- 3 hours ago
The Beat with Ari Melber - Season 2025 Episode 245
Category
😹
FunTranscript
00:00It is the Epstein Files.
00:01Go ahead.
00:03I thought we were talking about Eddie's baby.
00:05Yes, the Epstein Files.
00:06I can do that.
00:07No, I mean, well, I love local news too,
00:10but Epstein Files deadline, you've been covering it.
00:14I'm going through, and we're going to go through here.
00:16I've got, obviously, the outline of what they've given,
00:19the four categories.
00:20You've been covering it.
00:21We also have something you've touched on,
00:23which is, here's excerpts from a 100-page document
00:28that's completely and fully redacted,
00:31and we're going to get into it as you have been.
00:33I wonder what you think, because on the one hand,
00:35today the survivors have more files than they did before.
00:39Ro Khanna and the Democrats who pushed this
00:41have made this DOJ do something,
00:46and yet on the big, important questions,
00:49they're redacting their way out of maybe full transparency.
00:53Okay, so you're the lawyer,
00:55so I'm not going to give you any of my legal analysis.
00:57I mean, a lot of lawyers think they've done,
00:58you know, not even the bare minimum,
01:00but I'll give you my political analysis.
01:03Sure.
01:03Donald Trump's at 36%.
01:05His speech this week was panned.
01:07His smear of the late, great Rob Reiner
01:10and his wife, Michelle Singer Reiner,
01:12earned rebukes from across the political spectrum
01:16and way beyond politics.
01:18And his political collapse,
01:20if you think being at 36% and underwater,
01:22about 20 points meets the definitions politically
01:26of a collapse, which I do,
01:28began with his betrayal of his own base
01:30and some of the prominent podcast hosts
01:32in the manosphere.
01:33What he did today will do nothing
01:35to solve what brought about
01:37the beginning of his political demise.
01:40And I think, you know,
01:41I'm not the audience.
01:43Whether or not I'm satisfied isn't the point.
01:45So far, the survivors I've heard from
01:47are not satisfied.
01:48Not one of them has been contacted by DOJ,
01:51which is standard practice
01:52when you're talking about victims of sex crimes.
01:56And his own base is on the record,
01:58Joe Rogan and Andrew Schultz and others,
02:00of saying things like,
02:01what do they think we are, babies?
02:03I mean, if you do this
02:05and you release a bunch of blank pages
02:07and you don't contact the victims
02:09and you say the morning of the deadline,
02:12we're not going to abide by the law
02:14because we're above the law,
02:15then I think, yeah,
02:16you're treating your own coalition
02:18like they're babies.
02:21Yeah, you lay it out.
02:22That's the pressure.
02:24And they've tried to spin, minimize,
02:26or lie their way through
02:28the actual demand of transparency before.
02:30And it's been a problem.
02:31So I appreciate you breaking that down.
02:34And I'll see you soon.
02:35I'll see you Monday.
02:36Have a great show.
02:37Next time we talk,
02:38I will tell everyone
02:39that you are secretly a wonderful designer.
02:42We'll have that conversation at a future date.
02:44All right, that's inter-office furniture talk.
02:48Yes, we'll do that another time.
02:49Good to see you, Nicole.
02:50You've got a good eye.
02:52Appreciate it.
02:53Our thanks to Nicole Wallace there
02:54as we go through both
02:56some of the lighter stuff
02:57and the serious stuff.
02:58Welcome to The Beat.
02:58We have a special show for you,
03:00special guests,
03:01live from Congress,
03:02a lot to deal with
03:03what we were just discussing,
03:05what does transparency
03:06actually look like.
03:08The Trump DOJ
03:09is doing something,
03:11but also not meeting the deadline.
03:13They have not released everything
03:15from the Epstein files,
03:16but we do have new material.
03:17And so what we're going to do here,
03:19and Nicole Wallace just walked us through
03:20why there's so much bipartisan pressure
03:23on this administration to comply,
03:25we're going to walk through
03:26what we're learning as we go together
03:28because I got all the materials here.
03:29We got a whole team inside MSNOW
03:32doing this work,
03:32going through the batches of documents,
03:34fresh from just a few hours.
03:36We've been combing through it.
03:37We know Trump officials
03:38already admit that they are essentially
03:40not complying with the law.
03:42They are not releasing all the files.
03:45And the way they walked this out today
03:46was by first almost trying
03:49to lower expectations,
03:50the Deputy Attorney General
03:51blatantly saying they were not going
03:54to comply fully with the law,
03:55which fed some negative headlines.
03:57Then they released a bunch of stuff.
03:59And as I was mentioning to Nicole,
04:01we've got the four categories here
04:02I'm going to walk through.
04:03We have some new grand jury materials.
04:05We have some new photos.
04:06So it is important even amidst the skepticism
04:09that is well-earned for this government
04:11to deal in the facts of what we have.
04:14And that's what we're going to do tonight.
04:15Now, there are many redactions,
04:17which raises a question.
04:18This is a file that was over 90 pages
04:21that we pulled.
04:21And they've redacted everything,
04:24as you see.
04:25That's going to feed more questions
04:28about the compliance
04:29with Democrats warning tonight,
04:30and we'll hear from one shortly,
04:32that they will use all tools available
04:33to get this law 100% complied with.
04:37We are also parsing through
04:38the various different materials we've gotten.
04:41That includes court documents
04:42from cases where we didn't have
04:44all the information.
04:46That goes all the way back to 2008.
04:48There are hundreds of photos,
04:49some videos, some audio tapes,
04:51messages around voicemails
04:53that continue to add to the information
04:55about this sprawling web.
04:57So if you are someone saying tonight,
04:59did we get nothing?
05:00The answer is no.
05:01Now, we, the American public,
05:04journalists, lawyers,
05:05those interested in this story,
05:07got new information.
05:08And if you're asking,
05:09did we get everything?
05:10No.
05:10As Nicole and I discussed,
05:12we're a long way from that.
05:13The DOJ is not being transparent.
05:15And so I'm going to show you
05:16what I mentioned.
05:16How they started the day
05:17was not, hey, we're really trying,
05:19or the way they worded it
05:20in this letter,
05:21which I'll get into,
05:22which on paper sounds good,
05:24like, hey, we're doing
05:25as much as we can.
05:26But they did something
05:27quite different to start the day.
05:29The very controversial
05:30former defense lawyer
05:31for Donald Trump,
05:32now the number two official at DOJ,
05:34went out on Fox and said
05:36they're not releasing
05:37all the files today.
05:40I expect that we're going to release
05:42several hundred thousand documents today.
05:46And those documents will come
05:48in all different forms,
05:49photographs and other materials.
05:51And so I expect that we're going
05:53to release more documents
05:54over the next couple of weeks.
05:56So today, several hundred thousand.
05:58And then over the next couple of weeks,
06:00I expect several hundred thousand more.
06:05The law says what it says.
06:07President Trump signed it.
06:08And of all the agencies in government,
06:10the Justice Department knows a lot
06:11about complying with the law.
06:13Remember, Mr. Blanche, Pam Bondi,
06:15and their deputies and prosecutors,
06:18they go after people all the time
06:20for not complying with the law.
06:21If you have an IRS deadline,
06:23you don't get to say,
06:24oh, I'm giving you some now
06:26and some later,
06:27maybe a couple hundred thousand later.
06:28This goes to the question
06:30of whether this Trump administration
06:32is honest, complies with the law,
06:34or is dishonest
06:36and has a different elite standard
06:38for itself than everyone else.
06:40Here's how Blanche put it to Congress.
06:41Because of the volume of the material
06:42and the requirements
06:43at every page of every doc
06:45be reviewed for potential redactions,
06:46final stages of review
06:48of some material continue.
06:49They talked about that ongoing review
06:51being completed over the next two weeks.
06:53And that's what I mean
06:54about the contrast.
06:56As a letter,
06:57the reason that's written that way
06:58and that carefully,
06:59and we have it right here,
07:00is they are prepared
07:02to be taken to court.
07:03And they want to be able
07:04to try to argue to judges
07:06that they are really doing this.
07:08So in writing and to Congress
07:10and in the legal documents,
07:12this DOJ is acting like
07:13the Epstein Transparency Act
07:15is good law.
07:16They're not defying it.
07:17And they are, I think,
07:18I'm telling you our reporting,
07:20trying to set themselves up
07:21to be able to defend this
07:22if they are taken to court.
07:24At the same time,
07:25on Fox and elsewhere,
07:26they have a little more bluster,
07:28sounding like they'll decide
07:29when and how material comes out.
07:31And I mentioned Congressman Ro Khanna,
07:33who led this fight
07:34on a bipartisan basis,
07:36a Democrat who recruited Republicans
07:37and then won that clash
07:39with the president himself.
07:40Here's how he's reacting.
07:44Some of the documents,
07:45I've just been scanning them,
07:46have very heavy redactions.
07:48This including documents
07:51which judges ordered released,
07:53like the grand jury testimony
07:55in New York.
07:56They owe the Congress
07:58and the American public
07:59an explanation for every redaction.
08:01That I didn't see published
08:03on the DOJ page.
08:05But the law is very clear
08:06that any redaction
08:07has to be justified in writing.
08:12Fact check, true.
08:14Now, in all fairness
08:15to the government,
08:16the way the law was written,
08:17it expedited first the documents.
08:20It said, release everything by tonight.
08:22And then it gives them
08:23two more weeks
08:24to explain the redactions.
08:25So the congressman is correct,
08:27although technically,
08:28under the law,
08:28they can, the DOJ,
08:30take two more weeks
08:30to explain these redactions.
08:32And as I told you,
08:33some of them require explanations.
08:35As for the reference
08:36to grand jury material,
08:37that's important
08:37because that is usually secret.
08:39If you remember, say,
08:40the Bob Mueller grand jury notes,
08:43we never got them,
08:44even though they were
08:45of public interest.
08:46Here, the law requires them.
08:47And DOJ says,
08:48and I'm just sharing with you
08:50our notes as we go,
08:51that they are releasing
08:52the grand jury materials.
08:55I'll just make one more point on this.
08:57I'm reading from the letter here.
08:59And it says,
09:01they will release the materials
09:02from Epstein's criminal case in 18,
09:04the Maxwell case in 19,
09:06the Epstein death probe,
09:07and the grand jury materials
09:09from the Southern District of New York.
09:11So tonight,
09:12in the days ahead,
09:12we are going to be
09:13combing through all of this.
09:14You can't instantly do
09:16hundreds of thousands of documents,
09:18and the DOJ hasn't made it
09:19easily searchable.
09:20I'll get to that in a moment.
09:21So one big question here is,
09:23are they complying
09:24with those judicial orders
09:25to release all the
09:27secret grand jury material?
09:28And if so,
09:28that will yield
09:29a lot of important information.
09:31And if not,
09:32well, there's court cases there
09:34and judges there
09:35to make them do it.
09:36Now, I'm going to put back up
09:37the statement we started showing you.
09:38Chuck Schumer says,
09:39releasing a mountain
09:39of blacked-out pages
09:40violates the spirit of transparency.
09:42Dems will address
09:43and assess how the documents
09:44have been, quote,
09:45released to determine
09:46what actions must be taken.
09:48So that is the state of play.
09:50The Democrats are not playing dead.
09:51They're not acting like,
09:52oh, thank you so much
09:53for a couple redacted pages.
09:55But there is a process aspect to this.
09:58Anyone trying to tell you tonight
09:59what's in all these documents?
10:02Well, you can't believe them
10:03because no one,
10:04not even artificial intelligence,
10:06can scan all of this instantly.
10:08We're going to be going through this
10:09with you tonight.
10:10So get comfortable, buckle up.
10:12I've got great guests.
10:13I'm starting with John Flannery,
10:14a former federal prosecutor
10:16who's been a special counsel
10:17to congressional committees.
10:19John, welcome.
10:21Before we get into all of it,
10:23my first question for you tonight,
10:24based on what we know,
10:25which is fluid,
10:26how would you grade the compliance?
10:29It's clearly not an F
10:30in that they haven't blown off
10:32the entire project.
10:33And as I showed viewers,
10:35it doesn't look like an A.
10:36But how do you view the compliance
10:38based on what we know?
10:40Well, let's start with the simply.
10:43They have already defied the order
10:45that said that this would happen
10:47no later than today.
10:49I'm waiting till midnight.
10:50Maybe there's more.
10:51But I would give them an F
10:53because it strikes me
10:54that that doesn't occur
10:56unless you are having a document dump
10:58to withhold,
11:00as litigators sometimes do,
11:02to withhold the information
11:03that is called for by the statute.
11:06that set this whole thing in motion.
11:09The second thing,
11:10and you've referred to it already,
11:12and so I want to underscore it,
11:14that the documents be searchable.
11:16My undergraduate degrees
11:17are physics and engineering,
11:19and I have a master's
11:19in information science,
11:21and I just sort of watch
11:22this stuff pass me by
11:24because I don't think
11:25I could code anything
11:26by any language they use today.
11:28But one thing I do know,
11:29and that is if you take
11:30a picture of a document,
11:32they call it a TIFF,
11:33T-I-F-F,
11:34then you can't read that document.
11:38And there's jokes
11:39about occasional character recognition,
11:42which is that you can change
11:44that picture into words and letters,
11:47and then you can search them.
11:49And when you can search them,
11:51then you can do Boolean searches,
11:53for example, Trump and Epstein.
11:56I want all those references.
11:58Now, they have in the DOJ dump
12:02produced a page that says,
12:05type in what you want to search,
12:07and we will give it to you.
12:08So I did what some people would do
12:10on their home computers,
12:11a Control-F.
12:12I took their little form,
12:14and I typed in T-R-U-M-P,
12:16and I hit the button and said,
12:19your search reveals nothing.
12:20So I thought, well, how about Epstein?
12:22So let me, I'm going to slow you down
12:23to keep everyone with us.
12:25You're talking about something
12:27that is legally required.
12:29Correct.
12:30I just want to remind viewers,
12:32the Congress didn't say,
12:34hey, send this over to us,
12:36we'll review it first.
12:37Sometimes they do that.
12:38They didn't say,
12:39have the Inspector General review it
12:40and give us a summary.
12:41Because of the secrecy
12:43and the failure by parties,
12:45both parties' administrations
12:47over the history as we know it,
12:48of justice, the victims, the elites,
12:51this was a different approach.
12:52It was put all the information
12:55in a searchable, downloadable format
12:57so the public can deal with an area
13:00where there's been so much skepticism
13:01and scrutiny.
13:02And so the search bar,
13:04as we've checked,
13:05it has some functionality.
13:07The New York Times reported
13:08that when it was first released,
13:10it wasn't working.
13:115.30 p.m., I want to show people,
13:13to your point,
13:14you put in Trump,
13:15who we know has been in there many times,
13:17and it had two hits total.
13:21A search for Maxwell,
13:23which should generate many hundreds of hits,
13:25there's a whole case file for her,
13:27wasn't working well.
13:28It showed only 31.
13:30And to give viewers,
13:31I'm showing this so people can see
13:32with their own eyes,
13:34the most egregious example
13:36is if you search Epstein,
13:37you get about 224 hits
13:39out of a production
13:41that the Deputy Attorney General
13:42described as hundreds of thousands.
13:44And I could tell viewers
13:45that would be like getting 1% accuracy.
13:49So, John,
13:51the fact that they had the month to prepare
13:53and as of the release,
13:55it's not working,
13:56tells you what?
13:57It tells me,
13:59it's hard for me to believe
14:00it's an accident
14:01given the context
14:02in which anything is produced.
14:04We have the former counsel,
14:06Criminal Defense Counsel,
14:08to Mr. Trump,
14:11and he is directing this.
14:13And he is the one
14:13who is already violating,
14:15as he's telling us,
14:17this is what you're going to get.
14:18We're going to get some now
14:19and you'll get some later.
14:20And it's supposed to be searchable.
14:22And those words are exactly,
14:24it says searchable
14:25and downloadable format.
14:27And the other thing you'll notice
14:28is they put everything
14:29in stovepipes.
14:30So you have a collection.
14:31I went through them
14:32as best I could
14:34in the time allowed.
14:36They have like a series of pictures
14:37and then they'll have
14:38a document in there
14:40that is an FBI document.
14:44And there's no way to find that
14:45because of what
14:46I've just been describing.
14:48Also, you suggest rightly
14:50that how could there be
14:51so few references to Trump?
14:53And the answer to that is,
14:56I don't believe it's true.
14:59And so how do we check that?
15:01Well, number one,
15:02Trump is not under investigation.
15:04Number two,
15:06you cannot withhold information.
15:08And I'm holding the statute up
15:09so I get it absolutely correct.
15:12That no record shall be withheld,
15:14delayed or redacted
15:15on the basis of embarrassment,
15:19reputational harm,
15:21political sensitivity,
15:22including to any government official,
15:24public figure,
15:25foreign dignitary.
15:26Trump has no defense
15:27against any of this,
15:28nor I suggest does Epstein
15:30nor Maxwell.
15:34And I use those individual words.
15:37And when you posted,
15:38as you did, rightly,
15:39a word search,
15:41you'll notice that they gave
15:42two trenches for that search.
15:45This is my way of saying,
15:48when did we forget
15:50who was supplying
15:52this information to us?
15:54And with what contempt,
15:55not talking about court right now,
15:57what contempt,
15:58they view any requests
15:59for this information?
16:01And one of the questions is,
16:02why is Trump doing
16:03these other things?
16:04I think to misdirect us
16:06like a poorly paid magician
16:08so that we don't pay
16:09as much attention to this.
16:11And this also fits his...
16:12State with...
16:13Your points are fair.
16:14I'm bringing in another lawyer,
16:15as sometimes less lawyers do.
16:17We've got to watch the time,
16:19although I appreciate you.
16:19Nancy Erica Smith
16:20is also here,
16:21now a civil rights attorney,
16:22who's represented victims
16:23of sexual assault
16:25and harassment.
16:26John stays with us.
16:27Nancy, there's so much
16:28to peel through here.
16:29I want to read a little more
16:31from the letter where,
16:32and this actually builds
16:33on the point that John made.
16:36The letter goes out of its way
16:37to say that they had,
16:40quote, 200 DOJ attorneys
16:42working on this.
16:43That's not just, you know,
16:45researchers and paralegals
16:46who also, as all lawyers know,
16:48do important work,
16:49but that's DOJ-level
16:51credentialed attorneys,
16:52200 of them.
16:53And it raises the question, Nancy,
16:57how many attorneys would it take
16:59to comply with this law
17:01fully and honestly,
17:02rather than, as John and others
17:03have said,
17:04the way it seems to be going?
17:06Well, Harry,
17:07I had a case not long ago
17:08where the defendant served
17:105 million documents on us,
17:12as Mr. Flannery calls
17:14a document dump.
17:15And it's designed to make it
17:17difficult to find things.
17:19But it was served properly
17:22so I could send it
17:23to my data company
17:25and it was searchable.
17:27I could find any name
17:29in 5 million documents.
17:31I could search by date,
17:33by topic, by name.
17:35So this is possible.
17:37It's possible with 5 million documents.
17:39It's been done
17:40in my own experience.
17:42And this DOJ is just,
17:44I mean, but this isn't surprising.
17:47This should not be called
17:49the Department of Justice
17:50any longer.
17:50The Department of Justice
17:52pursues justice for Americans.
17:54That is not what this is anymore.
17:56Trump loves to name things.
17:58This should be the law firm of Trump
18:01because these people
18:02are not fair or honest
18:04or pursuing justice
18:05for the American people.
18:07Todd Blanche certainly is.
18:09And he's coddling Maxwell,
18:11a co-conspirer,
18:12a convicted sex trafficker
18:14for a pedophile.
18:16And Bondi,
18:18I'm going to release the files.
18:19And we've heard reports
18:21that they have been
18:22redacting these files
18:23for months
18:24before the law was passed.
18:27There's no shortage of efforts
18:29inside the DOJ here,
18:31which is why people are skeptical.
18:32I want to play something
18:33from a survivor,
18:34Danielle Penske,
18:35who was speaking
18:36to our colleague Anna today.
18:38Take a listen.
18:38I just read Todd Blanche's statement
18:43saying that we're going to see more
18:45in the coming weeks.
18:46And that makes me really nervous.
18:48Why?
18:48And, well,
18:49because we were really prepared.
18:52We had hoped
18:53that we would see everything today.
18:56So I do think that
18:57survivors definitely
18:58will be looking through everything
19:00and combing the files
19:01and trying to find
19:02what we know to be true.
19:03It re-traumatizes,
19:05but we know
19:05that it's important
19:06so that it doesn't happen again.
19:10That's a big part of this,
19:12having information,
19:14transparency,
19:14and prevention,
19:15even if you put,
19:17for a moment,
19:18the commander-in-chief aside.
19:19And I'm curious
19:20what you think
19:21of the categories we have,
19:23Nancy,
19:24for that substantive process.
19:26This is from
19:27the new website printout.
19:29And I've just noted
19:30they have court files,
19:32some of which
19:32are already obviously public.
19:34The DOJ files,
19:35that's most of the new stuff.
19:37FOIA,
19:37which is largely already public.
19:39And then interactions
19:40with Congress,
19:41also already public.
19:43And so it has a little bit
19:44of an Alice in Wonderland quality.
19:46And again,
19:46it's supposed to be
19:47for the public to access
19:48where there's about 18 doors here.
19:51And about,
19:52I'm guesstimating,
19:53but about 15 of them,
19:54you open them
19:55and you find a bunch of stuff
19:56that's already in public.
19:57There are,
19:58I want to be fair and clear,
19:59some doors that lead
20:00to new material.
20:01And we're going through all that.
20:02We'll get into some of that
20:03in the hour.
20:04This is the first few hours of it.
20:06There's pictures of Epstein
20:07and others.
20:08There's pictures
20:09we're not going to show
20:10that give more context
20:12to how women
20:13and possibly underage women,
20:15hard to tell from the photos,
20:16partially redacted,
20:17were basically put
20:20in these piles of photos.
20:21There's other disturbing material.
20:23We have a standards department
20:24that goes through this.
20:25So some of it's new,
20:27but about 15 doors
20:28lead to old documents.
20:29What do you think
20:30of the way they're presenting this
20:31and the effort of survivors
20:33for accountability?
20:35It's in contempt of the law.
20:38They should,
20:39I mean,
20:39I don't think this is going to happen
20:41because they keep going
20:42to the Supreme Court,
20:43which is basically Trump's court
20:44and corrupt.
20:45But the court,
20:47the lower courts
20:47have been holding
20:49this administration accountable.
20:50And those silos
20:53that they have put
20:53the information in
20:54do not comply
20:57with what the intent
20:58of the law is.
20:59The intent of the law
21:00is that Americans
21:02and the world
21:03can see what happened.
21:05How is it possible
21:06that for decades,
21:08a pedophile sex trafficker
21:10was able to skirt the law?
21:13How is it possible
21:14that he got a sweetheart deal
21:16in Florida?
21:17And then the lawyer
21:19who gave him
21:19that sweetheart deal
21:20was in the first
21:21Trump administration.
21:23And it also,
21:25on a broader,
21:26deeper level,
21:27it shows that women
21:28still don't matter
21:29because there are
21:30so many enablers here
21:32for so many decades.
21:34And women don't matter
21:36to begin with.
21:37But when rich
21:37and powerful men
21:38are involved,
21:39women don't matter at all.
21:40Even young girls,
21:41even 14-year-olds.
21:43And that's tragic.
21:46Yeah.
21:47I want to play
21:48from another survivor
21:48as we think about
21:49that aspect of this, John.
21:50This is Marina Alacerda.
21:53Sure.
21:55Will the redactions bills
21:57will still be
21:58to protect the wealthy
22:00and the rich,
22:01powerful men?
22:03Or will it bring them
22:05to justice?
22:06On the emails
22:07that Jeffrey Epstein
22:08was going back and forth,
22:10he mentions Trump,
22:12Donald Trump, correct?
22:13So that's another
22:14powerful person.
22:15I don't think that
22:16we need to hear more
22:17from the survivors.
22:19They are scared sometimes
22:20to mention other people,
22:21other, you know,
22:22powerful men
22:23that have been involved.
22:26John.
22:28Twice we have had
22:30the misogynist-in-chief
22:32playing a part,
22:34denying dignity
22:35and respect to women.
22:36And twice they've been denied
22:38equal justice
22:39before the law.
22:40This court overturned
22:42a 50-year law
22:44that protected
22:45women's right
22:45to take care of themselves
22:47and not to be affected
22:48by people like
22:50this backward individual
22:51who has no reason
22:53to be in the White House
22:54and shouldn't be tolerated.
22:56Why the Democrats
22:57are not already in court
22:58asking for contempt
23:00against these people
23:01and asking to have
23:03people assigned,
23:04a master of the court,
23:05because we already
23:06have a fixed game here.
23:08And how many times
23:09can these guys do us
23:11and we miss the fact
23:12that they're trying
23:13to do us?
23:14It's time we said to them
23:15enough is enough.
23:17You guys may try
23:19to destroy America
23:20with a phony war
23:21to conceal from the public
23:23what you did,
23:24what you Trump did
23:26and all your supporters did
23:28against these women.
23:30And what man
23:31in the Republican Party
23:32can go home
23:33and say to his wife
23:34or daughter
23:35or sister
23:36or whatever
23:37that he is supporting
23:39this effort
23:40against women generally
23:42and against the truth
23:43particularly
23:43in a nation
23:44that's the laughingstock
23:45of the world
23:46pretending to be a democracy
23:47and abusing women
23:49on a scale
23:50unprecedented
23:50in American history
23:52after slavery.
23:54There are several
23:55lawyers supposedly
23:57who refuse
23:58to participate
23:59in the redaction.
24:00Okay, I'm sorry.
24:01Yeah.
24:02Well, I'm not sorry
24:03for what I said.
24:03Don't be sorry.
24:04No, you're not sorry
24:05for what you said
24:05and I appreciate
24:06how forthright you are.
24:08That's what happens
24:09when John Flannery
24:10gets into it.
24:10Nancy and John
24:11both experienced lawyers
24:12who care about this a lot
24:13on this big news night.
24:15I want to thank you both.
24:16I have a short break,
24:1790 seconds
24:18and we're back
24:18on What's in the Files
24:20with Gretchen Carlson.
24:22All right.
24:24Have you ever socialized
24:25with Donald Trump
24:26in the presence
24:28of females
24:31under the age of 18?
24:37Though I'd like
24:37to answer that question
24:38at least today,
24:40I'm going to have
24:41to assert my 5th,
24:426th, and 14th
24:43amendment right, sir.
24:47We now have
24:48new Epstein files tonight.
24:49The Justice Department
24:51has described
24:51in its letter to Congress
24:52a process,
24:53what it calls compliance,
24:55although it says
24:55also hundreds of thousands
24:57of documents
24:57could still come out,
24:58and discusses how
24:591,200 names
25:01have now been identified
25:02as either victims
25:03or victims' relatives
25:05of Epstein
25:06and thus all 1,200
25:08such names
25:08have been redacted.
25:10I'm joined by
25:10Gretchen Carlson,
25:11the veteran journalist,
25:12co-founder
25:12of Lift Our Voices.
25:14Your view
25:15on what we're seeing
25:17tonight.
25:19Well, I think
25:20it's a total whiff
25:21to use Susie Wiles,
25:22the chief of staff's
25:23terminology,
25:24that she described
25:25how our attorney general
25:27Pam Bondi
25:27was looking into this
25:28earlier this week
25:29in the Vanity Fair profile.
25:31That also applies
25:33to the way
25:33in which this administration
25:35is releasing
25:36these documents.
25:38I mean, they had 30 days,
25:39and by law,
25:40they are supposed
25:40to release
25:41all of the documents,
25:43and they are not.
25:45And, you know,
25:46it's not surprising
25:46to me as well
25:47that the president
25:48came out today
25:49in front of the press
25:50and for the very first time
25:52in a long time
25:52that I can remember
25:53refused to take
25:54any questions.
25:55This is not going
25:56to help quell
25:58any of the conspiracy theories
26:00or any of the other people
26:02wanting to get
26:03more information.
26:04This is only going
26:05to increase
26:06the desire
26:06and the questions
26:08that still remain
26:08out there
26:09to know more.
26:12And when you look
26:13at some of what
26:14there is,
26:14the photos,
26:15Michael Jackson,
26:17Bill Clinton,
26:18some stuff
26:20offered without context,
26:21do you glean
26:22any order
26:23or priority
26:24that the DOJ
26:25has in terms
26:26of what they have
26:26put out tonight
26:27versus what they
26:28are holding back?
26:30Sure.
26:31You know,
26:31I think that it's obvious
26:32that President Clinton's
26:34photos are there
26:35because MAGA,
26:37I think,
26:37wants to see
26:38those photos.
26:40And again,
26:40it may be an attempt
26:42to try to stop
26:44the questions
26:44at least coming
26:45from the MAGA base.
26:47I mean,
26:47remember,
26:48as part of the conspiracy
26:49theory,
26:50they wanted these
26:50documents released
26:51because they thought
26:52it would be all
26:52high-profile Democrats.
26:54It turns out
26:55that it's going
26:55to be probably
26:56a combination
26:57of both.
26:58But no,
26:59it's not surprising
26:59to me at all
27:00that they would
27:01release these photos
27:02because in this
27:04sort of warped way
27:05of dealing with this
27:06from a PR perspective,
27:07the administration
27:07has just whiffed it,
27:10to use that term again,
27:11in thinking that
27:12this will make it
27:13go away
27:14because they released
27:15photos of Bill Clinton.
27:18What do you think
27:19about the shift
27:20we've seen
27:20within the administration?
27:22I mean,
27:22this is a scandal
27:25with real impact,
27:26but it is not
27:27what anyone
27:27might have predicted
27:28two or four years ago
27:30would be crippling
27:32Donald Trump's
27:33second term.
27:34And there are many
27:35different assorted
27:36issues one could pick.
27:38But this is the one
27:39that you and I
27:39have discussed
27:40mattered to people
27:41across the spectrum.
27:43You have the FBI's
27:44number two leaving,
27:46having failed
27:47at the transparency
27:48he vowed.
27:48You have the FBI's
27:49number one
27:50embattled on this
27:52and other issues.
27:53Pam Bondi,
27:54you mentioned
27:54the fighting
27:55with the Trump
27:56chief of staff
27:57over her failures here.
27:58She's now stepped back.
27:59I mean,
28:00everyone can see
28:00tonight
28:01it is her deputy,
28:03right,
28:04who reports up to her,
28:05who now is
28:06sort of the face of this.
28:07He did the Fox interview.
28:09He's on this letter.
28:10I will remind viewers
28:12that, yeah,
28:12in the DOJ,
28:13sometimes deputies
28:13play an important role,
28:14but they don't usually
28:16upstage the boss
28:17on a big,
28:18you know,
28:19national televised
28:20setting.
28:21It was Bondi
28:22who was doing
28:23the Fox interviews
28:23a few months back
28:24when she said,
28:25you know,
28:25she had a client list
28:26on her desk,
28:28Gretchen.
28:29Yeah,
28:30there's no way
28:30they're putting her
28:31out there tonight
28:32after the Susie Wiles
28:33interview came out,
28:34that explosive interview
28:35where she basically
28:37put her under the bus,
28:38you know,
28:39and said that she
28:40had not done
28:40a good job
28:41with this.
28:42Listen,
28:43they sent Todd Blanche
28:44down to do the interview
28:45with Ghislaine Maxwell,
28:46so I think that he's
28:49going to be the face
28:49that's going to be on this.
28:50But back to your point
28:51about Dan Bongino
28:52leaving the number two
28:53at the FBI,
28:54I don't think
28:55that's coincidental
28:56that Dan Bongino
28:57is gone,
28:58you know,
28:59today,
29:00on the day
29:00that the documents
29:01are being released.
29:02And I would remind
29:03everyone to stay tuned
29:05to when he goes back
29:06to his podcast
29:07as to what he may be saying.
29:09you know,
29:11about this entire episode
29:12now that he doesn't
29:13work for the FBI anymore.
29:14He was one of the
29:14biggest people
29:15saying at the beginning
29:16he wanted transparency.
29:19That's what I want
29:20to ask you.
29:20I'm running over on time,
29:21but final question,
29:22Gretchen,
29:22is the administration's
29:25play here is
29:26put a few things out,
29:29take a hit.
29:30I mean,
29:30they're going to be
29:30criticized tonight
29:31and going into the weekend,
29:32but their play is
29:34politically,
29:35okay,
29:35Christmas,
29:36move on,
29:37new,
29:38fresh start next year.
29:39Do you think
29:40that will work
29:40or will this
29:41trace them?
29:44No.
29:44This has been
29:45a colossal error
29:46from the beginning
29:47from a PR point of view.
29:48They could have nipped
29:49this in the bud
29:50a long time ago.
29:51They have created
29:52this problem
29:53for themselves.
29:54Look,
29:55the survivors say
29:55that there are
29:5620 names
29:57of perpetrators
29:59that they know
30:00are in these documents.
30:02And if those
30:02don't come out,
30:03then we will know
30:04as the American public
30:06that they have not
30:07released all
30:08of the information.
30:10So there's just
30:10that simple fact
30:11that you could go on.
30:12They're going to have
30:13to keep releasing
30:14this information.
30:15And I believe
30:16that there will be
30:16lawsuits from survivors
30:18and their lawyers
30:19because they have not
30:20released all the documents.
30:21I know that takes time.
30:23Yeah.
30:23But this story
30:24is not going away
30:25and it will go down
30:27in the history books
30:27as one of the colossal errors
30:29from a PR front.
30:31Wow.
30:32Gretchen Carlson,
30:33thanks for joining us again.
30:34We're going to now turn next
30:36to the top,
30:37a top Democrat
30:38on the House committee
30:40that's been dealing
30:40with Epstein
30:41that's gotten
30:41some of these wins.
30:42That's next.
30:47The Trump DOJ
30:49is releasing
30:49some Epstein files.
30:51That's the big headline
30:52as they hit
30:53this deadline today.
30:54And we're going to show you
30:55some of the headlines here.
30:57New photos
30:57and court records
30:58is how the Times
30:59reports it
31:00given the clash
31:01over not fully complying.
31:03Democrats already
31:04threatening to take them
31:05to court
31:05because the DOJ
31:06missed the deadline
31:07that clearly states
31:08all documents.
31:10Interestingly,
31:11Fox News tonight
31:12has a headline up
31:13that says
31:13Epstein files
31:14explode open
31:15as DOJ details
31:17discovery of powerful figures
31:18and more than
31:191,200 victims.
31:20That is true.
31:22We mentioned
31:22the victim count earlier.
31:24It's the kind of headline
31:25that suggests
31:25maybe the government
31:27is finally sharing more
31:29and people,
31:29of course,
31:29are debating that.
31:30Washpo going with
31:32DOJ releases
31:33huge strove
31:34of Epstein documents.
31:36Different ways
31:36to look at
31:37a developing story.
31:38Right now,
31:38we go to
31:39Congressman Stephen Lynch
31:40who's been at
31:40the center of the action.
31:41He's a Democrat
31:42on the House
31:42Oversight Committee
31:43which is one
31:44of the committees
31:45that has had
31:45the most active
31:47legislative progress
31:48this year.
31:50Welcome.
31:51I know it's a busy night.
31:52Thanks for being here.
31:53No, thanks for having me, Ari.
31:56Based on what you know,
31:58how would you rate
31:59the Trump DOJ's compliance
32:01with this law tonight?
32:03Maybe a C-.
32:06You know,
32:06they obviously curated
32:08the documents
32:09that they wanted
32:10to give to the press,
32:11pictures of Bill Clinton,
32:13things like that.
32:14But we know
32:16that there are
32:17troves of documents
32:19that they have withheld.
32:20There are also documents
32:22that they have redacted
32:23so heavily
32:23that we can't
32:26possibly
32:27provide context
32:30as to where
32:30they came from
32:32and what time period
32:34those pictures
32:35were taken.
32:35So,
32:36there's a lot of work
32:37that needs to be done.
32:37Yeah, let me jump in there
32:38on that.
32:39Let's dig into that point.
32:40You and your colleagues
32:42were, as I mentioned,
32:43more successful
32:43than most House committees
32:44this year.
32:45You got a vote on this.
32:46You got the president
32:47to sign it.
32:48And it very clearly says
32:50more transparency
32:51than usual.
32:53Usually,
32:53grand jury documents
32:54are secret.
32:55This law says
32:56they come out.
32:57Usually,
32:58redactions can be
32:58quite broad.
33:00Here, as you know,
33:01you guys helped write it,
33:02they're very narrow.
33:03Does this type of redaction,
33:04this is over 90 pages,
33:06every page redacted,
33:07does this,
33:07in your view,
33:08satisfy the law's
33:09requirements
33:10or violate them?
33:12It essentially violates
33:13the order of the court
33:15and the spirit
33:16of the legislation
33:17that was sponsored
33:18by Ro Khanna
33:20and Tom Massey,
33:21as well as the subpoena
33:22that was put together
33:24by Robert Garcia
33:26and Summer Lee,
33:27who were the ranking
33:27members on the committee
33:29and the subcommittee
33:30that got this done.
33:32So we clearly said
33:34in the subpoena
33:35and in the bill,
33:37the Epstein Transparency Act,
33:39what we expected.
33:40And the judge reinforced
33:41that as well
33:42on the subpoena,
33:44that he set a deadline
33:46and said all the documents
33:47have to be produced
33:49on that date,
33:51they used this excuse
33:53that it was taking so long
33:54because they were organizing
33:56everything for us
33:57and making sure
33:58that people were protected.
34:00But then they just dumped
34:02the information
34:04and there's no context
34:06at all
34:06in terms of
34:07what we asked for.
34:08It's just a jumble.
34:09So we're going to have to
34:10take some time
34:11and try to figure this out
34:12and maybe work
34:13with some of the victims
34:15to find out
34:15what these pictures
34:17actually portray
34:18and what these documents
34:20actually mean.
34:23Given that the DOJ admits
34:25it's not fully complying
34:26with tonight's deadline,
34:28they're in violation of the law
34:30by their own confession,
34:31will you sue them?
34:33Yeah, we'll be back in court,
34:35right,
34:35to either hold them in contempt
34:39or, you know,
34:40certainly sue them
34:42for their failure
34:44to produce all the documents
34:47as required.
34:49And so there's a...
34:51So is that something
34:52you've discussed
34:52with your committee,
34:54with Conor?
34:54Is that the plan tonight?
34:56Well, we've done this before.
34:58We've actually had this happen
35:00before in the committee
35:01and it's pretty standard
35:03for what we do.
35:05And so we would go back
35:07into court
35:07and try to have the judge
35:10enforce that order.
35:11And also,
35:12at some point,
35:13we're going to have to go back
35:14over these redactions.
35:17We want the Department of Justice
35:19to explain
35:20and justify
35:22every single redaction
35:24that they've made
35:25that conceals evidence
35:27and, you know,
35:29denies these victims
35:31their, you know,
35:33day in court
35:34and justice.
35:36And under the law,
35:37they have 14 more days
35:38to do that, right?
35:39Right.
35:41Well, I think next week,
35:43based on the fact
35:44that we have not received
35:45all the documents
35:47as promised
35:48and as required,
35:49we can go into court,
35:50I believe,
35:50on Monday
35:51back into
35:52D.C. District Court.
35:55Understood.
35:56Congressman Lynch,
35:57thank you.
35:58We will be right back.
35:59Okay.
36:00Thanks.
36:00We're joined by Michelle Goldberg,
36:05a columnist
36:06of the New York Times,
36:06MSNOW analyst,
36:07as we just got
36:08some news out of the Congress.
36:10A member of the key committee
36:11that has released
36:12the Epstein materials
36:13and helped get this law passed
36:14says they will go forward
36:15and sue
36:16to get full compliance.
36:18Michelle,
36:19your reaction to that news
36:20and what we've learned
36:21overall tonight?
36:22Okay.
36:22I don't know if Michelle
36:30can hear me.
36:31Well,
36:31I'm certainly not surprised
36:33that the...
36:34Oh,
36:35am I frozen?
36:37No,
36:38you're good now.
36:38My apologies.
36:39I do believe you're good.
36:41Go ahead.
36:42Okay.
36:42I said,
36:43you know,
36:43I think it's not surprising
36:45at all
36:45that the Trump administration
36:46has not been forthcoming.
36:49I think what is surprising
36:50maybe is that they have
36:52is that they've been so,
36:54I guess,
36:56sloppy and blatant about it.
36:57There's a way
36:58that they could have done this
36:59that would have
37:01at least feigned
37:03greater cooperation.
37:05They could,
37:05you know,
37:06they could have made
37:06the redactions
37:07a little bit more selective.
37:10They could have released
37:12all of the documents
37:13on time,
37:15which apparently
37:15they've been combing through,
37:17they've said,
37:18for months.
37:20And so I think,
37:21you know,
37:21I guess on the one hand,
37:22the blatancy
37:24of their defiance
37:25is par for the course,
37:27but it's also
37:28kind of self-sabotaging.
37:31Yeah,
37:31when you put it that way,
37:32because there are
37:33so many other issues
37:34where people are accustomed
37:35to them getting away with it.
37:37This is the burning hot
37:39vulnerability
37:39that they have not
37:40gotten away with it,
37:41which is why Republicans
37:42made them sign this.
37:43And so dragging this out
37:45in the next year,
37:45as you say,
37:46is not exactly something
37:49that disappoints
37:50the president's detractors.
37:54They would think that
37:56it's a win
37:58to have him
37:58to talk about this
37:59for another year.
38:00Go ahead.
38:01Yeah.
38:01Go ahead.
38:02I think that people
38:03are happy to talk
38:04about it for another.
38:06I mean,
38:06look,
38:06I think there are also,
38:07there are a lot of people
38:08who genuinely
38:08and with good faith
38:09are really trying
38:10to get all
38:11of this information
38:12into the public.
38:14I mean,
38:14there's that grand jury report,
38:15which is entirely redacted,
38:18right?
38:18Like more than 100 pages
38:19of just,
38:20you know,
38:21black redactions.
38:22A court has already said
38:24that they can release
38:25that grand jury report,
38:26according to the New York Times.
38:27And so there is,
38:31you know,
38:32whether it's sloppiness
38:35or whether it's defiance
38:39is difficult to say.
38:40They could have done this,
38:42which might have
38:44at least quelled
38:45some of their critics.
38:47You know,
38:47they kind of release everything.
38:50They could have redacted
38:51what was most damning to them.
38:53They could have released,
38:54you know,
38:54kind of a few photos of,
38:55a few more photos
38:56of Donald Trump
38:57that,
38:58you know,
38:58kind of don't particularly
38:59tell us anything
39:00we don't know.
39:01Instead,
39:02once again,
39:02they make it really look
39:04like they're hiding something.
39:06Mm-hmm.
39:07Yeah.
39:07And the law,
39:08of course,
39:08is supposed to address that.
39:10They are more on the hook
39:11than they were before,
39:12but still hiding
39:13and admitting it.
39:14All important stuff.
39:15Michelle Goldberg,
39:16thank you.
39:17When we come back,
39:18we will look at
39:18where this story is going
39:19and some of the new photos
39:20that are coming out tonight.
39:22Stay with us.
39:22The DOJ released
39:27new Epstein files
39:28late today
39:29while also acknowledging
39:30it is not able
39:31or willing
39:32to fully comply
39:33with the law.
39:34But there is new material.
39:35Former President Clinton,
39:36who was already tied
39:37to Epstein
39:38on the planes
39:40and other material,
39:41is in some newly released photos.
39:43He's seen
39:43alongside Epstein
39:45in this image
39:47the DOJ has released.
39:48There is no further context.
39:50There's also
39:50this photograph
39:52where he is seen
39:54in a hot tub
39:55the other individual
39:57completely redacted.
39:58So there's very little
39:59to be said
39:59other than what
40:01the photo shows.
40:01He's in a hot tub
40:02and there is apparently
40:04another person there.
40:06There's also a picture
40:07showing him
40:07with an unidentified woman.
40:09There, again,
40:11her face completely redacted.
40:12They appear to be traveling.
40:15There is no additional information
40:16provided by the government
40:17regarding the context here.
40:19And this is part of why
40:21Democrats have already said
40:23they would sue
40:24to get full compliance,
40:26which means all the information,
40:28not what could be
40:29a kind of selective leaking.
40:32Bill Clinton
40:32is not implicated
40:33through the photos
40:34in any additional conduct.
40:35His spokesperson says
40:37this is not about Bill Clinton.
40:38Never has been.
40:39Never will be.
40:40End quote.
Be the first to comment