[0:00]Survivors of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are deeply frustrated after meeting today with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch, who's trying to shore up support for his nomination as the nation's top prosecutor. Blanch cannot afford to lose a single Republican vote in the judiciary
[0:15]committee. But right now, two are currently holding out, including Senator Tom Tillis, who gave Blanch an ultimatum. He will vote for him only if he meets with survivors of Epstein. That crucial face tof face actually happened just hours later. But neither side came away fully satisfied
[0:34]with that conversation. It wasn't substantive. It was not productive. It just felt like, okay, well, we have we have a half hour. Air your grievances. Great. I met with survivors. It's like that's not what we're asking for. We are asking for investigations. We have been like,
[0:52]it's so exhausting to keep saying the same things. It's like America doesn't want to hear the same things over and over again. We just want action and we're not getting any action. And it's just after a day where you feel like maybe there was a small glimmer of hope and now we've ticked
[1:05]the box and we're moving on. Blanch said it quote wasn't all cordial because they want something I don't think I can give them, which is some form of justice and I want to be able to give justice in the form of prosecutions. He added, maybe we could do a prosecution at some point. I don't know.
[1:23]This has been excruciating for survivors of Jeb Free Epstein and their families um as they've kind of gone through this and been in some ways dragged through the mud uh as these releases came out. Names were not redacted there. It's it's been a bit of a mess uh to say the least. This
[1:39]meeting though has happened and Tom Tillis had said if you meet with them you you'll have my vote. So that leaves one person. What What do you make of what's happened here? I mean, I make that that John Cornin. Well, look, first of all, Tom Tillis should recognize that having Todd Blanch
[1:55]perform some prefuncter step just to basically check a box actually shows more contempt for the process than if he had just not met with them at all. But really, all this is the whole time has just been for show. Todd Blanch pretending that he's going to offer any semblance of justice is
[2:10]for show. He is Donald Trump's former personal criminal defense attorney. He acts as his current criminal defense attorney. And the reality is that he is there because Trump knows he can trust him. And Trump himself is listed in these files thousands upon thousands upon thousands of times.
[2:25]And so he wants to elevate into that position somebody that he knows is going to protect him because that's Trump's only priority here. What crime did Trump commit as it relates directly to Epstein? Because you're mentioning that he's in the the files with the implication of course
[2:38]that a crime was committed and yet for four years under the previous president they didn't charge him with anything because there's actually no evidence to suggest that he committed. Have you seen the files? I have seen a lot of the files. Have you seen every single one of them? Are you arguing that he's he committed a crime? No, I ask you a question. Did you respond to America
[2:54]wants to see? I've seen the files that have been released. You've you've seen the other 3 million files. Do you think that maybe you're suggesting that a crime was committed and that the Biden administration chose not suggesting that we should probably see the other half of the files
[3:10]that haven't been released? position you only magically started to take in the last two years, not one during the Biden administration. How did the Merrick Garland survivor? So, let me explain that. While Joe Biden was in office, he prosecuted Galain Maxwell and she's serving a 20-year prison
[3:24]sentence. So, let me ask you if if who let me ask you, why did why did Todd Blanch meet with Gain Maxwell and move her from the prison that she was in in Florida to the to the low security prison in Texas? Who should be charged now? Well, I'll tell you what. Once we see the files, once we see the
[3:39]files, I can let you know of the files that you've seen so far. Why are you defending? Why are you defending suppressing 3 million files? You're only in Why do you want the suppression of these? You can use this to try to go to Why are you care about this? Why are you protecting years for a
[3:56]reason? Why are you currently second calls out the hypocrisy? You saying you're defending pedophile because why why are you why are you not demanding the release of these files? Why who do you have to protect of the files that have been released so far? Who should be charged based on anyone yet?
[4:13]I'm asking that question. Have you seen anything in this particular So has the Trump administration released any files that you've seen? I'm simply asking. Have you seen any evidence of a crime yet? Or is the argument that well we haven't seen all the files so the additional files might have
[4:27]some crime there? That's usually how it works. Okay. So, but you're saying to this point that there has not been So, I guess my my Well, I don't know because we've also had we've also had co-conspirator information redacted and not to mention exposed. Is your argument that
[4:40]Merrick Garland and his DOJ they saw evidence and they chose not to pursue everybody else DOJ. So, why don't you allow me to answer this question? For any investigation, the US attorney's office
[4:54]handles it. They believe that in the Trump administration that Jeffrey Epstein got a deal that he shouldn't have had, right? That that that is being investigated. I believe Congress is investigating it. I don't know if DOJ is looking at it. The issue with the survivors right now is
[5:09]that anytime that there is new evidence, they should be getting that over to the FBI. They do not feel confident that the FBI is looking into it. When I was at the Justice Department, this issue was not raised for us from the Epstein survivors. And if it was raised, and actually if
[5:24]it was raised in one of 12 congressional hearings that Merrick Garland had, he would have absolutely met with these survivors. I will say the wh the the time that this whole thing was politicized was
[5:37]when Donald Trump felt that there were Democrats on some sort of Epstein list. He was not looking for justice. What he wanted is he wanted to embarrass them and he wanted a and he wanted to release that and so did Pam Bondi because Pam Bondi needed to do whatever he wanted. I totally
[5:54]had never seen that list up from the beginning. She saw that list. It was unfortunate but Donald Trump was all over it. There is the politics of this and there is the investigation piece of it. And when there is new information hold I'm not done. when there is new information,
[6:10]the FBI and the has the responsibility to look into it. Whether or not they make charges, I'm that is up to the FBI whether they have that evidence. But the survivors do not feel that the that they are being listened to by the FBI. And in that meeting when they asked why was Gain Maxwell
[6:28]put in a low security prison, do Todd Blanch did not want to answer that question. And I will talk about open investigations with them. Todd Blanch. But Todd, he can't talk about that. But don't you find it is very odd and it is unprecedented for a deputy attorney general to go meet with any sort
[6:45]of defendant at a jail. And what he wanted from Gilelay Maxwell was he wanted Glay Maxwell to say something to ensure that Donald Trump was innocent. And that is why he ended up putting her in a low security prison. We've got to end this conver. We all agree the worst job in the
[7:01]world would be Donald Trump's attorney general. Yes. Be rough. be it has been r well we've seen what happened with the prior attorney general. So we'll see what happens with Todd Blanch and if he is able to cross the line with one Republican sort of in the balance right now. Todd Blanch
[7:17]and Jake Clayton were grilled on Capitol Hill today trying to convince senators that they could be the next attorney general and the next director of national intelligence respectively. I do believe it should be independent of the uh president and that the the attorney general
[7:33]should serve the United States, be loyal to the Constitution, and therefore to the people. But it hasn't seemed that way in the time he's been the deputy attorney general, now the acting attorney general. He seems to continue to feel as if he's the president's lawyer. In so many ways,
[7:50]I have found his performance disappointing to say the least. And I can give you some of the reasons for that. People he's gone after w without much justification seem to be the president's perceived
[8:03]enemies. As if the president is saying, "Please prosecute the following people." And that's not said. He has in fact said that. Yeah. Well, he said it directly to Pam Bond said, "I want you to
[8:16]do this." But even since Blanch has been there, he seems to have continued that by continuing to go after James Comey for the seashells on the beach, which really doesn't sound like a a criminal case to me, to going after certain other people, Tish James, uh John Brennan, a whole list of folks that
[8:33]seem to be the president's uh chosen enemy. So, that's that's one thing I would fault him for. Uh secondly, this this fake settlement, this this weaponization fund and the immunity from
[8:46]prosecution on the tax audits that was very troubling because the the lawyers were not honest with the court and that's a big problem to tell the court there's no settlement when there is a settlement. That's not right. And that's been going on and he was he was caught in this today.
[9:03]um Sher Michael because he acknowledged that he he kept saying it's dead, it's dead, but he acknowledged that there's actually nothing in writing that says that it's dead and there's nothing in writing that says that the president who's the plaintiff can't try to revive
[9:18]it by basically saying we have a deal and it's written down here and you said you were going to create this fund. So, I mean, how is he to be believed? And it sounds like John Cornin, who's going to be a pivotal vote, doesn't believe him. Yeah, look, that that's a a point
[9:31]of consternation. I I think for the individuals that are tasked with ultimately getting him confirmed. I've been through this process before during the first Trump administration, having a nominee ultimately go before a committee, going through the mo murder board process,
[9:45]sitting with Dems, sitting with Republicans, and sometimes you do have to make concessions to get your person across the finish line. And I think listening to Manu's question to Senator Cornin, they may have to go back and put this in writing in order to get his vote. Now, there's a couple
[9:59]ways this could work out. He could ultimately vote to get him out of committee, but then say, "I'm not going to vote for him on the floor." And so, I think if if you're the sherpa, you have to be very very careful with not losing votes here. So, I'm not sure how this is going to work out,
[10:13]but I I think you may have to put this thing in writing and say, "Look, this is over. This is a done deal." Let me let me play um this is Jay Clayton. He's the guy that Trump has chosen to become the director of national intelligence. and and obviously Trump has been very clear he wants
[10:27]that office to now be concerned with his 2020 election conspiracies and so on and so forth. This is Clayton answering questions about just a basic question of fact. Listen, who won the I don't
[10:40]I don't I'm not This is like I'm just not I'm here to talk about my qualifications. So he won the election. He he followed our process, had the most of electoral votes, was declared the winner. You refuse to answer a simple matter of fact about the 2020 election. Is that right? No,
[10:56]that's not right. Then answer the question. Who won the 2020 election? I have answered the question. Answer it. What is your answer? I've given you my answer. What is your answer?
[11:10]You refuse to answer a basic question about who won a presidential election. No. But you asked to lead America's intelligence community. Uh Lydia, that's kind of embarrassing and maybe a little concerning if he I
[11:29]mean intelligence is what he wants to have the job of doing. If he can't just state a fact, how can he do that other job? I mean, he'd been asked I think three times at that point. And he did he did mince words. I would have liked him just to say yes and and put an end to the
[11:43]discussion. But there's a lot of theatrics at these kind of hearings. John Oaf got his sound bite and Republicans kind of do the same thing. They love to ask, you know, what is a woman and Katanji Brown Jackson couldn't answer. A lot of people still can't answer that question. So to me,
[11:56]it's theatrics. I do have to say it's it's funny. I feel like we sat at this table so many times and bashed Pam Bondi and Bill Py and I kind of thought maybe people be glad to have Jay Clayton and and Todd Blanch, people who are imminently qualified for these jobs. And I think at the end of the day,
[12:12]it's a question of do you want Jay Clayton or do or do you want Bill PY? I actually think that the two well the two people that were on the hill today. Did you hold on now, but he couldn't do it? The two people that were on the hill today I know you're trying to get a social media clip,
[12:27]Charles, but do you do you know I I think is trying to talk. I I know you're trying to get your social media clip for the gotcha. I answered your question already, but I'm also not here to to answer to you. So let me I'm happy that you told me that cuz I really appreciate I'm sorry.
[12:42]I really appreciate you lecturing me about what I'm here to do because I'm here because Abby show invited me here and I have been in journalism for a very long time. In fact, I came to the New York Times when you the year that you were born. So I would choose I suggest that you choose a lane that
[12:56]is your own and stay in it and don't lecture me because I won't be lectured by a child. Thank you. All right. Go ahead. So, I think to what Lydia was saying about these people being qualified, I would disagree that these are qualified individuals. I think what you saw on the Hill were two people
[13:11]that are quite grossly not qualified for the offices that they're seeking and will do the bidding to to your the point that you're making. They're supposed to serve the American people. Um, the attorney general is meant to be a check on the administration, on the president,
[13:26]and it's they're meant to be objective and serving the public. and what you saw today, even when Todd Blanch slipped up and said, "I'm the president's lawyer, you're actually not. You're actually the lawyer, the the the attorney general for the public." And so,
[13:38]I think what was displayed on Capitol Hill today? Yes, you're right. They're worth the weren't wrong. I mean, facts are facts. I mean, who won the election 2020? Is this like it's like, is the sky blue? I mean, that is a very easy question that could have been answered. And yet,
[13:53]there was a struggle. So, I I I do think you have unqualified people up there. I do think the Senate ultimately probably rallies around these two individuals. And I would say that on the Clayton issue, there are people who I our friend Ellie Honeig in the last hour made a a very compelling
[14:08]case that he is not qualified. Yeah. Yeah. He has no background in intelligence. I think look, I agree that that the attorney general should not uh curry favor for an individual but adhere to the Constitution. I think most of us at the table would probably agree with that. But
[14:23]as it pertains to Todd, I I think it's hard to say he's not qualified. I mean, the guy was at Southern District of New York, moved up through the ranks. Ellie Holene actually worked with him. Uh the current attorney general for New York, Alvin Bragg, worked with him as well. So,
[14:38]it's okay to disagree. I'm going to give you the room for that. You have the But the question is the real question here because Cornin has had offered the real the same objection to all of them. Merrick to Bundy and now um uh to Blanch which is he's saying I need to make sure that you
[14:55]can tell me that the DOJ will be independent of a legitimate not that's why I said though Charles your honor gohead this is a man who said that he his administration and he are at war with
[15:13]the judiciary that's a terrible thing to have said nobody should be at war with the judiciary There are three co-equal branches of government as we know. He also has called judges rogue. He has also criticized their opinions in a way that's not appropriate. So, and he and he and his people have
[15:31]been disrespectful and lied to the court such that there's no longer a presumption of regularity, which means that judges no longer believe DOJ lawyers. 16,000 people have left the DOJ since
[15:43]this man got here because they worked on cases that the president thinks were wrongly brought against him. So they they were just sumearily fired. Let me just play another interaction. He was asked about um his comments about the January 6th pardons uh by a senator and I'm going to play
[16:01]what he said in the hearing today and what he actually said in that appearance that was being questioned about. Listen. and you've bragged that bringing justice for violent riers meant that every one of them was either pardoned or had their sentence commuted. Almost everything
[16:17]the senator just said and and he's protected. He's allowed to lie. But almost everything he just said was absolutely false. I wasn't celebrating it. I was merely stating a fact. If you look at what happened to the to the men and women convicted because of January 6th, by 5:00
[16:34]p.m. on January 20th, every one of them was either pardoned or had their sentence commuted. Okay. So, when folks say you've done nothing, I say you have a very short memory.
[16:51]Um, I don't know. I mean, it does very much sound there that he's defending the decision to pardon these riers. That's what it sounds like to me. I mean, he tried to
[17:03]thread the needle today by saying that, you know, that it was right to prosecute them, but also not condemning Trump's decision to pardon them. So, how do you have it both ways? either they did something that was horrible and they needed to be prosecuted and
[17:16]therefore punished for it and also say well the president has the absolute right to do whatever he wants to do and I'm not going to comment on that well but he did say to get some votes he did say and we'll look into the way the pardon power is exercised so he kind of threw a bone
[17:31]I thought like that saying that and nothing are the same thing because there is nothing he can do about that and he said that he said the throwing of bone and try to get those last votes.