Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Bondi Defends DOJ's Handling of Epstein Probe Under Her Leadership; Trump and Advisers Meeting to Make Final Determination on Iran Deal; Multiple Artist Pul Out of Trump-Backed Concert Series. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired May 29, 2026 - 15:30   ET

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

[15:30:00]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Today on Capitol Hill, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee said former Attorney General Pam Bondi remained tight-lipped about the Justice Department's handling of the release of the Epstein files. They say that she offered no substantive answers, including if President Trump himself knew about Epstein's crimes at the time. Last hour, we spoke with Democratic Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, and here's part of what he said about Bondi's interview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM (D-VA): She also seems to defend her position on not meeting with the survivors. She said that it made no sense to meet with the survivors for some reason. Wouldn't be appropriate was the word she used.

And she didn't seem to have any awareness of the survivors reaching out to her, wanting to meet, or reaching out to her about wanting their own files, the own statements that they made to the DOJ.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: We're joined now by Epstein accuser and survivor Jess Michaels. Jess, thank you so much for taking the time to be with us. I know you've been watching this carefully, and Pam Bondi defended DOJ's handling of the files.

She said in her statement before her interview that, to the best of her knowledge, DOJ produced everything required under the law and demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to transparency released in documents. Even as she did sort of shift a lot of the responsibility here to Todd Blanche, do you agree with her characterization of how DOJ did this?

JESS MICHAELS, EPSTEIN ACCUSER: Well, of course not. First of all, thank you so much for having me on, Brianna.

[15:35:00]

Really grateful to be here and that people are still wanting to talk to survivors and understand what we're seeing and what we're hearing and what we know on the other side of this. If she's saying it's to the best of her knowledge, well, then her knowledge is terrible. To the best of her knowledge means she's going to absolve herself of any responsibility.

And as she did, she pondered off on to Todd Blanche, who is protected as Attorney General. So it's not unexpected, but it's also still discouraging, of course.

KEILAR: Bondi is the one, right, who initially said that the so-called client list, the names of people who are alleged to have trafficked Epstein victims, it was on her desk, right? Only for it to never materialize. How do you see her personal responsibility in light of that when it comes to the Epstein files?

MICHAELS: She was Attorney General. The buck stops with her. She had everything on her desk as she stated clearly.

And she had a choice, and she made it. And it is not in an effort for transparency. In fact, everything we've seen, Brianna, has been the exact opposite of transparency and downgraded transparency with every step.

The fact that this hearing was held without video cameras and without it being under oath is just another step backwards in transparency. So I think you're either Attorney General or you're not. And clearly, she really wasn't Attorney General.

Someone else was making all the rules for her.

KEILAR: A number of Epstein victims, as you are well aware, say that they were trafficked to other men. You have said that this idea of the client list, that the list is actually in the victim statements, the 302s, which, as you point out, are quite redacted. And we just know so little about how investigators pursued the leads from victims who do say they were trafficked to Epstein associates, other than hearing many victims say, yes, they welcome being questioned by the feds, but they haven't been.

What more do federal investigators need to do?

MICHAELS: A couple of weeks ago, several survivors and I and other advocates and influencers and influential political figures all went to the Epstein reading room, and we read files, Brianna, and we all picked files that were clear investigative leads, things that have been completely ignored. So a couple of things is maybe ask survivors where the investigative leads are, because clearly, they're not finding them in their own files, and we could tell you. But all of these names that are in there that have been redacted, they need to be brought in for questioning.

I mean, we're not even talking about bringing in all of the people that should be questioned under oath via videotape in the same type of hearing setting that, for example, Melania Trump mentioned a couple of weeks ago. Like, why not in front of Congress? Why not in front of everyone under oath?

And we're not seeing that. So federal investigators have work to do, even though they're ignoring it.

KEILAR: Jess Michaels, thank you so much for sharing your story and for speaking up and for being on the program today. We really appreciate it.

MICHAELS: Thank you for having me.

KEILAR: President Trump meeting to consider what he calls a final determination about the war with Iran. What we're learning about this tentative agreement next.

[15:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: We continue to stand by for news on the war with Iran and President Trump announcing a short time ago that he's meeting with his national security team in the Situation Room to make a final decision on a new peace proposal from Iran, a deal that would extend the ceasefire by 60 days, reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and start nuclear negotiations with Tehran.

Let's discuss with Ian Bremmer. He's the president and founder of the Eurasia Group and GZERO Media. Ian, thanks so much for being with us, as always. How close do you think we actually are to a diplomatic breakthrough? Do you expect this will get finalized and that the situation in the Middle East will be stabilized?

IAN BREMMER, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, EURASIA GROUP AND GZERO MEDIA: I think we're pretty close. It's certainly more optimistic than at any point since the initial ceasefire. And that's in part because President Trump has significantly walked back his war aims and the aims of the deal to make it more attractive to the Iranians that have been pretty intransigent.

And also because there's a lot of pressure on the United States, on Iran, and on everybody else to get the Strait back open. I mean, those economic costs, nobody is immune from that. And as you know, what is being discussed right now is not a breakthrough on the so-called nuclear file.

It's not about ballistic missiles. It's not about Trump choosing the next supreme leader of Iran and rescuing the Iranian people. It's just about reopening the Strait that was open before the war started.

So in that regard, if Trump is willing to accept that this isn't going to look like a win to a lot of people and that now the hard work of negotiation has to happen and there might not be any progress on that, then we can start getting the supply chains for the global economy up and running again.

[15:45:00]

SANCHEZ: It's notable that you say that because in his most recent post outlining the contours of what he expects to come out of this deal, he says that in coordination with Tehran and the IAEA, the U.S. is going to unearth and destroy Iran's buried enriched uranium. The reporting indicated specific discussions over the nuclear program wouldn't start until after the deal was signed, which as you just laid out is just about everybody's expectation.

Would it surprise you if Iran agreed to that upfront?

BREMMER: No, no, no, no, no. It would surprise me if what is agreed to is presented as coherent and consistent by the Americans and the Iranians. I mean, if there is an agreement, and again, I'm hoping there is, and we're moving towards that, but it's not done until it's done.

I promise you that what President Trump announces and what the Iranians announce will read as mutually exclusive, and that's fine, that's fine, because no one really cares what the headlines are. We just need the Strait reopen, right? I mean, you've got all over the world, you have inflation, and you have goods that are being stopped from moving around the world, and there's real hardship because this deal hasn't yet been put in place, and it can't start until they agree.

So if they want to tell their domestic audiences that they've agreed to something else, God bless them, inshallah, as the Iranians would say. Different story, but the important thing for everyone is can we actually start moving these ships, and the answer to that appears to be we're close, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Yes, no matter the result of this deal, it's going to be compared to the JCPOA, that the president calls one of the worst deals ever made. How likely is Trump's deal to be a market improvement over President Obama's in 2015?

BREMMER: Well, we don't know, and we won't know, because the deal, again, that's being agreed to, if it occurs, will not have any resolution on the nuclear issue. It will, I believe, have some money going to Iran. That money is likely to be $6 billion in assets that will be unfrozen by the Qataris.

Now, the Americans will say they had nothing to do with it. The timing is coincidental.

SANCHEZ: Right.

BREMMER: But the point is that then you start the nuclear negotiations, and there will be carrots for the Iranians if they move ahead on these negotiations. If you made me bet, I expect that in 60 days, both sides will be punting, and it will be extend and pretend by the Iranians, who have very little trust in the process, and the Americans, who have no trust in the Iranians, in lots of ways that this deal doesn't happen.

But as long as the straits stay open, if both sides want to continue negotiating, that's not a horrible thing. Now, if that occurs, it's weaker than the JCPOA. Clearly, clearly. Also, you'll remember that Trump seemingly out of nowhere started talking about the Abraham Accords needing to be expanded as part of this deal. Now, why would he do that?

Because, I mean, the likelihood that the Saudis would accept joining the Abraham Accords, given the present Israeli government and their disposition in Gaza and in the West Bank, the likelihood of that is roughly zero. So why would Trump bring that in? And it helps to answer your question, which is that the Abraham Accords, by everyone's account, was Trump's most improbable and biggest success diplomatically of his first term.

It was Trump as a peacemaker, bringing peace to the region, that the Democrats said he could never do unless there was a Palestinian state. And so for Trump to remind everyone of that, and then while he's negotiating on the nuclear side, probably ineffectually and with an outcome that doesn't look any better than JCPOA at best, he's also then saying, but we're negotiating, we're talking about these Abraham Accords, which was a big success. And by the way, if I do that, that's the ultimate peacemaking that no one could ever do.

And by the way, if I can't do that, if the Saudis refuse, well, maybe I shouldn't even bother with this other stuff because it's their fault, it's not mine. See, Trump's problem right now is that he is solely to blame for the fact that the Strait is closed. Once you sign that deal and you get out, suddenly Trump has the possibility of blaming other people, other actors, for not getting further progress done.

That's a much better political position for Trump to be in.

SANCHEZ: Wow. Ian Bremmer, appreciate the insights. Thanks so much for being with us.

BREMMER: Sure, Boris.

[15:50:00]

SANCHEZ: Of course. Still ahead, who is in and who is out? The growing list of performers canceling their America 250 concert sets. We'll get into this in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Sad to report the crowd will not be busting a move at the Trump-backed concert series to celebrate America's 250th birthday. That's because rapper Young MC and many other artists who were originally advertised as performing are dropping out.

Let's go down the line. Singer Martina McBride is out. Young MC, as we just mentioned, is out.

C+C Music Factory is kind of performing. Freedom Williams, who is touring under the group's name, says he doesn't support Trump but does plan to perform simply because people are telling him not to. One of the original founders of C+C says the group does not endorse Williams.

And I do have to point out earlier in the show, I said that Milli Vanilli was out. That's not exactly the case, so I personally want to issue an apology for that.

KEILAR: All right, Vanilla Ice is in. Milli Vanilli is also kind of in, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

KEILAR: Fab Morvan, the surviving member of the duo, performing. But remember, he was a part of that huge lip-syncing scandal when it was revealed that Morvan never actually sang on any of Milli Vanilli's songs. The Commodores, they're out.

Finally, Morris Day and The Time, no longer playing. Flo Rida hasn't said if he's going to perform, but Poison frontman, Bret Michaels, out. Let's talk about it with Jem Aswad, executive music editor at Variety.

Bret Michaels, that's the one that got me, Jem. Why are so many acts pulling out here?

JEM ASWAD, EXECUTIVE MUSIC EDITOR, VARIETY: Well, according to what he said, they were pitched the concert saying that it was going to be for first responders, it was going to be for veterans, it was going to be for active military and teachers and people like that. And all of a sudden, the flavor of it is different. It has become more of a MAGA- style event, and they just don't really want to be a part of that.

You know, it sounds like it was misrepresented to them in some way, intentionally or not, and this is nothing we haven't seen before because as these concerts get more and more politicized, artists decide that they don't want to be part of something divisive. And you know, it's funny, with the exception of Flo Rida, the two artists who are kind of performing, they're both basically in copyright disputes over the name. The Milli Vanilli one is absolutely hilarious because it's so meta, it's very strange.

The guy who is associated with Milli Vanilli and who you think is Milli Vanilli, but didn't actually sing on the record as performing, but the people who actually sang on the record, but weren't photographed, are not. And they're both performing under Milli Vanilli, touring that way.

SANCHEZ: It's like Schrodinger's cat. It's a philosophical question. Who's the real Milli Vanilli?

KEILAR: Maybe they can get the cat.

ASWAD: I mean, I ponder it constantly.

SANCHEZ: Yes. I wanted to ask you about a portion of Brett Michael's statement. It reads in part, "Concerns have also been raised regarding the safety of my fans, band, crew, family, and myself, including threats that are completely unfounded and unforgivable." What do we know about that?

ASWAD: I don't know anything about that. It's hard to know what threats he or his bandmates actually received. It may be a convenient out.

Maybe he got a couple of threats. I don't think Brett Michael's audience is terribly left wing. So, you know, I mean, I would actually kind of think the opposite.

So he may be conflating a couple, a few threats he may have received, not to diminish the importance of that because these things do happen. But, you know, he may be making more out of it than actually happened as a convenient way to bow out without offending people.

KEILAR: I just, you know, this is a big deal. The 250th, right? And it feels like it should be a time when the nation comes together, Jim.

But this is highlighting the kind of the politicization that the country is experiencing right now. What are you thinking about that at a time where hopefully people can kind of find some unity? That's not what we're seeing.

ASWAD: We most definitely are not. And I don't know what the intentions of the organizers originally were, but there does seem to be a difference between what the performers were told this event was going to be and what it is actually turning out to be. And, you know, I think it's fair to say the president is not big on resisting opportunities to make it look like people are on his side in circumstances like this or turning something like this into an endorsement of his administration or his policies or MAGA in general.

You know, I may be extending that a little bit, but, you know, things like this have happened before, and the artists aren't standing for it. And who can blame them? Because the reality is the more anyone wades into politics right now, the more you're going to --

KEILAR: Yes. The more you're going to --

SANCHEZ: Glitch.

KEILAR: Glitch and --

SANCHEZ: The signal will get messed up.

KEILAR: All the signals get crossed. That's exactly what is going to happen. People stop listening.

SANCHEZ: The same thing kept happening with our cave guests.

[16:00:00]

There was something cursed about the guests that we booked to talk about the cave, the folks in Lao that were trapped. Every guest that we booked dropped out.

KEILAR: Yes, but that's because the guests needed to have issues so that the villagers --

SANCHEZ: Had hope.

KEILAR: Sailing. Hopes of getting out. We'll continue to watch that story as will Kasie Hunt. "THE ARENA" starts right now.

END