[0:00]President Trump tours the Federal Reserve and again pressures Chairman Jay Powell on interest rates. House Speaker Mike Johnson's advice to Trump, proceed with caution. The speaker tells us House
[0:12]Republicans will keep their majority next year because he says middle class Americans will be much much richer. But what if they aren't? And it's not a
[0:23]hoax. That's the speaker on the Jeffrey Epstein saga. This as the Justice Department meets with Epstein accomplice Galileain Maxwell.
[0:33][Music] Hello everyone, I'm Major Garrett Washington. Let me welcome you to a
[0:45]special edition of the Takeout. One devoted to a rare and what we think is a pretty expansive interview with one of the most powerful Republicans in the country, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. Now, when the history of this
[0:56]week in Washington, this week in Washington is written, the political and legal torments of Jeffrey Epstein and associates may be more not much more
[1:05]than a footnote. What may prove more influential, more enduring, well, one of three things at least. One, the White House quest with many a shelved regulation to win the artificial
[1:16]intelligence race. A second might be trade deals announced this week with Indonesia and Japan. the Japan arrangement carrying, believe it or not, the promise of some 550 billion dollars
[1:26]of investment from the Japanese in the United States. All seemingly at President Trump's discretion. Wow, it's amazing. The third might be the latest clash between the president and the
[1:38]Federal Reserve. A matter that could, if not resolved, jeopardize central bank independence with decidedly negative consequences for years to come. The
[1:47]point is this. Washington can and in the past has missed big things right in front of it while obsessing over things that look big but turn out not to be.
[1:58]Even so, disagreements over Epstein brought the House of Representatives to a halt this week and Epstein's crimes and potential punishments yet to come or if they have imagined if they are
[2:10]imagined and become real to Epstein's victims. Well, that would be the biggest possible news. Now, we discussed all of this at great length with Speaker Johnson in the capital last night. Here
[2:20]was our exchange about Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Pal. >> Firing him would be dangerous to confidence in the American system, would it not? >> Yeah. I'm not even sure clearly what the
[2:30]legal parameters are of that. But I will say this, his term ends soon in a matter of months. >> May of next year. >> Yes. And um and it's a it's a rocky road for him between now and then. And here's
[2:42]what the speaker had to say on what the big Trump economic law will mean for the middle class and how it will influence midterm elections. >> The typical American family going to
[2:52]have about $13,000 more in their pocket. >> 13,000. >> That's right. Because the results of all this, we increase the >> see that by November of next year they can hold you accountable. >> Uh they'll see it and they and they will
[3:04]vote accordingly. >> You will hear all of our conversation with Speaker Johnson tonight. and we're going to bring in some reporters and subject experts along the way to offer some insight. We're going to start
[3:14]tonight with the latest on Epstein and related matters with my good friend Scott McFarland. Scott, today there was a meeting in Tallahass, Florida with Galain Maxwell. Walk us through what
[3:24]happened as much as we can know. >> Take a step back and reflect upon this moment. The deputy attorney general of the United States met face to face with a convicted sex predator uh in Dwayne
[3:35]Maxwell and spent most of the day doing so based on our reporting. That's a striking thing absent all the other peculiarities of the Epstein controversy. Her defense attorney said that Miss Maxwell did not invoke the
[3:47]Fifth Amendment, that she was responsive to all questions, and that it was an exhaustive set of questions. The defense lawyer is named David Marcus. Take a listen to what he said to reporters after this meeting in Tallahass,
[3:59]Florida. >> Miss Maxwell answered every single question. She never stopped. Uh she never invoked a privilege. She never declined to answer. She answered all the
[4:10]questions truthfully, honestly, and to the best of her ability, >> but no indication there's any progress in diffusing the political bomb for the Trump administration in this dayong
[4:21]interview. >> And any sense at all, Scott, as to other matters that Gileain Maxwell might want to discuss with the Justice Department on the table, like shortening the sentence, pardon, something like that, trading something for something else.
[4:33]She has 12 more years to serve in federal prison in her case. If she's looking for leniency, maybe this is a step in the right direction. It's worth noting though, Major Todd Blanch. Deputy Attorney General, former defense lawyer
[4:44]for Donald Trump, is friends with Maxwell's defense lawyer there, David Marcus. >> Thanks for noting that, Scott Priest. Please stay with me. Speaker Mike Johnson sent House members home for
[4:56]their summer recess a day early instead of holding votes on matters related to Jeffrey Epstein and releasing the files. I asked him about that as well as what he thinks of President Trump's often
[5:07]repeated assertion that all of this is a hoax. Jeffrey Epste has it ground the House of Representatives to a halt. That is the public perception. I >> I think the Democrats are working really
[5:19]hard to make that the public perception, but it's not true. Um, I made the case many times today and I have over this week. The House Republicans are united on this. We all want full disclosure,
[5:28]maximum disclosure. Uh, many of us have been intellectually consistent about that from the beginning and nothing has changed in that regard. The president himself is there as well. There's no daylight between us and the White House.
[5:39]And he says he wants all credible evidence to be put out there for the American people to make their own conclusions. And they're working on that. problem they have is that much of what is referred to loosely as the
[5:49]Epstein files is under sealed by the courts. And so you got to have the Department of Justice go in and request the release for example the grand jury testimony >> that was denied today by one Florida judge because it's a very difficult
[6:01]delicate process. >> It is and there's a reason for that. I'm a former litigator federal courts. I mean, uh, the grand jury process is jealously guarded and a lot of the material that comes out of there cannot
[6:12]be carefully evaluated by people because there's no cross-examination in a grand jury hearing. You know, I mean, none of the evidence has to be corroborated. You know, it's not a full trial setting. So,
[6:22]a lot of allegations can be made in in a situation like that where if the public just viewed it that way, they might they might skew it one way or the other. So, it's something in our system that has traditionally been protected. the judges
[6:33]are are are cautious about that. Understand that. But at the same time, this matter, I think, is uh an unusual one. It it merits there's so much public
[6:43]attention regarding this and the allegations are so u so dastardly. I mean, just evil evil acts. The people deserve to know and so that's why they're pressing for it.
[6:53]>> And to the point when the Trump Justice Department said there were more than 1,000 victims, for people who knew this case very very well, did a lot of investigative work on it, that number surprised them. high high number. >> Yeah.
[7:04]>> Meaning that to their minds, investigative reporters and others, there have to be accompllices, uncharged accompllices. And that aspect of justice is still missing.
[7:14]>> Yes. And it's of great concern to us. I mean, we we want full transparency. We want everybody who is involved in any way with the Epstein evils, let's call it what it was, to be brought to justice
[7:26]as quickly as possible. We want the full weight of the law on their heads. But when the Justice Department said in that same two-page memo, "There's no reason to pursue further prosecutions," many said, "How can those two things be
[7:37]properly aligned?" >> These are good questions. I don't know. I've never seen the Epstein evidence. It wasn't in my lane. Uh but I have the same concern and question that a lot of people do. And look, I think the president,
[7:48]>> this is not a hoax, in other words. >> Oh, it's not a hoax. Of course not. I mean, there are real victims here. But that's part of the delicate the balance that's being done here is I tried to explain in my press conference this
[7:58]week, man, we want full disclosure. If I had if I had these things in my possession, I would have put them out a long time ago. But I would also have been very careful to protect the innocent. You know, it's the standard in
[8:09]law enforcement in the courts and in government agencies that you do protect the innocent victims, for example, of sex trafficking and horrific crimes. We we don't want their names exposed because they would be subjected to more harm. And so you have to be careful in
[8:20]how you do that. But at the same time, maximum transparency, all credible evidence. We have to keep pushing for that. >> We're going to move on, but I want to read you three quotes. One from Ralph Norman, Republican, South Carolina. The
[8:31]public's not going to let this die, and rightfully so. Roana, Democrat from California. The question is, whose side are you on? Are you on the side of the rich and powerful, protecting men, or are you on the side of young girls and
[8:42]America's children? Last quote, Tom Massie. I think uh Kentucky Republican, I think it is a watershed moment for the speaker and the house and the president.
[8:54]Evaluate those three for me. >> Well, I talked to Ralph Norman about 10 minutes ago before I walked in here with you and he and I agree on this matter. I agree with what he said. With regard to Roana and Thomas Massie, I would say if
[9:05]you're so concerned, why didn't you bring your discharge petition at any time in the last four years? Remember, President Biden and his DOJ had these files for four years. Neither of those guys said a word about it. Thomas Massie
[9:17]is suggesting that this is some sort of watershed moment. We are all on the same page trying to advance the the truth, full truth and transparency. And the idea that he's suddenly so concerned
[9:28]about it is curious to me. He waited until President Trump was elected to bring >> seems that way to me. >> Scott McFarland is back with me here at the table. Willie James Inman also joins
[9:38]us from the north lawn of the White House. Scott, the speaker told me it's not in his lane or wasn't in his lane. It certainly is now and it has ground the house to something of a halt. That
[9:50]is a fact. >> They had to leave early for their August district work period because things couldn't get done anymore and it was all being gummed up by Epstein related matters. Not so much just the House of
[10:00]Representatives, but the rules committee through which everything goes to get to the floor of the US House that's meritorious. And when he says, "If I had it in my possession, I would have released it long ago," that's a signal
[10:11]to the White House that this pressure is building, not going away. >> And it's a weird coalition that has formed that really has jammed up the the Congress. It's not just Thomas Massie. It's not just Democrats. There's this
[10:22]unique one-of-a-kind coalition of conservatives who have been pushing for Epstein files for years. Think Marjgerie Taylor Green. Think of Ralph Norman. and
[10:32]the progressives who are in some cases agitating or a advocating for more transparency potentially for political reasons. So you've got them all mashed
[10:41]together in this one-of-a-kind group that is blockading things happening in the US House and Major this is appropriation season. This is the time when you fund things. It's a big time of year not to be in Washington.
[10:52]>> Right. And Willie James Iman to you on the north lawn of the White House when the speaker tells me everyone's on the same page. It doesn't sound that way. Yeah, it certainly doesn't, Major. I
[11:04]think you're right to point that out because the president has called this a hoax. He's called uh those who are looking for more information within his own party troublemakers. This is really
[11:15]a problem that is not going away for this president. Although the White House is trying its best to divert attention away to uh other bits of news, the news
[11:26]uh with what the president has called the Russia Russia Russia hoax, for instance, and uh the allegations that somehow uh former President Barack Obama committed treason uh with uh wanting
[11:37]more details released about uh what happened with the 2016 election. Look, this White House really knows that it has a problem on on its hands. Remember uh the president promised essentially
[11:48]during the campaign to release more information when it comes to uh things that people uh believe or conspiracy theories with anything related to uh
[11:57]JFK, MLK, also Epstein files. The president was asked about that and he said he wanted to see those files released and the White House is really dealing uh with a problem uh some would
[12:08]say of its own making. Major >> Billy James in at the White House. Scott McFarland here at the desk. I appreciate it very much. Coming up on the takeout, President Trump with a very rare visit to the Federal Reserve headquarters
[12:20]right here in Washington and more of my interview with Speaker Johnson where I ask him about well, you guessed it, the barrage of attacks from the president on Fed Chair J. Pal. How comfortable or
[12:31]uncomfortable are you, Mr. speaker with the president's repeated denunciations and jawbon and that's putting it mildly of the Fed chair Jerome Pal. [Music]
[12:49]Welcome back. President Trump visited the Federal Reserve and the much maligned multi-billion dollar renovation project going on there this afternoon. He was questioned about his repeated
[13:00]pressuring of the Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Pal. >> Are there things the chairman can say to you today that would make you back off some of the earlier criticism? >> Well, I'd love him to lower interest
[13:10]rates. >> Other than that, what can I tell you? >> And fairly describe that as the backslap heard around the financial world. Kelly O'Grady, CBS News Money Watch
[13:22]correspondent, is with me. So, let's help the audience understand the visuals today. The president goes over there to look at this renovation project, the Federal Reserve. And I want to play for you and our audience this very awkward
[13:33]exchange between the Federal Reserve chairman and the president about how much that whole thing costs. Let's watch and listen. >> It looks like it's about 3.1 billion. It
[13:42]went up a little bit or a lot. Uh so the 2.7 is now 3.1. >> I'm not aware of the >> Yeah, it just came out. >> You're including the Martin renovation. You just added
[13:53]>> entire capital. Yeah, you just you just added in a third building is what that is. That's a third building. >> No, but it's a building that's being built. >> No, it's been it was built 5 years ago. We finished Martin 5 years ago.
[14:04]>> It's part of the overall work. >> It's not new. >> There you go, Kelly. uh a real estate developer and someone who knows his
[14:15]numbers, the Federal Reserve chairman arguing about all this because this is a backdrop from the White House perspective to possibly fire J Pal. >> Yeah, that was one of the most uh
[14:27]awkward moments in recent financial history that I've ever watched. I kind of wish I had popcorn for some of it. Uh because you could really feel the tension between the two of them. Of course, Chair Powell can't comment on interest rates right now. It's a quiet
[14:39]period ahead of that meeting. But look, the there were a lot of numbers thrown out. At the end of the day, the Federal Reserve, it's over budget and it it of course has been suggested that the
[14:48]president may use that as a cause for firing because he can't fire Chair Powell. He has to have cause legally. But I think what was really what I took
[14:59]away from is this was very tense, very awkward. And you did have this one moment where a reporter asked, it was right after the clip that you played, and he said, "Well, you know, Mr.
[15:10]President, you used to work in real estate. What would you do to someone if they were over budget?" And he said, "I'd fire them." Now, everyone laughed, but it really does get at that point
[15:20]that this wasn't necessarily about a renovation and site uh visit. This was about interest rates and sort of this back and forth um all of the backdrop of that very tense visit that we just
[15:31]watched a bit of. And if anyone was hoping that that visit would calm this whole scenario or the financial markets hovering over it, they were sorely mistaken. Kelly Grady, please stay with us. I'll be back to you in just a
[15:42]moment. As mentioned before, I spoke with Speaker Johnson about President Trump's criticism of JPAL. Let's listen. >> There is a central bank in our country. I'm sure you're aware of that. Yeah. >> How comfortable are uncomfortable are
[15:54]you, Mr. speaker with the president's repeated denunciations and jawboning and that's putting it mildly of the Fed chair Jerome Pal. >> Well, I understand the president's frustration. I do believe that he should
[16:06]reduce interest rates and the it's really too much power to be held in in the hands of one person or a board and he has a board. Um but it is what it is. That's our system. But right now home ownership >> firing him would be dangerous to
[16:17]confidence in the American system, would it not? >> Yeah. I'm not even sure clearly what the legal parameters are of that. But I will say this, his term ends soon in a matter of months. >> May of next year.
[16:28]>> Yes. And um and it's a it's a rocky road for him between now and then. I I I do believe a lot of economists will say when the economy is hot, when it's running, and ours is, and we're ramping
[16:38]up uh lots of great developments, that that is not a time for you to reduce interest rates. But I I think desperate times call for desperate measures. And right now in housing, for example, uh new data came out today. there's just a
[16:49]a a glut in the housing market because people cannot afford to get into a new home right now. Uh and if you reduce the rates just just a small percentage you can solve that problem and I think that
[17:01]and other large purchases I think that would be a big thing for the economy and I think he ought to duly consider that it would save the nation a lot of money and it would give a lot more people more opportunity.
[17:10]>> You've heard all year long the tariff conversation. How do you assess it now? >> Well, I've been involved in the tariff conversation. uh not just heard it, but um I look I think >> you know what I'm talking about. >> Of course. Yeah. I I think I'm it's
[17:22]going to settle out. I'm I I've always considered >> the Treasury Secretary said today a one-time increase from tariffs is not inflationary by definition. If it happens once, it's not inflationary. It's just an adjustment to
[17:34]the economic structure. You agree with that? >> Uh I do. And inflation is cooling. Uh the, you know, the sky was going to fall, everybody told us, and it hasn't. The tariff policies have actually brought in a lot of new revenue. and by
[17:45]some estimates what $300 billion. >> That's how it pencils out for the year. >> Yeah. And that's a lot of money and we can use that well and we can use it to get the country out of debt. So on balance that's a great thing. I think
[17:56]what the president did he he sees lots of blind spots that others don't and this is one of those things. He's been talking about tariffs since he was being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey, you know, um back in the 80s. But what happened
[18:07]was there was a lot of countries that were being unfair. We had unfair trade practices with other countries, unfair agreements. And the president was offended by that and said, "We got to fix it." And he's the only one bold enough to have done it. I was in the
[18:17]Oval Office last night, Garrett, when the Japanese delegation I keeps doing that, Mr. Garrett, our major. Uh I I was in the uh I was in the Oval Office last night when the Japanese delegation was
[18:28]there to negotiate their big trade uh agreement. And the president called me in. I was outside in the waiting area and he said, "Bring the speaker in." And he said, "Mr. Speaker, what do you think about this deal?" And they're sitting there having the negotiation with with
[18:40]translators and the whole thing. It was a a master class. I mean, he um he he he is the really the king of the art of the deal. He wrote the book and to watch him
[18:50]handle that situation and get us to this what may be one of the largest trade agreements of all time. Uh to watch it live and see it happen in that way, it was really something. And um it's going to be great for the country. He's the
[19:02]the force multiplier for the US economy. He's the one that is getting us to these new trade agreements with other countries. and it's far more fair for us and advantageous for American consumers. I think that's good policy.
[19:12]>> Should Congress be involved in authorizing and approving these trade deals? The administration says Congress doesn't need to be a part of it at all. Historically, it has been. >> Well, it depends on how you look at
[19:23]history. I mean, traditionally, Congress has given a lot of latitude to the executive to negotiate these things. And if the executive sees that there is an a trade imbalance, they have traditionally had the authority to do that. I'm a
[19:35]jealous guardian of Article One and uh we are the first branch of government for a reason and that's how the founders intended it. I'm a constitutional law attorney. I take this stuff very seriously. If I feel like the executive is is stepping out of their lane, then I
[19:46]will I will suggest a course correction. I would do it with honey, not vinegar to begin, but I have a very close relationship with the president. We talk constantly all the time about these
[19:56]things and um I watch it very closely. >> Kelly O'Grady, I'm happy to say, is back with us. Also, I'm happy to say I'm joined by senior writer at Baron's Martin Bakardax. Martin, I want to ask
[20:05]you first for this assessment from the speaker echoing the White House. The tariffs are non-inflationary and this Japan trade deal, not only the tariff
[20:15]rate, but this $550 billion of investment from Japan is a net plus plus for America. >> It's so difficult to be quite honest,
[20:28]Major. I think we're looking at a situation where we don't know enough detail about the 550 billion investment, what it entails over what time period it is meant to be allocated. So it's difficult to give a perfect assessment
[20:39]on that. What I can say is that you have negotiated a trade deal with an economy that is by definition one of the oldest and most agist in the world. Um, from a
[20:51]consumer perspective, it's not the silver bullet I think that it might in the 1980s when Japan's industrial might was the envy of the world. It's simply not that case anymore. And if you look
[21:02]deeply into the details, they're not particularly good for American car makers. Effectively, major, it is cheaper now to build a car in Japan and sell it in the United States than it is
[21:12]to build a car in the United States and sell it in the United States. Not sure that the auto workers union thought that that was going to be the reality when they supported all these talks a few months ago.
[21:23]>> And Kelly, that raises an important point about mark market access, which is a very big part of the Washington and White House explanation for why these
[21:33]trade deals are valuable, but there's always some devil in those details about what that access is and what we will actually gain as a country from it. >> Yeah. you know, it's kind of what are
[21:45]you getting. >> Martin, hold on. That's for Kelly. >> Um, it's sort of what you're getting versus what you're giving. Of course, in that particular deal, as well as other ones that have been announced like Indonesia and the Philippines, the
[21:57]president has touted that American farmers in particular are going to have access to sell into these markets, which is good for them. I can tell you from talking to farmers, they are very excited about some of these deals. That
[22:08]trend started with the UK having more access to that. That being said, sort of this so what for American consumers, businesses are going to have to pay that tariff when a good comes into the US if
[22:20]they're importing from other places. And every single deal that we have seen done in these recent weeks has meant that 10% tariff that's been across the board while we have all of these uh you know
[22:31]reciprocal tariffs on pause is actually higher. And that's where when we get back to the Federal Reserve conversation of interest rates, that's why they're waiting and seeing because this next three to six months as these tariffs
[22:42]creep up to 15% 30% depending on the country, that's going to be really tough for businesses to absorb and it's likely going to get passed on to you and me. And whether it's a one-time increase or more, that's where we have to wait and
[22:54]see. >> Kelly O'Rady Martin Beckerax, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Next, Speaker Johnson defends that big, beautiful bill that's now a big law. He tells me the typical American, these are
[23:04]his words, is going to see an extra $13,000, let me repeat, $13,000 in their pocket. I ask him, "What
[23:14]happens though if they don't?" You're watching the Takeout. Welcome back to this kind of special
[23:28]edition of The Takeout built around interview with House Speaker Mike Johnson. President Trump, as you might have heard, we talked about on the show earlier this week, wants lawmakers in Texas to redraw the state's congressional map. That in hopes of
[23:38]increasing the number of Republicans sent to Washington from Texas, thereby he hopes project protecting rather the House Republican majority. I asked
[23:46]Speaker Johnson about that idea. Listen, >> I want you to do a thought experiment for me. It is election night 2026. >> Yes.
[23:57]>> Are you celebrating or are you explaining? We're celebrating. >> What are you celebrating on election night 2026? >> I am very bullish on election night 26. I'm absolutely convinced we're going to grow the House majority. A lot of
[24:09]reasons for that. It's not groundless optimism. It's going to be the result of a lot of hard work. The fact that we're delivering on our promises to the people. We had a true demographic shift in the 2024 election. We had a record
[24:19]number of Hispanic and Latino voters, for example, uh, black and African-American voters, Jewish voters, union workers, who came to the Republican party who had not been there traditionally in large numbers before because they came with hopeful
[24:30]anticipation. And we're delivering the one big beautiful bill. It's a big piece of that. Uh, it's geared for lower and middle class, hardworking Americans. They will feel the effects of that before the midterm election in 2026. In
[24:42]addition to that, I think it's providential, but we have the most favorable election map that our team has had in decades. And what I mean by that is, as you and I are sitting here talking this evening, there are 13 House Democrats sitting in districts that
[24:53]President Trump won. There's another 21 of them sitting in districts he came within five points of winning. And it gives us an offensive opportunity because conversely, there's only three House Republicans sitting in Kla Harris
[25:04]district. So, I like those odds. We're going to go out and target those seats that we can flip from blue to red. We're going to go out, run on our record. It's going to resonate with the people and we're going to have a good night. Do you
[25:15]want Texas to draw as President Trump has outlined five more districts nominally Republican or leave it as it is? >> Um, well, the juryy's still out on that one. I mean, I didn't have >> What's your advice to Governor >> the governor?
[25:26]>> Governor Abbott. >> Well, they need to follow the law. They need to uh be fair. >> They have legal rights to do it. Supreme Court settled that, >> of course. Right. And and I think they will do. I'm a fan of Governor Abbott. I think he's been a great governor there.
[25:38]Um, and and I think the outcome probably to our benefit, it sounds like. I mean, Texas is a red state and and uh that all makes sense, but we're still awaiting the outcome. I haven't seen the map yet.
[25:48]No one consulted me on that. Uh but I am in charge of the whole map in a certain respect and that I'm supposed to make sure that my party maintains the majority. I did that in 24 and I'll do it again and we've got a lot more to run
[25:59]on now than we did last time. So, I'm I'm bullish. You mentioned the big beautiful now law. I want to cite some recent CBS News polling on that. 47%
[26:09]told us it will hurt. 28% said it will have not much effect on their lives. 25% said it will help. Do you have some salesmanship to do? >> Yeah, we do. I'm not surprised by those
[26:20]numbers because they've gotten a steady diet of misinformation by most of the mainstream media and the Democrats. Certainly, they're telling them things that are simply not true. The good thing about this is we have the facts on our side. The reason I put the big beautiful
[26:31]bill on such an aggressive timetable, a fasttrack to get it signed into law by July 4th, which was a self-imposed deadline that we met was because we wanted people to ex experience the truth of what the bill will do for them. This
[26:42]is going to be like 2019 before co after the first two years of the Trump administration. We brought about the greatest economy in the history of the world. I mean, every demographic was doing better, Garrett. It really everybody. Rising wages, more job
[26:54]opportunities, people climbing the ladder. Um, we're going to get back to that again. But we did what we did in 2018 2017 this time on steroids. This was a truly big beautiful bill with
[27:05]something for everybody. And the uh lower and middle class earners are going to feel the biggest effects of that. If you make between 15 and uh 30,000, let's see, 15 and $80,000 a year, you're going
[27:16]to have on average about a 15% lower tax uh burden. Uh the the typical American family is going to have about $13,000 more in their pocket. >> 13,000. >> That's right. because the results of all
[27:27]this we increase the >> they don't see that by November of next year they can hold you accountable >> uh they'll see it and they and they will vote accordingly I mean the economy is going to be doing well this is jet fuel to the economy we're going to have American energy dominance piece through
[27:39]strength again we're going to have regulatory reform to get everybody going get the engines of government going again progrowth economy and uh we're absolutely convinced is this is going to serve us well so the Democrats will be out trying to convince people of
[27:50]something that is simply not true we'll be able to demonstrate the opposite I really like our chances Joining me now to evaluate all that, senior political correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, Molly Ball, congressional reporter for the
[28:02]Washington Post, Kadia Goba, and to my left, senior political reporter for Axios, Alex Eisenstat. Uh, before we get to that interview, a lot of other things happened today. Tony Ivers in Wisconsin, Democratic governor not seeking
[28:13]reelection. We've confirmed here at CBS News the two-term former Democratic governor Roy Cooper in North Carolina is going to run for the Senate, as will the sitting RNC chairman, Michael Watley.
[28:23]That's going to be a huge hund00 million Senate race for sure. And the Department of Justice sued New York City over sanctuary city policies. A lot of other things happened in the political and
[28:32]judicial space today. But Molly, assess what you just heard from the speaker, how bullish he is, and this shower of money that's going to fall upon middle class Americans before the midterms.
[28:44]>> Well, I would say first of all, it is very much the speaker's job to be bullish about the elections, whether he believes it or not. Right. for for I've lived through many midterms when Nancy Pelosi was speaker and she'd always say
[28:55]that they were going to win even when it was well not impossible for that to happen. He's sort of got to be that cheerleader. Uh so you have to take what he says with a grain of salt. I think however he is correct that Republicans
[29:06]chances rise and fall on the strength of the economy and if what he is projecting comes true, if this does unleash a great economy, then people are going to feel better about that. But, you know, he talked about the different demographics
[29:18]that powered President Trump's win last year. The problem for Republicans is that those are all the demographics who are least likely to vote in a midterm. Those infrequent voters who came into
[29:29]the Republican party just to vote for President Trump. We now have several cycles of Trump on on the top of the ticket but not on the ticket. And in every one of those, Republicans have lost ground because those infrequent
[29:41]those midterm voters are now much less likely to vote for Republicans. and Kadia, Democrats believe they're going to take what the speaker just said, measure it against the results, and they believe they'll be talking not about
[29:51]$13,000 falling out of the sky for middle class Americans. They're going to be talking about hospitals closed, people losing nutrition assistance, people being lpped off Medicaid, and possibly having a harder time getting
[30:03]Obamacare. >> Yeah, I think you will see Democrats on the road talking about the economy for the first time in a long time. Um, and I think they've learned their lesson from
[30:13]previous elections, but I also in the immediate future, I can't underestimate how much some of this Epstein stuff will will play into the midterms as well, at
[30:24]least for the the next immediate few weeks. You know, both Democrats and Republicans are home in August, so I imagine you'll see Republicans trying to
[30:34]promote the big beautiful bill and Democrats trying to slam it. But again, I can't you can't underestimate what this new role with this Epstein the role
[30:46]this Epstein stuff will play in the immediate future. And I think they should be cautious of that. >> Alex, he's not wrong, the speaker, about the map and the number of Trump
[30:55]districts, Biden districts, and if things are blowing in their favor, possible victories that are reachable, at least in theory, for House Republicans. >> It's possible. And it's also possible
[31:07]that redistricting, we're seeing a kind of a national redistricting push among Republicans, among Republicans, not only in Texas, but also in places potentially like Ohio, maybe even Missouri. So, this
[31:17]is kind of a redistricting has emerged as a centerpiece of the Republican strategy to keep the House. >> I was fascinated by the speaker's kind of caution around it, though. He was not giving a blinking green light to
[31:28]Governor Abbott because he knows you redraw those lines, you might create vulnerabilities that don't currently exist, >> right? and and the Texas congressional delegation is not too happy about
[31:39]redistricting. Why? Because when you shift around voters, their districts get become become less favorable, less Republican, and so he's getting some kickback from from uh from the
[31:50]congressional from the congressional delegation. Trump, of course, has played a role in getting Texas Republicans on board with the plan. Trump and the White House very much are being very aggressive with redistricting across the
[32:01]country because they see this as a way to keep the House. Molly, one other quick thing the speaker told me, which is tariffs when they come into full effect are not going to be inflationary and even if they are, the other economic
[32:11]benefits will overwhelm that. That's a pretty big bet politically and otherwise. >> It's the only bet that they can make at this point. It's clear that the tariffs are not going to completely go away. I think
[32:21]>> we're now at about a 15% average read, which is >> and they could still depending on what deals get on average, right? Uh at the same time, you have seen the markets
[32:31]stabilize since that early sort of turmoil provoked by the tariff roller coaster. Uh we have and we have not seen inflation skyrocket by any means. It's remained pretty much steady, only
[32:41]ticking up a little bit. So I think that has given a lot of traditional conservatives who are against these tariffs pause to say, well, wait a minute, maybe we don't know for sure that this is going to unleash an
[32:52]inflationary spiral. Of course, if it does, that would be bad for Republicans. And you mentioned Epstein because it really has created some cracks in the House Republican unity.
[33:02]>> Yeah, it really has. Um, again, lawmakers, Republicans in particular, have to go home for what, five weeks now, and they have to hear from their
[33:13]constituents about how unhappy they are about the files not being released, etc. Now, whether that has staying power all the way up to closer to the midterms,
[33:24]that's a different story. But, you know, one could argue that it might encourage some of the base that would vote in those primaries to stay home or express some disinterest.
[33:35]>> At minimum, it creates a sort of Paul over what they hoped would be a summer of celebration for other legislative activities. Molly, Alex Eisenad, thank you very much for being here. Appreciate it very much.
[33:47]>> Punch Bowl News, I read it. Many of us here at the table read it. referred to House Republicans as basically a spineless arm. That's an interesting
[33:56]anatomical combination, I realize, of the Trump White House. Speaker Johnson's response to that. Straight ahead. Welcome back to the Take. It has been
[34:11]said when President Trump says jump, House Republicans politely say, "How high?" Mr. President, is that true or not? Well, I asked that to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson.
[34:23]Punch Bowl wrote this morning, and I know you respect Punch Bowl, the GOP, and I'm quoting here, "The GOP controlled House is an arm of the White House." If you're a Congress watcher, you understand this. Under Speaker Johnson
[34:34]and Trump, the House simply isn't an independent branch of government anymore. Whether it's on Russia sanctions, the Jeffrey Epstein files, or voting for a $5 trillion debt limit
[34:45]increase, House Republicans do whatever Trump tells them to do. >> That's nonsense. Uh what Punch Bowl is commenting on is the fact that we're working as a in unified government,
[34:56]which is a rare occasion in our system. We have the Republican party in charge of the White House, the Senate, and the House. Uh the speaker of the house and the president have a very close working relationship, and we are running a playbook that was very carefully
[35:07]designed. We we worked on the big beautiful bill for a year and a half before we delivered that product over the goal line. I forsaw this moment in time and victory loves preparation. So that makes the Democrats and it makes
[35:18]the uh the authors of Punch Bowl very nervous because they don't want the Republican party to advance our policies as efficiently and effectively as we are. They don't uh give us any credit in Punch Bowl for having the most successful six months of any Congress
[35:30]and administration arguably and at least in the modern era and maybe one of the top two or three in all of the history of this institution. Uh so I take that as a badge of honor. U there is a big
[35:40]difference and what people don't see is the discussions behind uh the the curtains um the discussions that I personally have with the president of the United States. Um we we we game this
[35:50]out. I prevent conflicts between the branches before they occur. So that when the policies are announced as things that we have already predetermined are in the best interest of the country. So it looks as though we're not standing up
[36:02]when I've already had the difficult discussions but be behind the closed door. So that's what you call good governance. It's very important for the speaker of the house and the president to have a close working relationship and
[36:11]I make no apology about that at all. >> I name checked Punch Bowl News. The speaker of the house name checked Punch Bowl News. So let me now with pleasure turn to John Breahan, a co-founder of
[36:23]Punch Bowl News. John, take it away. >> Thanks, Mayor Major. Listen, I thought uh the speaker Johnson's comments were pretty interesting. I mean, uh, I do
[36:34]think he underestimates or underplays how much the House of Representatives, the Republicancontrolled House of Representatives executes Trump's agenda.
[36:45]In fact, today the speaker issued a a press release says House GOP passes 50 Trump executive orders. I mean, there's
[36:54]not I mean, that's pretty much says the whole thing there. Yes, the that the the House, you know, is an independent institution. It still is, but they're
[37:03]doing what Trump wants. The idea that House Republicans would vote for a multi- trillion dollar debt li debt limit increase, $5 trillion debt limit
[37:14]increase, House Republicans, is stunning. I covered in 2011 when the House Republican conference, some of these same members had a debt showdown with President Obama. Some of these
[37:25]members have never voted for a debt limit increase, but now Trump tells them to do it and they vote for it. They had two out of 219 House or 200 then 220
[37:36]House Republicans voted against the bill. So that the idea that they don't do what the the the terms of what's laid out by the White House. I mean, it's with all due respect to Speaker Johnson,
[37:47]that's just not borne out by the facts. And when he says, John, that reporters as intrepid as you and your organization don't know all the behind thescenes negotiations that he pre-works with the
[37:58]White House, you're missing a big part of this story. Um, a lot of the stuff does play out in full public view. >> Yeah. I mean, all the disputes that he
[38:08]had with conser that that Speaker Johnson had with conservatives played out in full view. And these are members we talk to 24 hours a day, seven days a week. These are members. Some of them I've known them a long period of time. I
[38:20]knew Chip Roy, congressman from Texas. I knew him was a staffer and I've known him as a congressman. I mean, we've known some of these members for years and years. We talk to them directly. We talk to the speaker directly. I mean,
[38:31]he's very accessible. I'll give the speaker credit for that. He stops and talks to us, his staff, the other leadership offices. We cover this place as much as anybody else. But again, this
[38:41]is, you know, they have they do have their they have their agenda, but they also have Trump's agenda. When Trump tells them what to do, they do it. And a couple other points here, when some of
[38:52]the negotiations that these House Republicans, especially conservative Republicans, like the House Freedom Caucus, the hardline conservatives, they went down directly to the White House and negotiated straight with Trump. Some
[39:02]of these meetings Johnson wasn't even in. Now, the reason why Johnson is still speaker is because Trump Trump saved his saved him on day one of this Congress. So, you know, this is very much Donald
[39:14]Trump's House of Representatives. >> John, as much as you know and as much as I know, many House Republicans say the closer in all these tight votes is always the president of the United States. John Brezen, Punch Bowl News. Thanks so much. I appreciate it. Will
[39:26]lawmakers avert a government shutdown this September? what Speaker Johnson has to say about that next right here on the Takeout. Welcome back to the Takeout. New polling
[39:38]from CBS News and from others shows support for the president's e immigration agenda rather declining. I talked to the speaker of the house about that. Let's talk immigration for just a
[39:49]second. CBS News poll march on President Trump approved 54, disapprove 46. Just this last weekend, disapprove 56,
[39:58]approve 44. One of the reasons is our data shows more people now than ever before believe the deportations are not limited to dangerous criminals or
[40:07]national security threats. 58% opposed the way deportation facilities are being used and overall disapproval of deportation writ large for the first
[40:17]time 5149 when in February it was 5941 approve. Is this going in the wrong direction? Is this administration overreaching and
[40:29]creating not just policy harms, but political risks? >> Well, I can I can tell you that the the focus has been on the dangerous illegal aliens. By our estimation, it's probably
[40:39]close to 20 million illegal aliens came across the border over the four years of Joe Biden, who professed to me personally and publicly that he had no power whatsoever to change it. That was obviously nonsense because President
[40:50]Trump sealed that border closed within just a couple of months. We had almost zero illegal crossings over the border in the last metric last month when they were uh they were monitoring all this.
[41:01]So he accomplished what he told the voters that he would do. The border was the number one issue in the election and people were alarmed by that. >> Do you dispute this trend line I'm describing? >> I don't put a lot of stock in polls. I
[41:12]would I would concede that it's something that we have to do a lot of education on to remind people of what is happening and why and how it's being uh done. We just in the big beautiful bill
[41:22]gave a a a big trunch of funds to to border security, one of the biggest investments uh in in in generations because desperate times call for desperate measures and that's what was
[41:33]needed. That's what the American people demanded. They wanted a secure border and they wanted us to make sure that people who jumped the line and tricked the system and got in front of law-abiding immigrants who are trying to
[41:43]follow the rules and come here lawfully. They want to make sure that that behavior is not rewarded. And so that's what the president is doing. That's what the administration is doing. They're trying to work through that and make
[41:53]sure that we follow the rule of law and that we enforce the law. And and that's what's happening. And when you see stories about green card holders or those who have legally applied for
[42:02]asylum or Afghan SIV special immigrant visa holders being caught up in this mill in this drag net, that doesn't concern you. That doesn't feel accessible.
[42:14]>> Well, no. It would be of concern if people who should not be caught in the drag net are. And those will be carefully evaluated cases. Um, but you you have to give ICE a lot of credit,
[42:25]for example, in doing what they're doing. I visited the ICE uh offices in Chicago and they're in charge of about a six state region. The officers there are overworked, underpaid, they're they're maligned by
[42:36]public officials. Democrats are actually telling people to assault them and some of them are doing it themselves. I mean, it's a very difficult job and and they need our support and encouragement to do what they're doing. If they make a
[42:46]mistake every now and then, everybody does and we have to address that as it happens. But the idea that we should impede their effort or to stop the enforcement of federal law is uh is to
[42:58]me nonsensical and dangerous and that's what got us into the mess that we're in. >> Will there be a shutdown in September? >> Not if I have anything to say about it. We have no interest in a shutdown. I I'm I'm interested. I I heard or read today
[43:09]that Chuck Schumer and Hakee Jeff were meeting and gaming it out. They've they've weaponized shutdowns for political purposes. It seems that that's what they would like to do. We want to do our work and we're pushing the
[43:19]appropriations uh through the process. By the end of this week, we will have had 10 of the 12 uh appropriations bills in the House at least to the committee. >> Not to the floor, but to the committee, >> right? But we're in that process and we
[43:31]get back early September will be at a critical phase because the end of the fiscal year is the end of September, of course. Um but the Milcon VA bill, the first appropriations through the process will be processed in the Senate, the
[43:42]House appropriations bill for the first time in a long time. That's an innovation around here. uh major and and uh a good one. We will go to probably to a conference committee between the two chambers and try to work all this out.
[43:53]We're trying to rebuild muscle memory because this is important for fiscal responsibility and uh that's something we committed to to get back to and I'm hopeful we can. >> That's it for today. Stick around. The
[44:04]daily report coming up next on CBS News 247.