← The Jim Acosta Show
The Jim Acosta Show
Senator Elissa Slotkin and Liz Oyer on DOJ Injustice and Florida Gubernatorial Candidate David Jolly
01:01:30
Loading summary
Transcript81 lines
- [00:13]
Jim Acosta
Welcome to the Jim Acosta show. And it's another day that ends in Y and Donald Trump's assault on American democracy. Today, he pointed to Attorney General Pam Bondi and said it was her idea to send Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard down to Georgia along with FBI agents to raid an election center in Fulton County. Meanwhile, his attempts to silence dissent in this country continue. Today, Michigan Senator Alyssa Slotkin said she would not sit down with Justice Department for their investigation into the video she filmed with other Democrats telling U.S. service members that they don't have to obey unlawful orders. And here to talk about that is Senator Slotkin. Senator, thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate it.
- [00:55]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Or thanks for having me on.
- [00:57]
Jim Acosta
Yeah. No, and let's just jump right into this. Your decision on why you're saying no to the Justice Department. I think a lot of our viewers will fully understand why you're saying no, but lay it out for us.
- [01:11]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Yeah. Well, just to review the bidding in November, you know, a number of us with service and veteran background here on the Capitol did a 90 second video restating current law. The president didn't like that. He retweeted and tweeted, you know, over a dozen times that we should be investigated, arrested, and then ultimately hanged. First edition. So threats go through the roof. Physical threats on myself, my house, my staff, my family, my parents. And, and then we get the beginning of this sort of formal inquiry from the FBI. And, you know, when your family is threatened, I mean, we're human beings. Right. My dad was very ill and he's been woken up in the middle of the night by being swatted with the police at his door. And so I was told by many people, kind of just keep your head low, sit on your hands, and hopefully this will just go away over Christmas. And then I come back after Christmas. And Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, has sent a letter saying, nope, we're still needing to talk to you and wanting to sit down for this inquiry. So it just, it pissed me off. And I think it really crystallized for me that if you, you know, doing nothing and kind of sitting on your hands doesn't actually make anything better. In fact, it makes it worse for you and especially for the next person who's going to be investigated. So we wanted to go on offense. We flipped the paradigm and make them tap dance a little bit today. And that's what we did by sending that letter saying, no, I'm not going to sit down for this sham Investigation for something that's my freedom of speech. But then secondly, retain all of your records. Just keep them all in line with the law, because who knows if I want to go ahead and use my constitutional ability to go and sue them for violating my rights? And so, just a little shot across the bow. The president has some immunity from the Supreme Court. His lieutenants and the people working for him do not.
- [03:19]
Jim Acosta
Right. And we should point out, I mean, this whole idea that you were doing something wrong by telling service members not to obey unlawful orders. I mean, you were not the first to do this. As a matter of fact, the Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth, I believe, once did this back in 2016. If I. If I'm correct on this. Let's play a little video of that. And I think you highlighted this. We'll talk about it on the other side.
- [03:43]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
You're doing something that is just completely.
- [03:45]
Jim Acosta
Unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that. That's why the military said it won't follow unlawful orders from their commander in chief. There's a standard, there's an ethos, there's a belief that we are above what so many things that our enemies or others would do.
- [04:02]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.
- [04:07]
Jim Acosta
Right. So, Senator, I guess I don't understand what the issue is. If Pete Hegseth himself has said this.
- [04:15]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
It's not about logic. It's not about law. It's just politicizing and weaponizing the federal government against critics who you don't like. And they're doing it to Mark Kelly, who did the video with me. They're doing it to other people in other realms. And if you think about it, you know, if they can do it to me as a sitting senator, what can they do to a business person, a community leader, a mom who goes viral on the Internet? I mean, you can see how weaponizing the legal system, you know, you got to get a lawyer. You got to pay for that lawyer.
- [04:47]
Liz Oyer
You.
- [04:48]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
It takes away from. From your. Your life, your time. So I just. For me, the intimidation that they're using is the point. They want you to be intimidated, and they want other people to be deterred from criticizing the administration because they're like, oh, look at what happened to Slotkin. Right? So I think that was very important for me. It's not about me and this case. It's about the next person who wants to say something and exercise free speech. And they're nervous to do it because of the intimidation that's coming.
- [05:22]
Jim Acosta
Right. I mean, it's often said with Trump, the cruelty is the point, but I think the fear is the point in many cases that it's about driving fear into his so called political enemies. And the other thing I want to ask you about, Senator, because your experience goes back to the intelligence community, I'm sure you know this. The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was recently down at the Fulton county election headquarters along with FBI agents who conducted a raid there and seized truckloads of ballots, according to the New York Times. And I mean, that, that of course is, is disturbing enough, but today, I guess Trump was trying to evade responsibility for this, even though apparently he was on the phone with these agents that day, according to the New York Times. And he was sort of throwing the Attorney General, Pam Bondi under the bus and saying, oh, no, she was the one who sent Tulsi Gabbard off to do this. Let's play this and talk and talk about this.
- [06:19]
Donald Trump
National and international intelligence. Tulsi Gabbard, who's doing a great job with Tulsi, she took a lot of heat two days ago because she went in at Pam's insistence. She went in and she looked at votes that want to be checked out from Georgia. They see why is she doing it?
- [06:45]
David Jolly
Right.
- [06:45]
Donald Trump
Pam, why is she doing it? Because Pam wanted her to do it. And you know why? Because she's smart. And they said, well, this has to do. Her position has to do. It's really not so. But her position has to do with international. I say, well, the same people that said that, they've been saying Russia, Russia, Russia has been screwing our elections.
- [07:04]
Jim Acosta
Okay, yeah. So Senator, I mean, he goes on and on here, but I mean, your sense of, your sense of all of this and the fact that he's, he's, he seems to be throwing Pam Bondi under the bus. I don't know what's going on there, why he's the president, why he would have to say that. But I guess, first of all, if we could just sort of peel back the onion one layer at a time, your thoughts on the Director of National Intelligence being involved in something like this? There's a Reuters story that says she did something similar in Puerto Rico as well.
- [07:31]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Right, right. Well, look, I served at the DNI's office many years ago. I helped stand it up. I was one of the first employees there when Congress invented it after 9, 11. And the director of National Intelligence is supposed to oversee the 17 different intelligence organizations that are focused on foreign adversaries, foreign threats. Right. So what she was doing showing up at a CIA, at a FBI raid in Fulton County. She wrote a letter to Congress three days ago saying, the president sent me. Right. She didn't say, bam Bondi. She said the president, she's going to Puerto Rico. She's basically following up on the president's, at this point, I think, obsession with the false claim that he won the 2020 election. Right. And she is spending her time doing that instead of thinking about the foreign adversaries, the foreign terrorist organizations, the nation states that are threatening the country. And it's completely inappropriate. And if there's some sort of foreign nexus, you know, that the Russians or the Chinese or the Iranians were involved in Fulton county, show us the money, show us the intel. And. But I think otherwise it is sort of, again, it's part of the same theme of what got us talking today, the weaponization of the federal government on the pet projects and against the adversaries that this president doesn't like. That's what it is. And it's a frightening moment.
- [08:59]
Jim Acosta
Yeah, it is. And just to follow up on that, I mean, do you think that our midterms are going to be safe and secure and fair and square if you have the president of the United States directing his DNI to meddle in this fashion? It seems to me that it's an open question and there, there should be a cause for concern here.
- [09:19]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Yeah. I mean, look, the. You don't have to sort of put pieces together. The president this week said we should federalize elections and take it out of the hands of the states because they can't be trusted. Our founding fathers in the Constitution set up our system of elections, and they did it purposely so that there could be a counterbalance should any president ever want to completely rig elections for their own reelection. I mean, literally, they designed the system to be a distributed system. We have important, serious people, Democrats and Republicans, who serve as clerks and who administer elections at the statewide level. So I know my governor and lots around the state, Democrat and Republican, took umbrella umbrage with that. But you don't have to guess that the president is targeting these, these next elections in November as a point and whether that's taking them over the threat of, he's mentioned out loud, putting ICE and federal law enforcement around some of these, these election locations. He has laid out the breadcrumbs. I mean, it's not even breadcrumbs. It's the bread of what he is thinking of doing. And again, whether you're Democrat, independent, Republican, we should all, like, just. Hew very closely that Democratic elections are at the core of who we are, and we can't let anyone, any one man, skew them for his own benefit.
- [10:46]
Jim Acosta
And you recently gave a speech, I think it was, at the Brookings Institution, where you said that you were concerned that this White House is making preparations to. To go after Trump's perceived political enemies in this country and that, and that you are concerned about this and that you're worried that perhaps they may come after you. You know, one of the things that I get concerned about is I see what's taking place with ICE and the Department of Homeland Security's preparations for these detention centers, these mass detention centers across the country is whether, I mean, what are your thoughts on this in terms of, you know, Trump's plans to go after perceived political enemies? And these detention centers, to me seem like, gosh, you know, is there something planned beyond just people who are swept up in these deportation rates? Your thoughts?
- [11:42]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Yeah. Well, I don't think there's a future tense to him going after his political adversaries. And we just live in a world right now where, you know, people have lost their sense of right and wrong. So he can use the government to go after his enemies, but then the government isn't doing the bare minimum to come after him and his folks, particularly those who are, you know, accused of corruption, accused of, you know, in the Jeffrey Epstein stuff. I mean, governments are falling in Europe because of those files. But he's untouchable, right? And his peers and his cabinet are untouchable. So we've already got this divided version of justice, which, again, is just. It's just history. Will not look back well on this moment in terms of detention centers. We know that the Department of Homeland Security and ICE in particular, got an enormous amount of money from the big beautiful bill back in July, and that a lot of that money is earmarked for facilities. I don't have any evidence that this is for, you know, political enemies, but it certainly. For ramping up his immigration agenda and putting more and more people in detention. You don't build facilities when. And I think that given some of the reports that are coming out of some of these centers, should certainly be a cause for real concern.
- [13:05]
Jim Acosta
Yeah, no, I mean, you know, there. There are reports that there's been a measles outbreak at one detention center in Texas, and they're just grabbing kids. I mean, what we saw take place with little Liam Ramos in Minneapolis, where he was brought down to Texas, and then a judge had to say to the administration no, you have to let this little kid out. I mean, what's happening with this country when we have detention centers and we're putting kids in those detention centers after he said out on the campaign trail that they were going to go after the criminals and the worst of the worst. That's clearly not what's happening.
- [13:39]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Yeah, I think, you know, we collectively right now have a situation where we're like the boiled frog, you know, that we've been in the warm water, it's gotten hotter and hotter each day. We come home and we're like, did you see what happened? And, like, good Lord. Or you wake up in the morning, you look at your phone, you're like, oh, my God. And what ends up happening is you get sort of resistant and numb to each new thing, and the water is getting hotter and hotter and hotter. And, you know, ultimately, if you don't move, you boil. And I think that's how I would describe the country right now, is that people are exhausted by this level of chaos and drama. And, you know, just the. The average American can't stand things that sort of look and smell authoritarian. Like what we're seeing in Minneapolis. No matter whether you voted for them or not, there. There's like a internal barometer for authoritarianism in the average American, which is good. But. But there's also an exhaustion, and that exhaustion is forcing a lot of people to tune out. I've had so many people just say, I'm just going to focus on my kids, on what we've got going on in my household. I can't handle it. And I understand that, but we can't turn. Tune out and just let ourselves get boiled like that.
- [14:56]
Jim Acosta
No, there's no question about it. And you're right that there is so much fatigue out there, people want to turn away from the news and not pay attention to things. I think one that folks should pay attention to, and maybe this is the boring Washington guy in me who's been covering this a long time, is the fact that we apparently don't have a treaty anymore between the US And Russia when it comes to our nuclear arsenals. I guess at midnight on Thursday, the treaty, called a new start expired, which had caps on the number of weapons that the two sides could deploy on missiles, bombers, and submarines. This is according to National Public Radio. Intelligence is your. Is your, you know, wheelhouse, your thoughts on this. I mean, it seems to be. Donald Trump in a moment as president, United States, when we don't have a nuclear treaty with Russia is maybe a bad idea.
- [15:50]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Yeah, you know, I think any American of a certain age, like over 45 or whatever, remembers the painstaking way that like Ronald Reagan and Gorbachev like manage and years before them, managed nuclear talks. I mean, big summits, big events. Because what could be more important than managing the weapons that can destroy all of humanity? Right? So in comes the Trump administration. And Trump won the first administration. You know, they sort of played within the colored within the lines on some of these national security issues, not now. And they're like, we'll get to it on a timeline of our choosing. That was the latest statement today. And as you can imagine, it's like we've taken something that most Americans didn't think much about because it was managed to being unmanaged. And we're talking about unmanaged nuclear capabilities. So we had a hearing up here this week in the Senate on this with some of these like arms control experts from both sides of the aisle. Again, like nuclear treaty stuff tends to be pretty nonpartisan because we just want superpowers to be able to navigate this. This is like Cuban missile crisis stuff. So it's dangerous. And the word out of the White House is like, we'll do it when we want to do it. And that makes us less safe, frankly, by a long shot.
- [17:15]
Jim Acosta
And because you are sort of keeping tabs on so many spooky things here in Washington, I just to wrap it up finally, that would be the one thing that would keep me up at night. I suppose there's a lot that would keep me up at night these days. That would be one thing. What keeps you up at night these days? Because there is so much flying at us from day to day. Is there something that does worry you? Does it go back to the administration's efforts to silence you, Mark Kelly and others? What would you put your finger on?
- [17:45]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
I will tell you the thing that keeps me up at night as a former CIA officer is we've seen the president and his administration violate so many norms with ICE and federal law enforcement, with the justice system and these political, you know, investigations and cases. We've seen him do this in so many places. One of the things that that is would be for me just a complete non starter would be if he turns the intelligence community on American citizens. Right. There is like an absolute article of faith from anyone who serves in the intelligence community. Our job is to protect the country from foreign threats, threats that are outside the country, foreign terrorist organizations, big nation states like Russia or Iran. And then, you know, with our history, Watergate and all These other things, we've learned this lesson over and over again. Do not turn the personnel and the power of the intelligence community on so called domestic terrorists in Minneapolis or political enemies in Georgia or whatever it is. But that, to me, is something I think a lot about. Who are the leaders of the intelligence community today going to hold firm when the. Or have they held firm when the President has directed them to turn the intelligence community against American citizens and American groups? That one keeps me up at night.
- [19:12]
Jim Acosta
And is there any sense that that is already happening?
- [19:14]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
I think, look, I certainly took notice. In September, the President put out an executive order tasking Pam Bondi to come up with a new list of domestic terrorist organizations. He expanded the definition of a domestic terrorist. So it's not just the Patriot act defining it. And again, someone who's been involved in a criminal act, it's people who are un American, have different views of Christianity and gender. I mean, he really expanded the definition. And then he tasked her with coming up with this new list of domestic terrorist groups. And she said, yes, sir, and said, we're going to use the full weight of the federal government to go after that groups. Those groups, including the Joint Terrorism Task Force, where the intelligence community sits.
- [20:01]
David Jolly
Right.
- [20:02]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
So I. So that got that pricked my ears up. CIA is on that task force. A lot of other intel folks are on that task force. So that to me was a real issue. And then you start to see Tulsi Gabbard showing up in all these places, and it's like, we got to keep that really strong red line. The intelligence community is for foreign threats, not American citizens.
- [20:27]
Jim Acosta
Yeah. I mean, and just finally, very last point, I mean, just in recent weeks, in the killings of Renee Good and Alex Preddy, members of the administration have referred to these people who were killed, gunned down as domestic terrorists. That seems to fall right into what you're saying.
- [20:46]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Exactly. So in September, they say, come up with a list. In December, January, they're calling everybody domestic terrorists. So, you know, if you label someone that way, which is, by the way, an absolute part of the authoritarian playbook, like, read your history books. I worked abroad for many, many years.
- [21:06]
Jim Acosta
Yep.
- [21:06]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Labeling your enemies as terrorists is as standard as it comes in the authoritarian playbook for saying, well, now I got to use force against those people, I've got to use intelligence capabilities against those people, despite the fact that we have freedom of speech. And unless you commit a crime or destroy property, threaten people, your. Your views can be unpopular, but they're protected speech. So certainly the combination of his executive order, plus what he's done in Minneapolis. The labeling of people should give again. We should all be thinking about this playbook.
- [21:40]
Jim Acosta
Well, Senator Alyssa Slotkin, we could go on and on like this. I won't do that to you or your team. But thank you very much for your time. I really appreciate it. And keep us posted on your efforts to, you know, resist these efforts to silence dissent in this country. And it seems to me, you know, our free speech rights are paramount. These constitutional rights cannot be violated. And so thanks. Thanks for your time. Really appreciate it.
- [22:05]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
Appreciate you guys. Take care.
- [22:06]
Jim Acosta
All right. You, too. Thanks a lot. And that was Senator Alyssa Slotkin, I think, with some very important words about what this country is up against right now. And she understands this all too well. After coming out of a CIA background, becoming a United States senator, she sees this stuff. She understands it well. Let's talk about her decision to tell the doj, no, she will not sit down for an interview with the Justice Department. Let's bring in the former pardon attorney over at the doj, lawyer Oyer. Liz Oyer. Liz, great to see, as always. Thanks for coming on. Oh, we don't have audio for Liz. Let's see if we can unmute Liz. There she is. How about now? You sound great. You're sounding great. Liz, great to see you. What are your thoughts on what Alyssa Slotkin just said? She told us, and she announced this earlier today, that she's telling the Justice Department, no, she will not sit down for an interview with. I guess it's Janine Pirro and the U.S. attorney's office as they're, you know, claiming they're conducting an investigation into Slotkin and some other Democrats saying to US Service members, you don't have to follow unlawful orders. Which is something, by the way, that Pete Hegseth has done and a lot of other Republicans have done in years past. Yeah.
- [23:26]
Liz Oyer
I'm so glad to see Senator Slotkin setting this example of standing up and pushing back against the bullying that's coming from this administration. There are not enough people doing it. Something that she said that really struck a chord with me is this idea that the advice she was getting from lawyers and others around her was to stay quiet because that's the safer course. That is the way lawyers are wired to think about managing risk. And lawyers have been a big part of the problem in enabling this administration. I have seen these law firms that have essentially capitulated to the administration and started this cascade of dominoes falling as a major part of this problem of everyone Just rolling out the red carpet for the bullies who are going to come in and demolish the rule of law in our country. We have not seen enough people with the courage to stand up to it. It is easier to stay quiet and to be complicit, but that is what ultimately will destroy our country. We need Alyssa Slotkin, who have the courage to stand up and say, I am not participating in this sham charade use of the justice system. So I find that incredibly encouraging to see her setting that example.
- [24:41]
Jim Acosta
Yeah, me too. And I know that, Liz, just in the last day or so, you posted a new video on your socials talking about the things that are happening over at the Justice Department, the things that really worry you, that are happening over the Justice Department. I assume one of those is this effort to suppress speech, to silence critics, to go after people like Mark Kelly and Alyssa Slotkin. Tell us a little bit about what you're laying out, because, I mean, seven is a lot. We shouldn't have a Justice Department doing seven different things that are undermining justice in this country.
- [25:16]
Liz Oyer
Yeah, the Justice Department is really failing in every single respect at every single aspect of what they're supposed to be doing. And one aspect of it is that they are using the powers of law enforcement to accomplish political objectives, which is fundamentally wrong. We saw that with the arrests of certain journalists. They're using the powers of law enforcement to try to silence journalists who are expressing viewpoints that they don't agree with. We saw them do this with the elections in the case of the search warrant that was executed at the Fulton county election office. They're also subpoenaing voter rolls from virtually every state in the country. So they're using law enforcement powers to interfer with elections and to interfere with free speech. They're also using law enforcement powers to go after the president's enemies. They have ginned up reasons to investigate people for doing their jobs. For example, in the case of the Fed Chairman, Jerome Powell, they are criminally investigating him because he refused to capitulate to Donald Trump's demand to lower interest rates. And that is happening across the board. The Justice Department actually has what's called the Weaponization Working Group and unprecedented creation of Donald Trump and Pam Bondi that has the. The entire task of that group is to figure out how to use the levers of justice to prosecute Donald Trump's enemies. So that's really unprecedented and shocking. And at the same time, they're failing victims of crime. We saw this week that the Justice Department exposed The personal information of dozens of victims of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse. And Todd Blanch, the deputy Attorney general, did this media tour in which he essentially said, well, it's not really that big of a deal because it's just a small number of documents. When you look at the overall number of documents we produced, and we're trying to fix it, but that's a sacred obligation of the Justice Department to protect victims of crime. And they can't even do that. Really. The whole system is falling apart under the leadership. Leadership, I'll say, in quotation marks of Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche.
- [27:31]
Jim Acosta
Yeah, they don't seem to be interested as much in protecting victims as they do protecting pedophiles and perpetrators of this kind of abuse. And I just saw today that Congressman Ro Khanna, who's been working with Thomas Massie on the Epstein files, Ro Khanna put out a tweet earlier today pointing out these two emails that he is very interested in where names are redacted. We're showing one right here. This is from redacted to Jeffrey Epstein. This is back in March of 2014, and it says, thank you for a fun night. Your littlest girl was a little naughty. And the person who sent that email to Jeffrey Epstein, that name is redacted. I don't know. Why are they redacting these kinds of names? There's another one we can show that's even more abhorrent or, I mean, I don't know, they're just as important. This one is name redacted to Jeffrey Epstein. And this is in January of 2013, so not that long ago. And it says, new Brazilian just arrived. Sexy and cute. And then it says, equals 9 y o, which sounds like 9 years old. I hope that that's not the case. But that's what it looks like. Absolutely horrific, horrendous stuff. And it looks like the DOJ went in there and very meticulously redacted this stuff.
- [28:47]
Liz Oyer
Yeah, it's indefensible. The redactions are indefensible. The failure to redact victim information is indefensible. The fundamental problem here is that we can longer trust the motivations of this Justice Department. We can't trust that they are trying to do it right. Typically, you would expect that the Justice Department would get the benefit of the doubt, like this very well may be litigated. Can these redactions stand? And typically, a judge would say, well, this is the Justice Department. They have a legal obligation. I trust that they are doing this in good faith. That has all fallen by the wayside. I don't think that courts trust the Justice Department any longer, which is just a devastating blow to the credibility of that institution. There have been some studies documenting just hundreds of cases in which the Justice Department has blatantly defied the orders of judges. And it has really cost them. It has cost the credibility of that institution. And we see that very clearly with the Epstein files. We cannot trust that what has been done here has been done in good faith.
- [29:52]
Jim Acosta
Right. I mean, I mean, this is the same Justice Department that said last July that there was basically nothing to see here with the Epstein files and they had to be, you know, dragged, kicking and screaming to release all these materials. And I mean, it's not just Pam Bondi. I mean, Todd Blanche was on the other day on Fox saying that it's, it's not illegal to party with Jeffrey Epstein. And it's like, dude, that's not the point. The point is they had these parties where there was sexual abuse and rape of children going on. And how he does not get that is really disturbing to me.
- [30:25]
Liz Oyer
It is really disturbing. I don't know if he's dumb or if he's just totally lacking in empathy or both. But that was a really shocking statement coming from the number two official in the Justice Department. We have seen Todd Blanche become the new public face, the mouthpiece for the department's handling of this issue because Pam Bondi has already burned her credibility on this particular issue. She announced about a year ago that she had Jeffrey Epstein's client list sitting on her desk waiting to be reviewed. And that list never materialized. And now she's damaged goods. So Todd Blanche is out in front of this issue and he's frankly doing a terrible job of handling it. He's not making anybody happy. And he really just doesn't sound like he gives a crap about the issue.
- [31:10]
Jim Acosta
Yeah. And I played this piece of sound earlier with Alyssa Slotkin. I want to play it again for you because to me, it just so typifies the way things operate in Trump world. You know, the he brought up at the National Prayer Breakfast. Why he's bringing this up at the National Prayer Breakfast, I have no idea. The fact that Tulsi Gabbard went to an election headquarters in Fulton County, Georgia. I've been all over this all week. This, to me is a, it's a five alarm fire for our democracy. And Trump said that it was, oh, it was Pam Bondi that sent Tulsi Gabbard down there. It wasn't him. It was Pam Bondi. Let's play this and then talk about what, what's going on here. We still have it. Hopefully we have it. Do we still have the Pam Bondi Trump talking about Pam Bondi? Well, I'll just summarize.
- [32:03]
Liz Oyer
I know what you're referencing.
- [32:04]
Jim Acosta
If they get it ready, we'll play it. But, yeah. Your thoughts on that? Because it sounds to me that Trump seems to get that there's maybe some legal culpability here or that this is maybe a little too hot to be sending the DNI down there and raiding with the FBI and election headquarters. And he put, he pins it on Pam Bondi, which says to me she's just as disposable as anybody else in Trump world.
- [32:29]
Liz Oyer
Yeah, yeah.
- [32:33]
Jim Acosta
Did we find it?
- [32:33]
Donald Trump
Tulsi Gabbard, who's doing. We have our Director of National and International Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who's doing a great job. Where's Tulsi? She took a lot of heat two days ago because she went in at Pam's insistence. She went in and she looked at votes that want to be checked out from Georgia. They see, why is she doing it? Right, Pam. Why is she doing it? Because Pam wanted her to do it.
- [33:08]
Jim Acosta
And Pam wanted her to do it. I mean, that's it right there. I mean, he says Pam wanted her to do it. The story in the New York Times is, is that, that Tulsi Gabbard is there and she put Trump on the phone with the agents, and it's his obsession with losing the 2020 election that's. That's at issue here. So, I mean, what did you make of that when you heard that?
- [33:27]
Liz Oyer
Well, he does this often. He sort of, like, floats these trial balloons. He. He pitches one approach to something, and then when it doesn't work, he shamelessly pivots in a completely different something that is directly contradicted by what others have said. Tulsi Gabbard wrote a letter to Congress in which she said that she got the direction from Donald Trump personally to be there. And now Trump is saying, oh, actually, it was Pam Bondi. So I don't know exactly what is going on here, but what's really notable about it from a legal perspective is that Donald Trump likes people who can get results, and he does not have the patience for process, including legal process, that slows down or interferes with getting the results that he wants. So here, instead of following an orderly investigative process through the Justice Department, even if there were anything to investigate, he's bringing in Tulsi Gabbard, who he knows is crazy enough and uneducated enough about the law that she will just step in there and try to achieve the goal that Trump has in mind without regard for the proper legal process that has to be followed. You cannot just go seize documents pursuant to a search warrant and share them with anyone that you want. There are actually rules in place that say that those documents can only be accessed by people who are working on a criminal investigation under the auspices of the Justice Department. And Tulsi Gabbard is not one of those people. So this is just a workaround for a legal process that might slow down or interfere with Trump's desired goal of somehow proving that this election that happened five plus years ago was unfair. And there's actually an interesting through line. There's a connection between this and what has happened this week with Ed Martin and the Weaponization Working Group. There's this.
- [35:17]
Jim Acosta
You've been, you've been talking about this old eagle, Ed.
- [35:20]
Liz Oyer
Yeah. So Ed Martin is this lawyer who, like, I don't even know how he got a law degree. He doesn't seem like a serious person in any respect, but he somehow ingratiated himself with Donald Trump after being fired from lots of other jobs and doing all sorts of wild stuff. He ingratiated himself with Donald Trump by defending a lot of the January six rioters and leading this Stop the Steal movement. And he got placed in the Justice Department as the acting U.S. attorney for D.C. and he was viewed even by some Republicans as unconfirmable for that position. So then he was given this position as the director of the Weaponization Working Group, as well as the role of pardon attorney. And so he's got his hand on this, like, lever of punishment and this lever of rewards through pardons. And the reason that Trump put him in that role is because Martin also doesn't give a damn about process. He's not somebody who feels constrained by following a legal process. He's somebody who's happy to take the direction to go out there and prosecute Trump's enemies and run with that without any consideration to following appropriate legal process. And it's. It seems that that finally caught up with him this week. CNN reported this week that he's in some trouble because he apparently leaked grand jury information, which is highly confidential, and even alienated himself in the MAGA circle of Todd Blanche and Pam Bondi, and was ousted from this role as Weaponization director. But it's just another example of the shortcuts that Donald Trump was. Is Taking by putting people who are totally unqualified for their jobs in roles where he just wants to get to an outcome, and he doesn't really care about following any proper process.
- [37:10]
Jim Acosta
No, that's absolutely right. And, you know, we should point out, and I've said this many times, there's no evidence. There's never been any evidence proven or shown to the American people indicating that there's widespread voter fraud in this country. And Trump's been trying to prove this for the better part of 10 years, since he lost the popular vote in 2016, he has still not been able to do it. And for all of his concerns about fraud, he's the one who's been pardoning fraudsters, as you have laid out time and again, Liz. So it's just incredible.
- [37:39]
Liz Oyer
Yeah. The thing that's going on with fraud prosecutions is concerning from a couple of different perspectives. One, yeah, Donald Trump says he's cracking down on fraud, and that's a major directive for doj. But at the same time, he has. Has pardoned some of the biggest fraudsters literally in history. The other issue is that he has really decimated the workforce within the Justice Department, the people who are there to bring these prosecutions. I read today that in the U.S. attorney's office in Minnesota, which is like the epicenter of these fraud prosecutions that he's currently obsessed with, that office used to have, under The Biden administration, 70 attorneys in it, and now it's down to something like 15, because so many people have quit, including four prosecutors who were leading the charge in a major fraud trial that is supposed to begin this month. So that really cripples the ability to prosecute legitimate cases when people are unable to work in the environment, either because they're getting fired or because they are being asked to compromise their ethics and integrity and just have to walk away and quit. And that actually places us in a lot of danger. Experts are saying that the level of attrition of prosecutors and FBI agents means that we are not doing the things that we ought to be doing to proactively prevent things like cyber attacks, terrorist attacks, prosecutions of fraud. And that's really, really dangerous for the American people. And it's concerning that it may catch up with us in some really damaging and devastating way for our country.
- [39:17]
Jim Acosta
Yeah. And we don't want that to happen. That's for sure. Well, Liz, always great to see you. Thank you so much. Thank you. You mentioned honesty and integrity. That's you. So we always appreciate coming on and parsing through these very difficult legal issues and all of which are being violated at this point, it seems. Thanks, Liz. Great to see you.
- [39:36]
Liz Oyer
Thanks for having me on, Jim.
- [39:37]
Jim Acosta
All right, great to see. As always, I want to quickly switch gears and talk about the upcoming midterms because, you know, folks, you know, it was, it was once said that, well, the Democrats will take the House, they won't win the Senate. That's what was once said. And now all of a sudden there's a lot of discussion about maybe the Democrats will win the Senate. And people say, oh, well, they'll win the House, maybe they'll win the Senate, but they'll never win these governor's races in places like Florida. That just will never happen. Well, folks, we don't know, I mean, this, this thing is moving fast, so I think we have to keep our, our, our minds open here. And to that point, let's bring in David Jolly. He is the former Republican congressman now running for governor of Florida. And David, I, I, I've been really excited to talk to you about all of this stuff because as I was just saying a few moments ago, it's sort of, you know, people just are, I, I guess conditioned at this point to think, well, just nothing's going to work out. Yeah, yeah. As a matter of fact, things sometimes do work out. And I think the, the governor's race is within grasp in the state of Florida. Things are, I was just down there, as you were. Things are changing down there, too.
- [40:46]
David Jolly
Yeah, that's right, Jim. Look, I think the Florida governor's race is now a toss up. We got into this race about a year ago. I'm a Democrat now. I had been a Republican in Congress, spent about five or six years as an independent. Today I'm a proud Democrat, not a reluctant one, but, you know, we got into this race. My wife and I have two kids, 6 and 4. I have had no interest in a vanity run or a race that would be out of reach. It's not worth the sacrifice to our kids and to our family. But you know, I've told my daughter, when you have a chance to change the world, you take it. And I think in this moment where the nation is just, is breaking apart and crumbling around us, where we know the division every day, it can be through your concerns over the attacks on our democracy, over personal liberties and economy that's getting away. What we're seeing in Minnesota, the division is real and here's why. I can tell you Florida is within reach. We can believe in our heart all day long that there's a movement happening and I believe there is. But we can also use our heads and realize, wait. In Florida's special elections, two congressional seats, Democrats have outperformed by 15 and 16 points. Miami just elected a Democratic mayor for the first time in 30 years. It wasn't even close. It was 19 points. We're, we're getting ground in the villages. We're seeing state legislative races move by 20 points. And so yes, Florida, the statewide races this cycle, the governor's race is within reach. I started telling people, I'm afraid we're going to win this thing. I'm afraid we're going to win this thing.
- [42:11]
Jim Acosta
And then you'll have some real work on your hands in the state of Florida, which hasn't been run by Democrats in quite some time. And I think part of the reason why is, and you tell me what you're hearing anecdotally from folks. I think the Epstein files is a very big deal for a lot of people. I think people are very pissed off about that and I think a lot of Republicans are mad about it and it's sort of cracking the code for them in terms of what Donald Trump has been up to. And they're like, maybe I just, I don't know about this guy anymore that's happening in the Republican Party. And I also think the economy, people vote with their pocketbooks. And there was just a story that came out today. This is new numbers. This is according to the Hill. New numbers from U S. Based employers show January was the worst month for job cuts since 2009. This is according to a report from challenger Gray. And Christmas, of course, we don't have a whole lot of faith in what the federal government is putting out now in terms of jobs numbers because Trump has gone after the Bureau of Labor statistics. But people are worried about this economy right now. It's real.
- [43:08]
David Jolly
Yeah, Jim, we got in about a year ago and we've been talking about what's now considered the affordability crisis. I use the term economic crisis. You know, affordability is whether you can afford your rent this month. The economic crisis is whether you're going to be able to afford housing for the next 10 years, whether that's rent or home ownership. Healthcare costs now as such that families are going without healthcare. They're losing their doctors, frankly, in a universal school choice state like Florida, education is becoming part of the economic crisis because Florida's abandoned public education and they want tuition on top of the voucher money. So the economic crisis is real and that is at the forefront of our campaign. But you hit on something, whether it's the Epstein files, whether it's Minnesota, whether it's what we're seeing with ice, something has happened in the last 30 to 45 days. And, and I'll reflect on a conversation I had with a former Republican senator just in the last week who said to me, listen, I'm not leaving the Republican Party, but I'm going to vote for every Democrat on the ballot this cycle. Unless, unless you ask me to litigate the finer points of policy. If you just ask me to litigate our national identity, it's time to give Democrats the keys to the car. And I think what we've discovered here, Jim, is, look, I often say to my Republican friends, because we need Republican voters in Florida to elect a Democratic governor, I say we're never going to make America great again if we don't first make America good again. We are wrestling right now with our national identity, right? Even if you look at immigration, immigration policy is not hard to figure out. Once we settle our national values around immigration, are we a nation that is going to welcome the immigrant and the refugee and recognize their economic and cultural contributions to our country, or are we going to revert to this white nativist thoughts about whether or not we are welcoming to the immigrant? That's not policy debate, that's debate around values. And so I think that's what we're seeing the American people litigate. What we're seeing in ICE represents values that are antithetical to who we are. We would never tolerate that from our local police department or our local sheriff's agency, but we see it at the direction of Donald Trump being a reflection of federal law enforcement policy. So, yes, the economic crisis is certainly at the forefront of people's minds, but I think we wake up every day with an anxiety now around our national identity. The opportunity then for Democrats is to lead with values that are rooted in Democratic Party tradition, but bigger than our party and big enough to embrace the independent and Republican voter this cycle who's just looking, looking for the opportunity for change.
- [45:45]
Jim Acosta
You're right. I think ICE is a values issue. I think that's very smart. I think that's the right way to put it. When people see a little five year old being, you know, arrested in Minnesota and put in jail in a detention center in Texas, they say, hey, I'm all about getting criminal illegal immigrants out of the country and so on, not little kids. That, that's just not right. And, you know, some of this, you know, I wonder how Much. It resonates down in Florida because you got a lot of church going, folks down in Florida. As they say, south is north and north is south. There's a lot of people in northern Florida and go to church and they, I, I have to think, I've traveled all over that. I have to think that they're not on board with these ICE tactics and hurting people the way that the ICE agents have been doing. And I'm wondering if you're hearing that too and if it's making churchgoing folks question Donald Trump. You know, this is a guy, I mean, I'll play a clip from the National Prayer Breakfast a little bit from now, but I mean, I gotta think it's, it's shaking their confidence that he has any Christian bones, not even one Christian bone in his body.
- [46:50]
David Jolly
Yeah, Jim, I think we're seeing some fracturing for Republicans within the faith based community. But I also think this becomes a charge for Democrats. Look, I'm somebody who speaks openly about my Christian faith.
- [47:01]
Liz Oyer
Faith.
- [47:01]
David Jolly
I'm a preacher's kid. My wife and our family still today celebrate our Christian faith. We're raising our children in our faith. I speak openly about it as a Democratic candidate on the trail, but I do it because it's part of my identity. Right. I'm married, we have two kids. I was in Congress, I'm a lawyer, I lived in Miami in the Panhandle. And yes, I talk about my faith as part of my introduction, but I acknowledge and I defend and I demand that it's time for the state of Florida to have a governor who understands that their personal and private faith stops at the steps to the state House. That's what the Constitution has ordained. But by speaking about my faith, that reveals a little bit of my values orientation. And so people of all faiths, the basics, love, joy, dignity, generosity. But people who identify as agnostics and atheists who believe in what Thomas Jefferson declared as the natural rights of man, you see these basic values, whether you come from a faith community or an agnostic community that subscribes to kind of Jeffersonian democracy, we realize that these are the values that have slipped away from us. And these are the values that if we hold that up as a test for the President or for Governor DeSantis in Florida, we cannot suggest that they pass that test right now. What do I mean? The simple values then in politics and in this country should be that the economy works for everyone. Absolutely everybody. We don't need to condemn success and, and fight the haves to fight for the have nots. The economy's not working for everyone. The second value is government can improve our lives. It shouldn't be constantly attacked. We need investments in public education, access to healthcare, protection of individual liberty and reproductive freedom, upward mobility, home ownership, retirement security, whatever it might be. And the third value is very simple. We should be a state where everyone's welcomed and their dignity celebrated, regardless of the color of their skin, where they were born, who they love or who they worship. So what does that have to do with the faith based community? I think if we reflect on those values, are we improving people's lives, celebrating everyone's dignity and making sure they have a shot, A shot, real opportunity. Then as Democrats speaking about our faith, we have an opportunity to build a coalition where Donald Trump is starting to push those communities away. When you go just to the immigrant community, for instance, we use language and I did this, I'm guilty of this in the last cycle about xenophobia, racism, anti immigration. I stand by those words. But it did not work in terms of political messaging. What everyone understands this cycle is cruelty and broken promises. Right? Liam Ramos, with the bunny ears and the backpack, that is not something that we thought. Someone that we thought should be a target of an enforcement and removal order. Or in South Florida, the Haitian community saying, I didn't think you meant my tps or the Venezuelan community who says you're going to topple Maduro. But now what? It didn't get any better for us because now you just have the imprint of Trump on the same regime. There is a host of broken promises and cruelty that are moving people throughout Florida, but also across the country into considering for the first time voting for a Democratic candidate or a Democratic coalition.
- [50:04]
Jim Acosta
Well, meanwhile, Trump's at the National Prayer Breakfast wondering if he's going to get into heaven. I don't know if you saw this, David, but we should. Let's play this, this. Because he talks about this a lot.
- [50:13]
Donald Trump
Said where? National Prayer Breakfast. I said, I'll be there. I'm afraid not to be. I need all the help I can get.
- [50:23]
Jim Acosta
They still applaud him, but let's listen.
- [50:26]
Donald Trump
And you know, I never get a fair break from the fake news, which is back there. That's a lot of fake news. Because last time I was having a lot of fun. We had a big graduate, 60,000 people. And I'm talking about the fact that I will never make it to heaven. I will never, ever. And I was being funny. I was trying to be, you know, you can't be sarcastic with them. Because they write your words and the people are reading. The words are much different. But I said, I'm never going to make it to heaven. I just don't think I qualify. I don't think there's a thing I can do.
- [50:59]
Jim Acosta
So anyway, I mean, he, you know, he's, he seems to be aware that maybe it's not going to work out when it, when it comes right down to it. But I mean I, you hear people applauding for him and I, this is one of the things that I've always struggled with covering him for so long. Is that how the Christian conservative community can really just put all of its eggs in that basket? It just seems to me that it, it's a square peg going into a round hole with Donald Trump.
- [51:27]
David Jolly
Yeah. Jim, Consider myself one of the millions of Americans who consider themselves today. Church hurts. We don't quite understand the direction that the church, the evangelical church and the Republican party have gone with their marriage since the 80s. Certainly the warning signs were there. I have a manuscript one day I'll take to market. It's called Throw away the Truck, Throw away the Crutch. Throw Away the Crutch. It's a message to the church that basically says, listen, stop running to government, stop running to the Republican Party to try to enact into law your faith based principles that you have failed to successfully evangelize. And the reason it's a message to the church is you want those faith based convictions to remain within the church house, not within the state house. It will empower your faith and the government and our Constitution is there to protect your religious liberties, to evangelize it. I supported marriage equality long before it was ever constitutional. Kind of a libertarian Republican streak. And what I would say to the church community is, listen, the views of traditional marriage sit within your faith and you don't want to run to government to ask them for help with that. You want to celebrate your faith teaching and celebrate a constitution that allows you the liberty to evangelize. That it's true. Where I got to reconcile my personal faith with reproductive freedom. Right. Whatever my faith teachings might be on a very difficult question, I recognize that when those teachings are rooted in faith, that's a big red flag to say that cannot be a constitutional decision then because the Constitution is there to protect everybody's individual liberty, to practice what they want. And in the case of a faith based view of life or reproductive freedom, the constitutional requirements is to unleash reproductive freedom on every individual across this country and allow women to have bodily autonomy look, maybe it's a result of the fact that our politics have played to kind of the lowest baseline and we've elevated leaders like Donald Trump. I will never understand the direction the church has gone with the Republican Party. I hope being a Democrat who speaks openly about my faith, maybe I can unlock a new vision for some people in the faith community. I say that not to evangelize, but look, Democrats need help in this space. One of the reasons when I left the Republican Party in 18, I didn't become a Democrat right away because I didn't feel welcome. I didn't feel welcome. I was the first, the first Republican member of Congress to call on Donald Trump to drop out of the race, the only one in the 2016 cycle. I did it in December of 15 over the Muslim band, and I became this, you know, this noted Trump critic as a Republican. Well, by the time I left the party in 18, I still wasn't welcome in the Democratic Party. And I know Biden tried to get the party there. But I credit Vice President Harris at the convention when she welcomed people of faith, she welcomed former Republicans. She welcomed defense hawks. She welcomed people that spoke a language that I was speaking but made it feel as though I could now be a part of the Democratic coalition. Both my wife and I, we practice our politics individually, but like any couple, they're pretty similar. We both joined the Democratic Party shortly after that Democratic convention.
- [54:32]
Jim Acosta
Very interesting. Well, and it's, it's an incredible journey that you've been on, David. And I feel as though folks better keep an eye on you in this campaign down in Florida, because I, you know, nothing's impossible these days. I mean, it's sort of the same conversation, I think, surrounding James Talarico in Texas, you know, another Democrat who is leading with his faith. And I think it's okay, it's okay to talk about this stuff. Democrats, it's all right. Don't shun people who want to talk about their faith. It's, it's, it's going to be all right. But. And you might learn something, too. David Jolly, great to see, as always. Thank you so much. Best luck with. Let's do this again soon. Thank you. And I do want to end, you know, and maybe this is a good segue here. We all need to, I'm not going to go on some rant or monologue today. We all need to say a prayer. If you pray or moment of silence or think good thoughts about Savannah Guthrie's mom. And she is a, you know, somebody I've worked Alongside out on the campaign trail and in the news business for many, many years. She's over at NBC, the host of the Today show. She has issued a plea along with her siblings for the return of her mother, Nancy Guthrie. The the latest from the Associated Press is that investigators believe that the missing mother of Savannah Guthrie is still out there, and they have not identified any suspects. The sheriff said that DNA tests did show that blood found on Nancy Guthrie's porch came back to match her. And so, you know, I just want to say that I'm thinking about Savannah and her family. And let's play a little bit of the video, if we have it, of Savannah and her and her siblings in our home.
- [56:21]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
She is 84 years old. Her health, her heart is fragile. She lives in constant pain. She is without any medicine. She needs it to survive. She needs it not to suffer. We, too, have heard the reports about a ransom letter in the media. As a family, we are doing everything that we can. We are ready to talk. However, we live in a world where voices and images are easily manipulated, related. We need to know without a doubt that she is alive and that you have her. We want to hear from you, and we are ready to listen. Please reach out to us. Everyone is looking for you, mommy, everywhere.
- [57:28]
Jim Acosta
My heart just goes out to Savannah and her family and the folks at NBC who I know are just shell shocked right now over all of this. And we do hope and pray for Nancy Guthrie's safe return. I. I don't typically do this and devote the end of my show to something along those lines, but it is something that I think the entire country is. Is watching. And we just hope for the best for Savannah and her family. I want to thank everybody for joining me today. Please, if you. If you don't mind, I'll put one last pitch in. Please subscribe. It does make a difference to support independent media, so we can continue to bring you stories and interviews like we've brought to you on this program today. Senator Alyssa Slotkin, who is obviously one of the most talked about senators these days, a rising star in the Democratic Party, and I think with a very important and powerful message about the government going after critics in this country. She's right in the middle of this right now. And so we can bring in those kinds of guests, we can bring those kinds of interviews, those kinds of conversations to you. There's no going to commercial break. After five or six minutes, we can have a long discussion about these very important issues. And you really can only get that kind of content in independent media. And so it's very important to not just be a viewer of all of this, but a participant in what we do every day. So thank you so much for those of you who have been subscribing, who have been liking, have been sharing. If you do it on substack. Thanks to all of you so much. We're now one year since launching the substack show and several months into the YouTube show. I want to show one last thing before we go. If we, if we have the graphic ready. I think this past month in January, we had the most viewers ever on YouTube. I think we did. There it is right there. Our January YouTube growth. 3 million views in January. And so everything's growing and everything's doing great. And so if you watch us there, thank you. If you're watching us on YouTube right now, thank you. Your support means the world to us. And while you're at it, if you're viewing, subscribe, like, share all of those things. I know I sound like it's a. It's a. It's one of those, like, telethons or something, Jerry Lewis telethon or something. But it does make a difference when you do offer that support. And so please give us that support. It means the world to me and means the rest. Means the world to the rest of our team. It means the world to Duke, too. But in the meantime, still reporting from Washington, I'm Jim Acosta. I'll see you next time. Question.
- [60:18]
Senator Alyssa Slotkin
From the briefing room.
- [60:19]
David Jolly
To you.
- [60:24]
Donald Trump
The dream. I got.
- [61:14]
Jim Acosta
Sa.