Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Epstein Files Fallout Continues; Trump Points Finger at Obama for Election Interference; White House Cuts Programs for Undocumented Immigrants. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired July 22, 2025 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:00]

EDWARD ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: -- the people around Joe Biden. Joe Biden himself tends to say, give -- give Hunter Biden some space to do things and say he knows what he's doing. Time and again, this has proven a problem for -- for Joe Biden.

MANU RAJU, CNN INSIDE POLITICS HOST: Yeah. And just as Democrats are hopeful they're in a good news cycle, here emerges --

(UNKNOWN): The Bidens always tend to show up at the wrong point (ph) in (ph) time (ph).

RAJU: Exactly. Perhaps not what all of them want. All right, great discussion. Thank you guys. And thank you for joining Inside Politics. CNN News Central starts right now.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN NEWS CENTRAL CO-ANCHOR: The call is coming from inside the House, but Speaker Mike Johnson is letting it go to voicemail. He says he will not allow a vote on the demands to release the Epstein files before September. Still, Trump's DOJ is feeling the pressure, announcing it will try to meet with Epstein's convicted co- conspirator.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN NEWS CENTRAL HOST: Plus, an investigation underway after a now viral video shows officers in Florida smashing a car window and punching a man who questioned why he was being pulled over. Ahead, why police officials say the use of force there was not unlawful. And Israeli tanks roll into parts of central Gaza that had not previously seen ground operations in the 21 month war. That offensive could exacerbate an already dire humanitarian situation there. We are following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN News Central.

KEILAR: We have breaking developments as the fallout from the Epstein files chugs on. Today, President Trump's Justice Department and a key House committee are taking active steps to speak with accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein's associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell is currently in federal prison. She's serving 20 years for helping Epstein groom and sexually abuse underage girls. Both requests coming as pressure from Trump's base shows no signs of letting up.

Let's go first to CNN's Alayna Treene, who's live for us at the White House where the President, Alayna, just a short time ago said he didn't know his officials would be making this request. What more did he say?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: That's right. A reporter asked him about his thoughts on this statement from the Deputy Attorney General, Todd Blanche, you know, saying that he wanted to organize a meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell and that they were expected to meet in the coming days. At first he appeared caught off guard and he said, I'm not involved in that. I don't know anything about it, but it sounds appropriate. I want you to take a listen to exactly what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, US PRESIDENT: I don't know about it, but I think it's something that would be, sounds appropriate to do. I didn't know that they were going to do it. I don't really follow that too much. It's sort of a witch hunt. Just a continuation of the witch hunt.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: So, a few things, Brianna, I want to break down about that. Yes, he actually has been punting to the Attorney General and the Justice Department more broadly in the handling of some of this. But of course, Brianna, he's also paying very close attention to this because he is repeatedly now been trying to change the subject away from this, and not just the president, but the White House more broadly as well. And part of that is because this has been over two weeks now that Jeffrey Epstein has really dominated the conversation.

And increasingly we are seeing a growing number of not just Americans and Democrats and people in the general public, but Republicans and some of the President's fiercest supporters saying that there needs to be more transparency. First, you know, there's a lot of people on Capitol Hill, a lot of Congressional Republicans including people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Senator Josh Hawley, both allies of President Donald Trump who said that they've been getting calls from their constituents saying they want to see these Epstein files and they want more transparency from the White House.

And then I also was asking, I caught up with Laura Loomer today, of course, someone who is a part of the MAGA movement, more of a far right activist, but also very influential with Donald Trump. She's met with both him and the vice president, J.D. Vance, separately here at the White House in recent months. I want to tell you what she told me of this move by the Justice Department today.

She said, why wasn't this done on day one? Why didn't they ask to meet with her before the memo was released on the 4th of July weekend when they essentially said the case would be closed? Seems like this should have already taken place. She went on to say, is the DOJ basically saying they have never met with Ghislaine Maxwell to ask her or interview her about whether she has information about sex crimes committed against minors?

So, look, what I took, what Loomer was telling me, Brianna, about this is that, you know, and especially let me back up a second and give you some context here. Loomer has been one of the people who has been the loudest in her calls and really criticism of the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein case. She has called for the Attorney General to be fired over this. She's called for a special prosecutor. And so my question to her was, is this enough?

[13:05]

Is this move now by the Justice Department to maybe meet with Maxwell enough? And clearly she's seeming to argue it's not. And the reason I think Loomer is important here is because she does represent, again, a big portion of the MAGA movement. And many of the people in the president's base feel similar to Loomer, that they want more information here. And so this is kind of just the latest turn, I think.

And as we continue to get more and more, you know, new updates, every turn of the wheel to this Epstein case and seeing how the White House has kind of struggled to move on from it and now, you know, taking a new position as what we're seeing with the DOJ, saying they're going to try and meet with one of Epstein's associates in person to try to get more answers.

KEILAR: All right, Alayna Treene, great reporting. Thank you for that. Jim?

SCIUTTO: Let's go to Capitol Hill now where a source tells CNN that a Republican led effort to subpoena Maxwell passed earlier. House Speaker Mike Johnson at roughly the same time, though, told Republicans they need to give the Trump administration more time. Johnson then canceled votes to let Congress head home early in order to avoid any Epstein related vote. Lauren Fox is chasing it all on the Hills. So, Lauren, Republicans voted for this, but then the Republican House Speaker said, go home. We don't want to do anything now?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, there's really two dynamics that are taking place right now. You have Republican leadership that is trying to tamp down on Republican members calling for more information into this Epstein matter. Now, the House Oversight Committee, because of an amendment that was brought forward by Representative Tim Burchett, is planning to move forward with the subpoena of Maxwell.

But that is obviously not where leadership has been wanting to go on this issue. Leadership was imploring members this morning during a conference meeting to basically give the Trump administration and President Trump in particular more time to flesh this issue out. Meanwhile, there is this whole other saga that was taking place in the House Rules Committee because Democrats wanted to push Republicans once again to have to vote to release additional Epstein files.

And that was something that a lot of Republicans on the Rules Committee did not want to rehash from last week. So they abruptly stopped that meeting last night. We have no guidance that they're going to come back and try to continue moving forward with House business. And just to give you a finer point on it, if the Rules Committee can't meet because they don't want to take these votes, what that means is you cannot move forward with any Republican legislation. They were supposed to be moving forward this week with a series of

immigration bills that were meant to put Democrats in a really tough messaging spot before this month long recess. Now that's not happening. And Speaker Johnson announced that, yes, they are planning on leaving town tomorrow. That's just a day earlier than they were scheduled to leave for their August recess. But here's why Johnson says Republicans need to give the President adequate time.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE JOHNSON, HOUSE SPEAKER: You have to allow the legislation to ripen, and you also have to allow the administration the space to do what it is doing. The President has said clearly, and he has now ordered his DOJ to do what it is we've all needed DOJ to do for years now, and that is to get everything released. So they're in the process of that. There's no purpose for Congress to push an administration to do something that they're already doing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOX: Now, that effort that Johnson was referring to there is a effort by Representative Thomas Massie to push Republicans and Democrats into having to take a vote on releasing these Epstein files. And he's talking about an arcane tool in the House of Representatives known as a discharge petition, essentially that will not be ready for the House floor until they return in September.

But we should note there are more than 10 Republicans now who have signaled their support for it. Assuming every Democrat also voted for it, it could pass on the House floor. We should also note, though, Majority Leader John Thune in the Senate has made clear he has no interest in bringing that bill to the floor.

SCIUTTO: Lauren Fox on the Hill. Thanks so much. So also during that meeting in the Oval Office earlier today, President Trump declared his intent to, quote, go after people for what he claims were attempts to interfere in the 2016 election by claiming that Russia was seeking to influence the result. The president insisted that former President Obama was guilty of crimes for what Trump said was his role in weaponizing intelligence.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: The leader of the gang was President Obama, Barack Hussein Obama. Have you heard of him? Look, he's guilty. It's not a question. You know, I like to say, let's give it time. It's there. He's guilty. They -- This was treason.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: CNN's Kevin Liptak is at the White House for us.

[13:10]

Kevin, it's notable this response came during a question about Ghislaine Maxwell, but can you fact check what the President is suggesting here?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah. And just to underscore, these are very striking comments from the president. You know, he's accusing Barack Obama of sedition. He said he was seditious, he's accusing him of treason, and he says, quote, whether it's right or wrong, it's time to go after people. Clearly, the president intent on using some of this information that was released last week by the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, to go after his political rivals, chiefly the former President Barack Obama.

And just to step back and describe what Gabbard released. She released information that she says undercut that 2017 intelligence assessment that found that Russia, through a hacking and influence campaign, attempt to influence the result of the 2016 election. She seems to be relying on sort of correspondence that was sent between Obama officials that said that Obama wanted a new assessment into this.

And what President Trump seems to be seizing on is the fact that an initial assessment found that Russia was not successful in influencing the results of that election. But both Trump and Gabbard seem to be twisting some of what the intelligence found. You know, the intelligence community found that Russia did attempt to influence votes through things like hacking emails, things like social media campaigns, but it never found that it actually hacked into voting systems and changed votes, even though it attempted to breach some of those systems.

But President Trump seems to be using some of this new findings and documents that have been released by his intelligence chief to go very harshly after President Obama. And certainly it has always been true that the Russia investigation that really clouded the first two years of his first administration has long been in his head as an attempt to undermine his legitimacy. He has repeatedly called it the Russia hoax.

Now, the President seems more intent than ever on going after some of the people who he thinks were responsible for it. And just over the weekend, we saw him post quite a striking AI generated video of President Obama in the Oval Office being arrested by FBI agents. Later, the video depicted Obama sitting in prison in an orange jumpsuit.

So very striking imagery, very striking words from President Trump as he tries to use some of this information, one, to go after his rivals, but two, seemingly to try and distract from the Jeffrey Epstein matter. But I think, bottom line, when he accuses Obama of treason, when he accused Obama of leading a coup and of being seditious, there's really no evidence in what Gabbard released last week that would back up any of those claims.

KEILAR: Yeah, certainly. Kevin Liptak, thank you so much. Live for us from the White House. And we're joined now by CNN legal analyst and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs at the Justice Department, Elliot Williams. And Elliot, a lot going on.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: A lot going on. KEILAR: But we just learned that the federal judge overseeing the case of Ghislaine Maxwell says he needs more information before he can unseal grand jury transcripts. He's giving DOJ the one week deadline to do this. He says DOJ hasn't addressed several factors that he needs to consider in order to decide whether to grant the request. What kinds of things would those be?

WILLIAMS: What's the use of disclosing grand jury transcripts? Typically, grand jury materials can be released for some official purpose to aid a prosecution, to aid a national security investigation, things like that, that prosecutors need to work. Now broadly, if something is seen as being in the public interest, judges have cracked the door open to saying that maybe we can release grand jury materials, but they are so reluctant to do so.

They're certainly not going to do it just after being asked by the Justice Department. They're going to want briefing, they're going to want to write up an opinion about it. So it's not just a yes or no question. And I think don't be shocked if the judge actually says, yeah, no, this is just not in the rules.

SCIUTTO: Okay, so in other news, Trump is accusing his predecessor of treason here. Just a moment of reminder. When Russia interfered in the 2016 election, as the intelligence community agreed, quite broadly, there was bipartisan agreement that Russia did so. You had Republican and Democratic lawmakers saying quite clearly there was no question about Russian interference in the election.

And just for folks who may not remember, they hacked emails from John Podesta to Hillary Clinton and notably released those hacked emails right after the Access Hollywood tape came out. I mean, that was, that's what part went into the assessment that this was attempted to advantage Trump. Intelligence community never found that they influenced votes or voting systems, et cetera. From a legal perspective here, is there any legal evidence grounding for a U.S. attorney to take up these referrals and actually prosecute?

WILLIAMS: Well, a U.S. attorney can take up whatever they want if it's handed to them, and frankly, they ought to, if they get a referral.

[13:15]

There is not a serious case here for treason or sedition or whatever else. You know, Jim, from your long work overseas, that intelligence estimates or intelligence assessments are sometimes ambiguous.

There are different opinions that can be made about them, but merely disagreeing with one or the findings of one or what's drawn from one is not treason, which is the act of, number one, seeking to overthrow a government, or number two, seeking to kill a sovereign of a nation. It's just silly. Can it be a hassle and a pain in the ass to the person who's investigated, who's got to hire a lawyer and go through all the motions? Sure. But this is not an investigation that'd be grounded in any reality.

KEILAR: But when you have the president raising the prospect of using these levers, right, these legal levers of his administration.

WILLIAMS: Yeah.

KEILAR: I mean, what is the risk in that? Just remind us.

WILLIAMS: No, you know what I think the risk is? It's public misinformation. I think people do not know what treason is or what sedition is or what any crime is. And they hear the words from someone in a profound position of authority who can get in people's heads and say, wait a second, I think those guys actually did try to commit acts of treason. So more than anything else, it's bad civics for the population that just doesn't understand these very hard legal questions.

SCIUTTO: There's that old saying that a prosecutor could get -- could indict a ham sandwich. Right? If they go before a grand jury, essentially a one sided affair.

WILLIAMS: Right.

SCIUTTO: Could you see at least reaching that relatively low level?

WILLIAMS: No. No. Because in order, I mean, yes. By Sol Wachtler, former New York Court of Appeals judge, that a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich. You still have to get to probable cause, which is that it is more likely than not that a crime was committed. It is not more likely than not that Barack Obama committed treason. You don't have to like the president. You don't need to have voted for him. But let's be serious here about what the claims are. So no, no one's getting charged here for this.

KEILAR: Elliot, thank you so much. A lot going on and certainly it was noteworthy that he talked about the one thing as he was asked about the other. So, we appreciate it. Still ahead, 21 Democratic attorneys general suing the Trump administration over its attempt to block undocumented immigrants from accessing federal programs. New York's Attorney General Letitia James is leading the charge and she will join us.

SCIUTTO: Plus, an investigation is now underway after a viral video shows a driver punched multiple times by police during a traffic stop. Ahead, how police officials are now explaining that incident.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:20]

KEILAR: There is a new legal battle that is playing out over some of President Trump's America first policies. On Monday, 21 Democratic attorneys general filed a lawsuit trying to stop cuts to many life saving social programs. Earlier this month, the White House announced it would bar undocumented immigrants from accessing more than a dozen health and education initiatives.

The lawsuit by these states claims that the move will also prevent many Americans from accessing programs like Head Start, Meals on Wheels or domestic violence shelters by forcing them to verify recipients immigration status or risk losing federal funds.

Joining us now is the State Attorney General who's spearheading this lawsuit, Letitia James of New York. Thank you so much for being with us. And of course, at the center of this legal fight is whether undocumented immigrants should continue to access some federal health and education benefits that they currently qualify for, which the Trump administration wants to restrict. Why should undocumented immigrants be able to use these services like Head Start?

LETITIA JAMES, NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL: Thank you for having me. This program has existed for over 30 years. It's a bipartisan program which was created to provide essential services, key social services to all Americans and all individuals. It's important that individuals understand that the terms of these grants were changed in the middle of the grant period.

It's nothing more than an attempt by this administration to terminate programs that millions of individuals have relied upon in order to advance his cruel immigration policies here in these United States. We have relied upon these programs, we have relied upon the interpretation of the law. And they changed it midstream. And some of these programs will close. And my answer to this, to this executive order, to this misinterpretation of the law is that individuals who are hungry should not have to prove or provide identification.

Children who need Head Start should not have to prove their identification. Individuals who need a place to sleep should not have to prove their status. Individuals who are running from domestic violence should not have to prove their status. It's important that individuals understand that this is nothing more than a cruel effort to advance an immigration priority of this administration and will have a devastating impact on all of the states that have filed this action, as well as all of the individuals who relied upon it each and every day simply to survive.

KEILAR: Is New York able to comply with this requirement of verifying the citizenship status of recipients of the services? I know that has been raised as a potential complication.

JAMES: So what this executive order requires is that we comply immediately. And it's important that individuals we don't have the systems are not in place to comply. We have relied upon our interpretation of the law, the plain written language of the law, for over 30 years, three decades, overlapping five presidential administrations. And the interpretations have always been the same.

[13:25]

Now, with the stroke of a sharpie, this administration has changed its interpretation and expects states to enforce their interpretation of the law immediately, jeopardizing the health, the safety and the well being of millions of individuals in the United States of America. It is unconscionable, it's unconstitutional, it's in violation of the law. And that is why we are seeking an injunction against the implementation of this act. KEILAR: I want to ask you about this Border Patrol agent who was shot in New York City over the weekend. Two undocumented immigrants with final removal orders are in custody for their involvement in this.

One person of interest, Miguel Mora, has a criminal history. And I just want to lay this out for our viewers who are not familiar. I know this is a little lengthy, but it's important. And that criminal history includes charges for assault on a pregnant woman and a stabbing charge in January, according to two senior law enforcement officials. DHS detailed three arrests in the last two years in New York City.

His alleged accomplice, Christhian Aybar-Berroa, also entered the country illegally and has a criminal history that includes charges of reckless endangerment and felony grand larceny. He pleaded guilty to petite larceny at the Bronx County Supreme Court in June of this year and was conditionally discharged, according to DHS.

Is this the kind of incident where there may be a case where law enforcement, local law enforcement should be coordinating with immigration authorities? Both of them had these removal orders, these final removal orders.

JAMES: So let me just say I'm so glad that the officer is doing well, and we pray for a speedy recovery. Two, let me also say that it is now time for Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform. Three individuals, obviously, who have criminal convictions or criminal convictions, obviously, it is the policy of the great state of New York to cooperate with ICE agents. However, individuals who serve you each and every day, who come to this country seeking a better opportunity, individuals fleeing violence, individuals who wants -- who want the same thing that you and I want, and that is to care for their families. Individuals who serve us each and every day.

Those are the individuals who need protection. And that's why the state of New York and other Democratic attorneys general are standing up for those families and for those individuals who, unfortunately, are being kidnapped in the middle of the night by masked agents with no insignia, no identification, and taken away from their families. Again, we have no problem with the worst of the worst, but unfortunately, they're focusing on too many innocent individuals. Individuals who work in our farms, in our small businesses, who go to church, who go to school --

KEILAR: I understand what you're saying, because voters also, voters make a distinction, a lot of them in the polls show it, between undocumented immigrants without criminal records, people you're talking about, and those who have them. Right? Especially in these extreme cases, like we look at, in this case in New York City. But to that point, in this case, why should those voters think that this is something other than the system not working?

I mean, if you're talking about waiting for comprehensive immigration reform, I've been in Washington for 20 years. They've been trying for a long time. It doesn't happen. Right? So why in the case of cities taking a step is and states taking a step, is this an example where there could be that coordination? Instead of waiting decades for Congress to act.

JAMES: At the outset, I indicated to you that, in fact, New York state and other Democratic states cooperate with ICE when it comes to criminal convictions. But when it comes to innocent individuals, individuals who serve as your nanny, who clean your home, individuals who are our neighbors, individuals who, unfortunately, are just trying to make ends meet each and every day --

KEILAR: Okay, but both of these individuals had multiple arrests after deportation orders. Why are those not opportunities?

JAMES: And that is why in the state of New York when it comes to individuals, as you indicated, individuals with criminal convictions, then we cooperate with ICE. But it's important that we make a distinction between those individuals with criminal convictions and those individuals, again, who are just trying to make ends meet each and every day. And the vast majority of individuals who are being secreted and kidnapped at night are individuals who, again, are facing civil, civil deportation and not criminal enforcement.

It's important that we make a distinction. It's important that individuals understand that individuals are being caught up in these ICE raids. Innocent individuals, students, teachers, small businesses. We all want the same thing, and that is to protect individuals from harm --

[13:30]