, which is what Democrats should do, you know, heading into the fall midterms. I talked to Elizabeth Warren yesterday. She's advocating for a very populist economic agenda. And you know, she may be right about this. I mean, Donald Trump called her after she gave her speech at the National Press Club on Monday talking about capping it, credit card rates and so on. And so he wants some of that. He's not going to get it because people are suspicious of him now, even more so than perhaps ever before. But your sense as to where Democrats should take this, because it's not going to just be about ice or Greenland or Iran. It's these bread and butter economic issues. I tell people this all the time. And I know I'm not the first to say it, Carville. Other people said it over the years. I mean, it is the economy, stupid. It just is.
- [38:56]
C
Yeah.
- [38:57]
A
You know, and they're going to vote on this, no question. Every time.
- [38:59]
D
Exactly. And, and the point is like, how is what's happening in Venezuela, how is what's happening, you know, on the streets of, you name, what American city? How is that improving the ability for me to pay my rent? Right. And to try to save some money and to, and to have a good life. So I completely agree. It has to be focused on the economy and specifically. And I think that's the lesson that we all should take about, about Zoran Momdami's campaign. To me, it wasn't about, you know, whether he was a Democrat, socialist or not. It was about his ability to do two things. Right. It was his ability to listen, not lecture and to tap into those extreme day to day anxieties that so many New Yorkers had across a variety of different reasons and connect public policy to solving some of those anxieties and taking some of the pressure off.
- [39:59]
A
Right.
- [40:00]
D
So if, if folks like Senator Warren and others can kind of connect those policies to how it's going to impact people on a day to day basis, that is the kind of, that combination I think that Democrats need to get to and they need to understand that one of the big differences between Today and the 2017, the first Trump midterm is the Democrat brand is in a far weaker position than it was, you know, seven or eight years ago, too, especially specifically with younger people. You know, they just have. They have. They have more questions than ever, and they view the brand generally as more weak than strong. And that's something that needs to be corrected in real time, you know, leading up to November.
- [40:47]
A
I think it's that whole strong and wrong versus weakened. Right.
- [40:51]
C
Is.
- [40:51]
A
I mean, is that kind of it?
- [40:53]
D
And.
- [40:53]
A
And the Democrats have a. Have an issue with this. They just do.
- [40:56]
D
Yeah, they do. And a lot of people sense younger people in particular believe that there's some strength, even if you disagree with a policy, for someone willing to defend it.
- [41:07]
A
Right. Yeah. And.
- [41:09]
D
And they see Democrats as too often trying to kind of make certain constituencies happy by saying what they think they want to hear, rather than some of the things I talked about, which is, listen, we have had a problem with immigration in this country. Right?
- [41:23]
A
Yeah.
- [41:24]
D
And there's a right way and a wrong way to address it by just recognizing what people can see every day and building a little bit of trust and then taking the conversation into a more kind of productive place, which. Where there's a shared set of values. And clearly more younger people values align with Democrats than Republicans.
- [41:45]
A
That's.
- [41:45]
D
That's been clear for. For many years. People haven't always voted that way, though.
- [41:50]
A
Yeah. Well, and I think with younger voters, they do pay attention to the podcast bros. As maddening as it might be to guys our age, they do pay. And so when Joe Rogan is out there saying, you know, why is ICE acting like the Gestapo? Younger people are going to listen to that. That is. That is not good news for Donald Trump. But I do think economic issues are so big in this, the aca. Here's Joe Rogan. Let's listen to this.
- [42:17]
C
Many of which turn out to actually.
- [42:18]
A
Be U.S. citizens that just don't have their papers on them.
- [42:21]
C
Are we really going to be the Gestapo?
- [42:23]
A
Where's your papers?
- [42:24]
C
Is that what we've come to?
- [42:26]
A
Yeah. I mean, John, how much of it. How much of it is riding on the Democrats having a better media ecosystem? They just, you know, Rogan was part of the Trump media ecosystem. He will say that that's not the case. Right. But there's this whole thing of Democrats looking for the Joe Rogan of the left and so on. There's something to be said for. There's just not as much Passion. There's just not as much energy on the left, on the center left as you see center, right to right.
- [42:56]
D
Well, not only that, but there's not nearly the same amount of resources by the left or the center or the center left investing in these kinds of relationships. Right. Joe Rogan, I could be wrong, but I think he said Bernie Sanders on there at least once.
- [43:14]
A
Yes. Calerico on. Yep.
- [43:17]
D
Okay. And he had Teller Rico on. Right. And my sense is that Joe Rogan would give you a fair shake. Okay. And that what younger people see, what younger people told me many, many times when they, when they knew. Right. That Kamala Harris didn't go on the show. It's like, why? What are you afraid of? Right. That they see the difference that most Democrats are uncomfortable in those places because you need to be yourself. Right. And you need. It's unscripted for an hour, maybe three hours.
- [43:51]
A
Right.
- [43:52]
D
And they, and they see strength in some of the Republicans being willing, like Trump on those shows, and they see some strength in that. So, you know, kind of engage in that place. Obviously, be Buttigieg, Cory Booker. There have been Democrats who have done that. And, you know, they may not say everything that's going. The host may not agree with every single thing, but it shows some strength and some authenticity and an opportunity to kind of build some. Build some trust. But, you know, these things travel. Young men right now are. Are kind of playing games or online on Twitch. They're talking about these things. Right. They talk about what Rogan said. They're talking about what they're hearing from other podcasts. It's influencing that conversation. So one of the big messages, I think, is that Democrats need to understand this kind of, this ecosystem and they need to begin to invest and to lift up some of those influencers who might have hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, not millions yet, and help give them a platform for their message. There's a project I'm part of called the Sam Speaking with American Man Project, which is trying to do just that.
- [44:57]
A
Yeah. And I do think, just getting back to what we were saying a few moments ago about these economic issues. I mean, if Donald Trump vetoes a bill that would provide help to people to buy Obamacare, I mean, you know this all too well. Health care is a massive issue in these midterm election cycles, and Democrats have sort of banked on that from. From cycle to site. I wonder if they could do it this time as effectively. But your thoughts on what the. Like, what the Democrats need to do heading in these midterms? What the, what the message is that resonates and so on.
- [45:32]
D
Yeah, I mean clearly that healthcare is an integral part of that, Jim. There have been multiple times. But I'm thinking one recent example of a focus group I did you know of, of 20 something year old younger men where one was, he was a mechanic, it lived out west in one of the battlegrounds to kids out west. Well, he talked about one of his best friends, went into the doctor for the first time in years and found out that he had disease and within a week or two had passed away. Right. Without access to health care. So we think about access to health care as being something that drives a lot of older voters, but it's incredibly relevant with younger voters, especially younger folks, folks who are working class voters, you know, who may not have a lot of economic security certainly related to health care. So I clearly think that is one element of that. But listen, I think that to have that conversation though, to have that policy based conversation, you need to do the hard work now to begin to develop some trust and to prove to people that you're listening. The kinds of conversations of talking to you. There isn't a focus group I can assemble anywhere in the country where I don't meet someone who's been homeless. Right. Third, up to 40% of younger people feel like they're on the verge of homelessness. And Democrats just need to be real and say, you know what, I know you don't trust us, I know you don't think we've delivered anything. But I'm telling you, I hear you. And the reason I'm fighting so hard is to XYZ provide more economic opportunity for you so you can stay in your home, you can save for a home, you can provide for a family and do the things that are just basic that we've all been raised to want to perspective. We work hard. Right. But they need to address that they're seen as weak right now and how to address that directly head on.
- [47:24]
A
Interesting. And I mean not to belabor this, but abolishing ICE is that, I mean I hear, I was at a protest last night, you know, covering this and that is something that comes up time and again. Is that, is that something that. It could work.
- [47:38]
D
It could work. It could be a part, it could be a part of it, I think. But like abolishing ICE without recognizing that people have real concerns right. About, you know, what's happened in the border chaos, etc. I'll tell you something else we talked about. You show the graph from Harvard. Yeah, we've been doing this 25 years. This is a 51st survey, right. Only 13. Great track. Why? You know, certainly the disorder, the economic instability. Right. One, driven by inflation and the cost of living. Two, but the other aspect, incredible opportunity gym for Democrats is related to AI and you've got strong majorities of younger people across the socioeconomic spectrum in the Harvard poll who are just deeply concerned about the impact that's going to have on, on their economic futures specifically related to those careers. And I think that's one of the more significant policy differences between the Trump White House and Democrats right now in terms of Trump White House, you know, basically removing all the guardrails. You know, so again, another opportunity, I think, for Democrats to recognize the concerns that people have and to, and to work with them to help provide some guardrails. So, so, so people can kind of benefit. Younger people are smart enough to know what happened with social media without the guardrails.
- [49:03]
A
Right.
- [49:03]
D
And, and how detrimental that's been to so many aspects of our society today and democracy.
- [49:09]
A
No question about it. Oh, well, John, I'm, I'm glad we were able to do this and we've been meaning to get this perspective for some time. So thank you for coming on today and hope we can get you back on here again. I have a feeling we're going to be talking about Gen Z and these young voters all throughout the year. So thanks so much for the time. Really appreciate it.
- [49:27]
D
Anytime. Thanks, Jim.
- [49:28]
A
Thank you, John. Thank you. Good to see you. And you know, I do want to go back because there, there has been, you know, quite a bit of talk of, you know, Donald Trump. And you know, what he has been, he has been saying to the American people in recent days, let's go back and play. I mean, this was, this is. Well, he knows when he's on camera. He knows when he's on camera. And so when somebody says something to him and he responds in the way that he did in Detroit when somebody, there was a, an auto worker who called him a pedophile protector, which is what he has been. And when he responded this way, let's play this one more time and talk about this. I don't know about you. I think I saw two use and the middle finger coming from Donald. And I mean, I let's, there's a part of me that wants to, there is a part of me that wants to say, okay, why did we give the mayor of Minneapolis a hard time? Why, why did we give him a hard time? Because he said, you know, get the out of out of Minneapolis. But there's something else that is on my mind and it seems to me, you look at the polls, you look at the reaction to the killing of Renee Good, you look at what's, what's taking place with the Epstein files, the Justice Department slow walking, the release of the Epstein files. I mean, there's, there's a lot to be pissed off about. There's, there's a lot to say you about. It seems to me, it seems to me the American people, if you look at what's been taking place over the last week or so, the outrage over the killing of Renee Good, to me, it's, it's the American people who are saying fuck you to Donald Trump. They're saying fuck you for the Epstein files and protecting pedophiles like Ghislaine Maxwell. When Donald Trump is called a pedophile protector, that is what he is. They moved Ghislaine Maxwell from a prison in Texas to a minimum security facility or a prison in Florida to a minimum security facility in Texas. So the American people, I mean, it seems to me, are saying, no, Donald Trump. The American people are saying fuck you. They're saying fuck you for the Epstein files and protecting pedophiles like Elaine Maxwell. They're saying fuck you for ice. They're saying fuck you for Renee Good. They're saying fuck you for terrorizing immigrants. We're a nation of immigrants. The American people, it seems to me, are saying fuck you for screwing people on Obamacare. They're saying fuck you for making Americans pay for your tariffs. They're saying fuck you for bulldozing part of the White House. They're saying fuck you for putting your name on the Kennedy Center. We're not going to call it the Trump Kennedy Center. They're saying you for putting gold everywhere around the White House. It's not Saddam Hussein's house. It's the American people's house. They're saying fuck you for attacking the press. Just today the FBI searched the home of a Washington Post journalist over a leak investigation. The Trump people, I should point out, they leak all the time. It seems to be the American people are saying fuck you for threatening our NATO allies. They're saying fuck you for threatening Greenland. Fucking Greenland. 4%. We showed that poll earlier. 4% of the American people support invading Greenland. And yet Donald Trump and his people are putting that out there. They're saying fuck you for demonizing trans people. I think they're still saying fuck you for fucking with Jimmy Kimmel and fucking with Stephen Colbert. And fucking with the media. They're saying, fuck you to Donald Trump for just about everything. And so when Donald Trump goes out there and he tells an auto worker you for saying you're a pedophile protector, I mean, it seems to be, it is just fine for the American people to say you right back. There's a lot to say fuck you about these days. And before you say, oh, Jim, don't say or, oh, mayor of Minneapolis, we can't say fuck. Don't forget who's in the White House right now. The most vulgar, crass and profane president this country has ever known. And if you can't say right now, when can you say it? Something to think about. Something for Donald Trump to think about. My thanks to Jess Michaels. My thanks to Rufus Gifford. My thanks to John Della Volpe. My thanks to all of you for watching. Doggone it. I was supposed to say at the beginning of all this, please. I'm trying to make this more of a point to say this from time to time, when you get a chance, make you, make sure you hit that subscribe button. Make sure you hit that, like, button. If you're watching this on various platforms. It does mean a lot to us when you support independent media. Why not just say it and join the squad here? But thanks again for watching. Really appreciate it, as always. Still reporting from Washington, I'm Jim Acosta. I'll see you next time.