Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Now: Republicans Holding Up Vote On Trump's Cuts Over Epstein Case; WSJ Reports On Letter Bearing Trump's Name Given To Epstein; CBS Canceling Colbert's Show; White House Reveals Trump Diagnosis After Images Raise Questions; Congress On Track Tonight To Cut NPR, PBS Funding. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired July 17, 2025 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[19:00:25]
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:
The breaking news, Trump's agenda at this hour held up by the Epstein uproar. Republican holdouts saying they won't vote on DOGE cuts unless they get something on Jeffrey Epstein. And tonight, we'll talk to a Republican who wants more information.
Plus, Trump swollen ankles and bruised hands. Tonight, the White House offering up an explanation after images of the president raised serious questions.
And, Congress on track to essentially wipe out all federal funding for PBS and NPR, $1 billion over the next two years. Steve Inskeep, the NPR voice that everyone knows is my guest.
Let's go OUTFRONT.
(MUSIC)
BURNETT: And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
OUTFRONT tonight, we begin with the breaking news. Jeffrey Epstein now threatening to derail Trump's agenda. On Capitol Hill tonight, Epstein is front and center. Several Republican holdouts are saying they will not move forward on a vote on Trump's DOGE cuts unless they get Epstein, too.
And House Speaker Mike Johnson's back is up against the wall because the House faces a Friday deadline at midnight. So, we're counting down here to act on Trump's cuts to the government funding package. And GOP holdouts say that their constituents are the ones that are demanding answers on Jeffrey Epstein, as MAGA media is not letting up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALEX JONES, INFOWARS HOST: Trump has done a F minus. I mean, my God, it's worse than an F. I mean, it's like a zero on the Streisand effect and not having clarity and flip flopping back and forth. It's just been horrifying. OWEN SHROYER, INFOWARS HOST: Trump did this to himself. And it's not
even about, let's say, Epstein hooking him up with some hot 20-year- old 40 years ago. It's the fact that he came out and insulted his base and said it was a hoax. And so, the whole thing is just crazy, and I don't want to get in all of it now. We'll get into it coming up. But it's just going to get worse.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: All right. The man you heard speaking right there at the end was someone who spent time in jail because of his role leading up to January 6th. All right? So the people who are saying this aren't people who are on the fence about Trump. These are the people who vaulted Trump back to the White House, like Nick Fuentes, the white nationalist whom Trump has hosted at Mar-a-Lago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NICK FUENTES, FAR-RIGHT ACTIVIST: And now he says, if you're not on board with the Epstein coverup, oh, I don't want your support. You're a weakling. (EXPLETIVE DELETED you. (EXPLETIVE DELETED you.
You suck. You are fat. You are a joke. You are stupid. You are not funny. You are not as smart as you think you are.
We are going to look back on the MAGA movement as the biggest scam in American history.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: I mean, to think that those words came out of his mouth, they're going to look back on the MAGA movement as the biggest scam in American history -- I mean, these are people who made their names on the MAGA movement, inside the MAGA movement by support of Trump. And their attacks are heard by millions and millions.
And then there's Elon Musk, who's also stepping up his calls for more information. Today he posted this: Where is phase two? And alongside that was a picture of the Epstein files. Phase one.
Now the White House is doing all that it can to make this story go away. In fact, the administration is completely trying to change the subject. They'd rather talk about Trump's swollen ankles, for God's sake.
And the attorney general today went to Alcatraz. Pam Bondi touring the 91-year-old former federal prison because of Trump's desire to transform that national park back into a prison. And following Bondi, the pro-Trump network Fox News, California's Governor Gavin Newsom's office, responding with a statement to that, saying Pam Bondi will reopen Alcatraz the same day Trump lets her release the Epstein files, so never.
Well, if you listen to the White House, though, there is no desire, no desire at this moment to release more information on Epstein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It was this president who directed the Department of Justice and the attorney general to do an exhaustive review of all files related to Jeffrey Epstein, which they did. They spent many months going through all of the files related to Jeffrey Epstein, and they concluded what they found in that memo, which they drafted and they released. And so, the president has been transparent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Of course, all those questions still remain. Nothing of all the rich and powerful people who associated with Epstein over so many years, there's absolutely nothing for anyone to see.
[19:05:02]
Let's go to Manu Raju, live on Capitol Hill.
I mean, Manu, what you are watching unfold on Capitol Hill, GOP versus GOP when it comes to a signature bill, Trump wants to pass and a whole lot of members of the GOP saying, no way, not until we get Epstein?
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, this is a fight that's really been intensifying all week long from Donald Trump's closest allies on Capitol Hill, who are demanding more information, are simply shrugging off all of Trump's attacks against them.
Trump has tried to call them foolish. He's called some of them stupid. He called this a Democratic hoax. Many of them are simply saying, that's fine. You can say that, Mr. President, but we still want this information released.
And Speaker Mike Johnson has to contend with the reality of the narrowness of his majority in the House of any handful of members decide they want something and hold out their support. He has to listen to them and potentially cater to their demands. That is exactly what is happening with this bill that Donald Trump wants passed by the end of this week, by the end of Friday, the bill to cut roughly $9 billion in federal funding for foreign aid and for public broadcasting.
But those holdouts want a vote, a separate vote on an Epstein related matter, potentially to release all of the Epstein files. And that has been the source of the negotiations, intense negotiations that have been happening all day long.
Now, Erin, I am told that the Republican leaders plan to still have a vote tonight on this bill to cut roughly 9 billion of dollars. And there's some signs that there potentially could be a resolution with those Republican holdouts. And in a key meeting that is happening right now in the House, Democrats are pressing for information about any deal that was released related to Jeffrey Epstein.
The Republicans on that committee so far have not divulged the details about a deal about any separate vote related to Jeffrey Epstein. But as one of the key questions tonight in the Capitol, what did Johnson have to agree to on Jeffrey Epstein to get Trump's agenda moving ahead as they plan to do so, to get this bill passed by the end of the night, Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much, Manu.
So I want to go straight OUTFRONT now to someone in the center of all of this. That is the Republican congressman, Tim Burchett. He is a co- sponsor of a resolution in the House to release files on Jeffrey Epstein.
I very much appreciate your time.
So, Manu's reporting, you know, maybe there's a vote that will happen that maybe Johnson has agreed to something on Epstein. You're obviously in the center of this. You're central to this legislation. Is there an agreement at this point?
REP. TIM BURCHETT (R-TN): No, ma'am. There's not. And honestly, if the Democrats were serious about this issue, they wouldn't have waited four years to bring it up.
This is all politics. We need to be worrying about the victims in this thing, and we need to worry about justice. And these dirtbags that were involved with these kids.
And we need to publicly ridicule them and possibly hang them. But the reality is, is there probably isn't a list, you know? I've known a few criminals in my life. Heck, I've served in in elected office with a few of them, and they don't keep a list of their criminal activities.
And Trump's not on this list because if he was, Biden would have released it the first day.
So, it's a lot of politics and a lot of hype. We just need to get to the bottom of it, ma'am. And unfortunately, in this town, when it's delayed, it's kind of like the Kennedy assassination. We're never going to get to the bottom of it.
BURNETT: Well, of course, we don't know -- we don't know who's on the list. And to your point, right, list is a is a euphemism, right, for knowing who Jeffrey Epstein was dealing with, right?
BURCHETT: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.
BURNETT: Who was., who was sleeping with underage girls, who was financing all of those things. We don't know.
(CROSSTALK)
BURCHETT: Let's correct that. Let me correct you on -- ma'am, ma'am, let me correct you on something. He was raping underage girls. You do not have sex with an underage girl, ma'am. You rape them.
And that is what this is about. So, you know, we try to soften that. But that was a horrible act of violence against these young --
BURNETT: Well, I agree with you.
BURCHETT: Yes, ma'am.
BURNETT: I agree with you.
BRUCHETT: Thank you.
BURNETT: And I happen to agree that we should know every single person involved.
Do you think the Pam Bondi is listening to you at this moment, Congressman? That there's any chance that she's going to release the files and in a way that you would have confidence on what's in those files?
BURCHETT: I don't have a lot of confidence in her, ma'am. I think she's way out over her skis in this thing. She released that notebook, which was stuff that you and I would already know. Maybe she didn't. Maybe she didn't follow it. I think she took some bad advice.
She's in the primetime. Gets thrown in the middle of it. And I think she took some bad advice. But then when she followed it up with the list on my desk and then there is no list, I get tired of that.
One thing I think people ought to worry about, wonder about, though, is these flight logs, which are generally public record. But that doesn't necessarily mean somebody is a pedophile.
That's why I think we need somebody in the legal community to oversee this, to make sure none of the kids' rights are violated.
[19:10:01]
We don't want to see pictures of children. We don't want their identification. Anybody that was abused.
BURNETT: Yeah.
BURCHETT: But if the person is suspected of a crime, dadgummit, we ought to have that information. And that's what it should always be about.
BURNETT: So I know that you have wanted to have Ghislaine Maxwell testify before congress. And of course, while Jeffrey Epstein died before his trial, she is serving 20 years for her role in assisting him.
BURCHETT: Yeah.
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: So have you gotten a response, Congressman Burchett from the House Speaker Mike Johnson or from leadership saying that that they're willing to hear from the one person who actually could answer all these questions.
BURCHETT: I haven't yet, ma'am, I need to run into Chairman Comer. I haven't seen him yet in the last couple of days, but -- and you can call me Tim, by the way. But I don't think Comer is going to duck me out on this one. He's going to do what's right. He's a stand-up guy on these types of issues. He's a family man as well, like I am. So I think he's there.
You know, ultimately though, ma'am, I'm going to have to answer to my creator on this issue. It's not the voters or even the president. You know, as a -- as a Christian, I'm not a very good one.
Obviously, I'm on the far end of the spectrum, but I -- the Bible talks about how you treat the least amongst you, and that's Jesus talking. And that's some pretty strong medicine right there, ma'am, the least amongst us definitely are these children.
And we need to get to the bottom of this, because first of all, we need to send a message to these godless dirtbags that abused children that were not going to stand for it. And second of all, we need to send the message to all the victims in the world, in this country, anyway that we are out there fighting for you.
I've held the hands of people that have been molested and abused and ma'am, they have a -- they have a life sentence. They never get over it. Lifetime of counseling, guilt, horrible things, they do horrible things to their bodies.
And it is just a -- it's a -- it's a horrendous thing. I passed some of the toughest laws in the country when I was in the state legislature. I know all about this issue.
BURNETT: Well, I would hope everyone would agree with you. This shouldn't be a partisan issue.
I want to ask you one thing, if I may, before you go, and that is we've been talking about the attorney general and that it would be, you know, this isn't the purview of the DOJ. But Ron Wyden, who's the top Democrat in the Senate Finance Committee, is saying that there are files somewhere else, right? Which would mean, I guess in this case, its Secretary Scott Bessent who would be in charge of them because he says that there are files on at Treasury with a lot of this information. Here's what he said, Congressman.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RON WYDEN (D-OR): Somewhere in the Treasury Department, Mr. President, locked away in a cabinet drawer is a big Epstein file that's full of actionable information. Follow the money details about his financing and operations that await investigation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Congressman, do you believe that?
BURCHETT: Ma'am, I have no idea. But the problem you have is, it's been delayed so much that I think a lot of the evidence has either been tampered with or destroyed. And that's really what bothers me. Over the last four years. We should have had this thing out there, and it should have been brought forward.
And that's why I believe that, that well never really get to the bottom of it. And that's -- they're going to deal with it on the other side. And when they meet their creator, and I hope it's soon for some of them.
BURNETT: All right. Well, Congressman, I appreciate your time. And thank you so much, Congressman Burchett, joining us from Capitol Hill.
BURCHETT: Thank you, ma'am.
BURNETT: And I want to go straight to Bill Kristol and David Axelrod now.
And, Bill, let me just start with some new reporting that is just in, and I want to just lay this out for everybody because we're just learning this from "The Wall Street Journal". "The Wall Street Journal" is reporting that there's a letter that bears Trump's name that was sent to Epstein in 2003.
Now, according to "The Journal", Bill, it contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand drawn with a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman's breasts, and the future president's signature is a squiggly Donald below her waist, "The Journal" says, mimicking pubic hair.
The letter concludes "happy birthday, and may every day be another wonderful secret".
All right, Bill. I mean, that's just disgusting. But in an interview with "The Journal", Trump denies writing the letter. He denies drawing the picture.
He says, "This is not me. This is a fake thing. It's a fake 'Wall Street Journal' story. I never wrote a picture in my life. I don't draw pictures of women. It's not my language. It's not my words."
And he told "The Journal" he's preparing to file a lawsuit if it published an article. "I'm going to sue 'The Wall Street Journal', just like I sued everyone else."
So, Bill, I mean, here we are.
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: I mean, "The Wall Street Journal", obviously was incredibly rigorous standards is publishing this.
BILL KRISTOL, EDITOR AT LARGE, THE BULWARK: Yeah. And Trump, president of the United States, who's a big religious guy, threatened them with a lawsuit. They seem quite confident just to be -- it's a birthday card apparently in a book of kind of birthday cards for Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003, I believe. [19:15:05]
So that's 15 years after Trump already knows Epstein pretty well.
It has this. Apparently. It has this kind of typescript of an imaginary conversation. I could just maybe add to what you read, if it's okay, Donald -- so it goes like Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey.
Jeffrey: Yes, we do. Come to think of it.
Donald: Enigmas never age. Have you noticed that?
Jeffrey: As a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you.
For me, I mean, that's a kind of weird. What is enigmas? I mean, is that a word that Trump and Epstein use to convey something that they shared? I mean, we know that.
So, I think this will raise many more questions about how much Trump how close Trump was, let's put it this way, to what Epstein was involved in.
BURNETT: And obviously, you know, Trump -- Trump denies the letter, David. But you know "The Wall Street Journal" to publish something like this is not an insignificant thing.
DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Oh absolutely not. And you've got to believe that they were pretty rigorous about evaluating it before they ran it, because they knew that it would invite lawsuit.
But let me just make a point here. You know, I heard Congressman Burchett very passionately talk about this, but it's really curious about is there anyone on the planet who believes that the attorney general did a 180 on this issue on her own? Donald Trump didn't want this material out there, and he instructed her, I believe he instructed her not to release the material.
And this is a clue as to why. Now, I don't know what's in there. And maybe there's nothing about Donald Trump in there, but he's not behaving that way. And, you know, and now, he and his politics have been hoisted on their own petard there because they rode these conspiracy theories and maybe not conspiracy theories about Jeffrey Epstein all throughout his campaigns and the people around him and people in his cabinet.
And now, they're in the government and they're being held accountable for the things that they said. And it's created a political headache for him. So, this is just more evidence as to why the attorney general mysteriously did a 180 and didn't release what she promised to release.
BURNETT: I mean, Bill, you know, also, you know, with the what "The Journal" is reporting and Trump's denying, but they're saying that the on that letter was that the words, you know, every day, be it a wonderful secret or something like that. It's just an odd -- it's an odd thing to write. It's a very odd thing to write on any birthday card.
KRISTOL: Yeah, it is. And maybe they're just being, you know, yucking it up, guys, and it's semi-innocent. Let's just say not, you know, not necessarily suggesting Trump had full knowledge or even partial knowledge. Maybe he had some awareness though of Epstein's activities. He says in the interview in 2002, Trump remembers, said that he and Epstein both liked beautiful women, and Epstein kind of likes them, on the younger side, Trump, at least it seems to me, is one could plausibly say it had some sense of what Epstein was interested in. He obviously might not have known at all about the massive criminal conspiracy.
It's, you know, it strikes me at two points I want to make quickly. David is totally right. I thought this from the beginning. Zero chance that Pam Bondi and Kash Patel get together and put out a statement on something like this without consulting with, and I would say, taking orders from Donald Trump. And certainly, that's their theory, aren't they in favor of a unitary executive, right? The president gets to tell the attorney general and the director of the FBI what to do. So, I think there's no chance that that they didn't know about it.
You know what also strikes me so much that Trump's been talking about this for two weeks, berating his supporters, berating the media. He never says a word of sympathy for the girls, right? I mean, he seems to have no interest, no empathy for these young girls who were so horribly, horribly treated. And it just strikes me that that's he thinks about this from sort of his point of view as a friend of Epstein.
He wants to -- I'm not involved. I didn't have anything to do with it. I knew Jeffrey, I didn't know him that well. I didn't know quite as well as I said I knew him. He has no empathy or sympathy. I think it's just a human thing.
I say the contrast with Congressman Burchett is so striking. You know, for me, I mean, they're both very conservative. They're both MAGA Republicans in a sense, you might say. Burchett's probably voted 99.9 percent of the time for Trump, but he seems to care as a human being about these young girls in a way that I've got to say, Donald Trump has shown no evidence of care.
AXELROD: But, you know, what --
(CROSSTALK)
BURNETT: Yeah?
AXELROD: What's interesting, Erin, is that none of these politicians, including Congressman Burchett, are -- the reason they're attacking Pam Bondi is they don't feel like they can attack the president.
And so, you know, if you -- I said the other day, if you if you can't -- if you can't attack the king, attack the courtiers.
[19:20:05]
And so, it's easier. But they all know the truth as well, and they probably suspect what were talking about here. And they can't say it because they're fearful of what that might mean.
So, they're doing this. They've made Bondi the focus of their ire.
BURNETT: And "The Wall Street Journal", you know, Trump obviously is denying this and threatening the lawsuit against "The Journal". But "The Journal", as I said, as part of their reporting, they say I'll read from the article, the Justice Department officials didn't respond to requests for comment or address questions about whether the Trump page and other pages of the birthday album, that's the birthday album for Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday, were part of the agency's recent documents review. The FBI declined to comment.
I mean, David, that's pretty stunning, right? That's not denials from anybody who had seen it. That's a -- that's a -- that's not commenting. Thats very different than denying. I mean, you know, well see where this goes. But they obviously ran all the ropes on this.
AXELROD: Yeah. Without question. I mean, this is pretty explosive stuff. And "The Wall Street Journal" is a pretty responsible publication. And so, you have to assume they ran through all kinds of hoops to -- before they decided to publish this.
But look, all of it, everything we're saying here points to the same thing. Donald Trump was discomfited by what was in those files, and he did not want them out. And so, they're not going to come out as long as he has anything to say about it. And he has a lot to say about it.
And now he is trying to shift the focus and turn this into -- throw it into the rubric of partisanship and say, well, this is all a Democratic plot. I mean, he accused President Obama of slipping things into the files. This this all happened after years after Obama left office. I mean, the whole thing is absurd, but he knows that when he's in trouble, to bang that hard, you know, the whole hoax, the whole hoax, hoax hard, and he's doing it here.
BURNETT: So, Bill, where does it explosive story like this go, especially given Trump's immediate threat?
KRISTOL: It's just -- the hoax thing, though. Remember, he's telling his own supporters that they were hoaxed and they were hoaxed by Trump, who propagated this this theory. I mean, I think this is why it's so damaging to him.
It's very hard for him. David is totally correct that this is what Trump would like to do to make it a normal Democrat versus Republican, Trump versus anti-Trump. You know, it ends up as a standoff, so to speak.
But very hard to do that when you have Trump's own supporters saying, I think in many cases, sincerely, like Congressman Burchett, that, you know, this this is horrible. What happened, obviously, what Epstein did. And we need to know as much as we can know while protecting, obviously, confidentiality of the girls and et cetera. We need to know as much as we can know about what happened here.
And so, I think it's very hard to -- Trump can't quite shut this down as easily as he's managed to shut other things down, I think.
BURNETT: Thank you both so much, I appreciate it. I'm grateful to you to be to be here.
And next, the far-right activist Laura Loomer. She has Trump's ear, of course. She has also, though, been a thorn in Trump's side when it comes to his handling of the Epstein situation. And tonight, new reporting on what she's saying this evening.
Plus, more questions about Trump's health after the White House revealed what's causing Trump's legs to swell.
And Tesla on trial after a car that was said to be on autopilot crashed, killing a college student.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:27:58]
BURNETT: More on the breaking news coming from "The Wall Street Journal". "The Journal" is reporting a letter bearing Trump's name given to Epstein in 2003 was part of a leatherbound book for Epstein's 50th birthday. According to "The Journal", it contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand drawn with a heavy marker. They don't use the word sharpie. They describe it as a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman's breasts and the future president's signature is a squiggly Donald below her waist, "The Journal" says, mimicking pubic hair.
The letter concludes, according to "The Journal", quote, "Happy birthday and may every day be another wonderful secret," end quote.
Now, in an interview with "The Wall Street Journal" about this reporting, "The Journal" says Trump denied writing the letter or drawing the picture. He said, and I quote, "This is not me. This is a fake thing. It's a fake 'Wall Street Journal' story. I never wrote a picture in my life. I don't draw pictures of women. It's not my language. It's not my words."
And he went on to tell "The Journal" that he was preparing to file a lawsuit if it went ahead and published the article saying, "I'm going to sue 'The Wall Street Journal', just like I sued everyone else."
All right, let's get to Kristen Holmes at the White House.
Kristen, obviously, "The Wall Street Journal", you know, ran the ropes on this, and they chose to publish it. What are you hearing now?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Erin, we've reached out to the White House for any kind of official comment.
I think right now, the official comment, of course, stands as President Trump himself saying that he had nothing to do with this. This wasn't his handwriting. This wasn't his note. This wasn't his drawing. And the pushback that he was going to sue "The Wall Street Journal".
One thing to note here is that the White House had been bracing for a story from "The Wall Street Journal". This had become kind of an ill kept secret that they were working on something. There were rumors of what it could possibly be, and we know that they were waiting to see if they actually went through with it. Obviously, the White House was aware of what was in this story before it published, given the fact that President Trump had spoken to "The Wall Street Journal", we know that. We also know that there had been numerous reach outs for comments across the administration.
The reason why this is such -- coming at such a critical time is it's really a time when President Trump and his entire administration, the entire White House, has been trying to get as far away from this as they possibly can. This has dominated the news cycle for several days. And it's not just in the news. It's also personally.
President Trump has been at odds with his base. There has been a clear fracture here. We have seen his MAGA base calling for a special prosecutor, calling for President Trump to release more documents for the attorney general to release more documents, to actually explain the rollout here, why they just came up with this memo instead of more files after promising for months and years that they would if he was elected to office again. People like Attorney General Pam Bondi and Kash Patel, the head of the FBI, the deputy director Dan Bongino.
And this has become a point of contention behind the scenes between many of these officials on how this was handled. So, this is yet now another turn of the wheel on this story, something that they've been trying to get away with, get away from. And the one thing to keep in mind here earlier today, Karoline Leavitt said that President Trump wouldn't actually recommend a special prosecutor, that would just not be something that he would. She would, he would want to do or that he wanted. That's how he felt. That was the word she used.
The reason why that's so critical is that in any other administration, at least in modern history, the Department of Justice has acted independently of the White House. That is not the case here. So, any kind of saying President Trump wouldn't recommend that, that's likely to completely kill the idea of a special prosecutor.
Now, what happens now once this has been out there, once this story is what we're going to be watching closely, is not just how the White House reacts, but how do the people closest to President Trump react? How do the voters react? How does his MAGA base react?
Because right now, there has been so much fracture and they haven't been able to get away from the story?
BURNETT: No, he hasn't. And this reporting obviously is explicit and it's terrible.
All right. Kristen, thank you very much. And you know obviously Trump denies it. But according to "The Wall
Street Journal", they said that Justice Department officials, when they reached out explicitly for requests for comment or for them to address questions about whether the Trump page in that album and other pages of the birthday album were part of the agency's recent documents review -- well, the FBI declined to comment.
And it comes as far right activist Laura Loomer is among those who are not letting up on the attorney general, Pam Bondi, tonight.
Loomer, in fact, is demanding that Bondi apologize to the American people and admit that she either lied or misspoke, and Loomer is not backing down from her warning that the Epstein case is a major threat to Trump's presidency.
Sunlen Serfaty is OUTFRONT tonight with more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LARA LOOMER, FAR-RIGHT ACTIVIST: Appoint a special counsel, and please, let's talk about other things so we don't have to say Speaker Hakeem Jeffries next November.
SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It is a big warning coming from an influential voice in President Donald Trump's orbit.
TRUMP: We have a lot of great friends and a lot of great people. Laura, how are you?
SERFATY: Far right activist and Trump confidante, Laura Loomer, telling "Politico", President Trump's handling of the swirling Jeffrey Epstein controversy could, quote, consume his presidency, lashing out at Attorney General Pam Bondi and advising Trump to appoint a special counsel to investigate the matter.
LOOMER: She has created an embarrassment and also a PR crisis for the president of the United States. And now people are talking about how they're not going to support the president, and they're not going to show up to vote in the midterms. Totally insane.
SERFATY: Potent words from Loomer, whose loyalty to Trump has been absolute. It represents a big fissure, with Trump coming just as the White House says, Trump would, quote, not recommend a special prosecutor. The president is clear he wants to move on. Firing off this true social tweet, wondering what's going on with my boys. And in some cases, gals, they're going after Attorney General Pam Bondi. Topping the list of Trump's, quote, gals, Loomer, who's power within the MAGA world cannot be overstated.
LOOMER: I'm with the greatest president ever, President Donald Trump, who is killing it right now.
SERFATY: Just 32 years old, the right wing provocateur has gained a massive following with 1.7 million followers on X, a powerful megaphone with a direct line to the president, that Trump has often called on as a barometer for what the base wants.
TRUMP: We're glad and you are. You are very opinionated lady. I have to tell you that. And in my opinion, I like that.
SERFATY: In April, Loomer brought into the oval office a binder full of people she believed Trump should fire. He immediately fired six of them. Loomer, she coined the phrase afterwards, boasting about her influence, later going on to trademark it with the U.S. government.
TRUMP: That's a woman with courage.
SERFATY: Her brazen approach making her a useful political weapon for Trump.
KEN BENSINGER, NEW YORK TIMES REPORTER: There is just a feeling that she's she would be too hard to control from the inside. She'd have a Twitter account, perhaps, but she wouldn't be able to use it the way that she uses now.
[19:35:03]
It would stifle her -- her communication ability that they hold so dear.
SERFATY: Fighting battles for him from the outside.
BENSINGER: If you get in the wrong side of Laura Loomer, she can ruin your career. She can end your career. She can cancel you.
SERFATY: Loomer is known for her brash, feisty and controversial theatrics.
LOOMER: They want to shut me down, and I'm not leaving. I'm not leaving anytime soon.
SERFATY: Rising in notoriety with viral on camera confrontations with political figures.
LOOMER: You wouldn't be governor if it wasn't for President Trump. You betrayed President Trump.
SERFATY: Confrontations that caught the president's eye and started an atypical, powerful relationship.
TRUMP: If you're Loomered, you're in deep trouble, that's the end of your career, in a sense.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SERFATY (on camera): And to that point, Loomer is claiming credit for the firing of two people this week, Maurene Comey, who helped prosecute Jeffrey Epstein and Sean Combs, and another official for Customs and Border Protection.
She had called them out repeatedly online and told CNN today that she believes the public pressure campaign that she created led to their firing. This certainly an acknowledgment of the power that she believes she has and the power she's clearly, Erin, trying to exert here as the White House handles the Epstein investigation. And Loomer, Erin, of course, remains in support of the president.
BURNETT: All right. Sunlen, thank you very much.
And I want to go straight now to Adam Wren. He's the senior national politics correspondent for "Politico:", and he has interviewed Laura Loomer repeatedly. In fact, breaking the news earlier this week that Loomer was calling for a special counsel.
So, Adam, I really appreciate your time.
So, I know you spoke to Laura Loomer today after the White House came out and said Trump would not recommend a special prosecutor, which is something that she has urged Trump to do. She's talked to you about that. So she talked to you after the White House rejected that idea. What did she tell you?
ADAM WREN, CORRESPONDENT, POLITICO: She essentially is saying two things that that seem to be conflicting, but in her mind aren't. She's saying that there's nothing really else that the President Trump can do to move beyond this fraught moment with his base.
But she's also saying that she still supports him, that she thinks that he's done a lot of good for the country. She's still MAGA, and she thinks other people in the movement should follow her lead and be able to walk and chew gum and hold these two seemingly polar opposites in tension with one another, that Trump and Pam Bondi have made a mistake on the handling of the Epstein files that she does still think a special counsel is the best way out of this, but also that it's not enough of a thing right now for her to break with him, even as she says that it could impair him in the midterms.
BURNETT: Which, you know, it's all -- it's all fascinating, Adam, especially in light of the fact that there's now news coming, right? And let me ask you about the breaking news from "The Wall Street Journal", right? They're reporting about this note that Trump allegedly wrote to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday album.
And I'll read the entire note that was typed inside "The Journal", says the outline of a naked woman. It was an imaginary conversation between Trump and Epstein that was written in the third person. Okay.
And it says, I'm quoting what "The Journal" has here. Voiceover, there must be more to life than having everything. And then it says, Donald, yes, there is, but I won't tell you what it is, Jeffrey, nor will I, since I also know what it is.
Donald, we have certain things in common, Jeffrey. Jeffrey, yes we do. Come to think of it. Donald, enigmas never age. Have you noticed that?
Jeffrey, as a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you. Trump, a pal is a wonderful thing. Happy birthday. And may every day be another wonderful secret.
Now, Adam, of course, Trump denies writing this. He called it fake. The Department of Justice, though, did not comment.
Trump himself has threatened to sue "The Journal". The question on this is going to be how does Loomer -- how do others on the right respond to this?
WREN: Well, when I last spoke with Laura, she essentially was telling me today that every time Trump posts a Truth Social on this or talks about it in general, it has a Streisand effect, drawing more people back into this never-ending story line that continues to unfold. And so, I think that this "Wall Street Journal" story, and particularly the president's reaction to it, as related by the reporter in the interview with the president directly earlier this week, plays into that same, same effect.
And in fact, I'm talking as I was waiting to go on air here with someone who's who speaks with the president on a regular basis and advises him. And they told me that they think the actual substance of the story, though they said it was, quote, weird was not damaging as much as Trump's response to it and his defensiveness as he seemed to have has been defensive throughout this process when asked about Epstein. And so, they think that the content of the story itself is less damaging than Trump's response to it.
[19:40:06]
BURNETT: Wow. That's interesting. Thank you very much. I really appreciate your time.
And we do have some breaking news. CBS has just announced that its going to be ending "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert". The announcement coming after Colbert criticized the shows parent company for a settlement, a legal settlement with the Trump administration.
Plus, the White House disclosing new information about Trump's health after images of the president came out with swollen legs and bruising on his hands.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:45:03]
BURNETT: Breaking news, CBS is canceling "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert". Colbert just making the shocking announcement at his show taping.
Now, it's unclear why the show is canceled, but it comes after Colbert spoke out against his parent company, Paramount's $16 million settlement with Trump over the editing of a "60 Minutes" interview.
In fact, here's what Colbert said just a few days ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, "THE LATE SHOW WITH STEPHEN COLBERT": Now, I believe that this kind of complicated financial settlement with a sitting government official has a technical name and legal circles. Its big, fat bribe, because this all comes as Paramount's owners are trying to get the Trump administration to approve the sale of our network to a new owner, Skydance.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: And now hearing that that show is canceled.
Brian Stelter is OUTFRONT.
I mean, Brian, what more are you learning about what is, frankly, a stunning announcement when we were talking about it. Just found out about it here in this commercial break. I said, wait, what? What? What just happened?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: It really doesn't make any sense from the normal business logic of television goes like this Stephen Colbert is the highest rated program in late night television. He beats his competitors. He's been going at it for ten years, and frankly, he's been on a hot streak lately.
So, by the business logic of television, normally he would be in a very safe spot. However, CBS says this is a financial decision given the difficulties with the entire late night sector, and there is some truth to that explanation. I reported a couple of years ago about "The Late Late Show" ending with James Corden, because it wasn't profitable anymore. So, there might be some -- some rationale to this CBS announcement.
But almost everybody, upon hearing about this, is connecting it to the Paramount settlement from two weeks ago, because, as you said, it was just two weeks ago that president Trump struck a deal with the parent of CBS. That $16 million settlement. Of course, Trump later said that there were other terms on top of the 16 million he referenced getting public service announcements from CBS, for example.
And all this comes as one owner of CBS, Shari Redstone, is about to hand off to a new owner, David Elistone -- excuse me, David Ellison and his company, Skydance Media.
There have been speculation raging online for the last two weeks about whether Skydance was going to try to push Colbert out. In fact, this had been such a hot topic that Colbert came back from vacation on Monday and he made jokes about it. He said he had a new mustache, and so the new owners wouldn't be able to find him.
So on Monday, Colbert was joking about possibly being in danger. On Wednesday, he found out his show was being canceled. Tonight, he announced it. And this all takes effect next May. And so, he does have one more season, but this means one of the staunchest Trump critics on television will be leaving.
BURNETT: Yeah, and incredible to think. And I know we will learn more here in the coming days, how quickly it all seemed to fall apart. And things like this, things like this generally don't fall apart all of the sudden, unless there's a reason.
Brian, thank you very much.
And we have more breaking news that we are following tonight for you this hour. The White House is revealing that President Trump has been diagnosed with a chronic condition called venous insufficiency. After questions were raised about these pictures showing the president's swollen ankles. And then there were more images that showed bruising on the president's hands covered up. It appeared by makeup.
Now, its notable because the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, actually voluntarily brought up this medical diagnosis, right? I mean, I had seen it on social media. Perhaps you had, too. Unclear what it really was. Was it real or not?
But she brought it up unprompted. And part of her opening statements today. Interesting timing, given the other stories consuming the White House right now, including the Epstein case.
OUTFRONT now, Dr. Jonathan Reiner, White House physician under George W. Bush.
Dr. Reiner, I appreciate your time, and I know you were in surgery for most of the day, so really appreciate your coming on to talk to us.
So, you know, when I saw those images over the past few days, I wasn't sure what to make of them. I'm sure at some point you had seen them as well. Swollen ankles, the bruising on his hand covered up by that makeup.
At the time when you first saw them, what did you think?
DR. JONATHAN REINER, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: Well, Erin, I'm a -- I'm a cardiologist and like, to a hammer, everything, you know, looks like -- looks like a nail. And when I see swollen ankles, you know, typically as a cardiologist, I think about things like congestive heart failure. And I'm happy to say that the White House physician has looked for potentially dangerous sources of swelling in his legs. And it appears that the president doesn't have them.
So the president has chronic venous insufficiency, which basically is what we would call an incompetence or sort of a leakiness of the veins in the president's legs. The veins bring blood back to the -- you know, to the heart, which then distributes to the body and over time, veins can become a little bit leaky.
[19:50:03]
And that is what appears that the president has.
But what's interesting is that they're calling it chronic venous insufficiency. But we know that in April, when the president was evaluated by his White House physician, Dr. Sean Barbarella, he didn't have edema then. There was no edema on his exam.
So, this is more of an acute process, which I think is what prompted the White House physicians to be so aggressive in testing his heart and his kidneys and his blood, looking for another source? BURNETT: Right. And, of course, it's good news that it appears to be
of the more common sort. Nothing that would indicate congestive heart failure. But as you point out, that it appeared to have come upon -- come up rather suddenly.
The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, also spoke about the president's hand, right? And she read the memo from Trump's physician. And I want to just play what she said or what she read from the letter from the president's physician about the bruising on Trump's hand. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: Recent photos of the president have shown minor bruising on the back of his hand. This is consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking and the use of aspirin.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Frequent handshaking. Does that add up to you? And what about the reference to aspirin?
REINER: Well, aspirin can make you more -- more prone to bleed. And you know, I see patients every week with a big bruise on the hand in the place that the president seems to have one. And it's not typically from aspirin. Its from more things like more powerful blood thinners, which we don't know whether the president is taking, at least none have been reported.
But sort of the notion that the president's hand is bruising because he's shaking people's hands, that's -- that's a little bit outlandish to me. So, I think there's -- that's not really a sufficient answer for why the president of the United States has a chronic bruise on his hand. And we really need to know more about that.
BURNETT: Yes.
All right. Dr. Reiner, thank you very much. I appreciate it again. I know you had a long day. Thank you.
And next, breaking news, Congress set to pass a bill that will zero out all federal funding for PBS and NPR. Steve Inskeep, you know, his voice, the host of NPR's flagship news program, is our guest, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:55:01]
BURNETT: Breaking news, Congress tonight on track to pass a bill that will zero out, zero out, all federal funding for PBS and NPR, the first time since 1967 that the public broadcasting in America could lose every dollar of taxpayer support, $1 billion over the next two years. The Senate passed the bill in the early hours overnight.
Senator Ted Cruz, citing bias at NPR and PBS.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): If you want to watch left wing propaganda, turn on MSNBC. But the taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: OUTFRONT now, the voice that everyone knows from NPR, a voice of calm, wake up in the morning to him, Steve Inskeep, he has hosted NPR's flagship news program, "Morning Edition" for two decades.
And, Steve, over that time, you know, I've run into you around the world reporting, and you're now in a moment of uncharted territory as you look at an institution that you love, at a job that you love. If the House votes to cut funding tonight, and this actually becomes law, what does it mean?
STEVE INSKEEP, HOST OF NPR'S MORNING EDITION AND UP FIRST: I think that NPR is still figuring that out. The CEO had a meeting with people today and talked about being ready for anything. NPR wants to be ready for anything.
I'm not really going to this evening comment too much on the funding, because I'm covering it as a journalist. I understand the different arguments about it, but I can talk to you, Erin, about who we are, who NPR is, and what we do.
I'm glad that you listen. I'm a guy from Indiana. I went to Morehead State University in Kentucky, and most of my education really is traveling across the country and around the world, sometimes running into you and meeting people face to face and hearing their stories and passing them on.
That's what I do all day. I got up at 3:00 this morning to do the news. I got up at 3:00 -- I will get up at 3:00 tomorrow morning to continue doing the news, and I'm doing that with thousands of people at NPR stations, local stations in communities across the country run by those communities across the country who are covering their communities even now, while they are the subject of the news, they're covering the news and trying to cover it straight.
BURNETT: So, Steve, you know, you and I first met, I believe, on a -- on assignment. I know, I know, it was on assignment. I believe it was on a rooftop in Iran.
We were covering that historical presidential election 12 years ago.
INSKEEP: Yeah.
BURNETT: So, you've been there and so many other places. I've got video of us together here. You were just in China, and I heard your reporting there from the ground on the tariffs. And you were talking to factory owners about their actually, it was such amazing reporting, their close relationships with their people that they work with in the United States and then in the U.S., Kansas City, Dallas, Boise.
You've been doing this, as I said, for decades. So how many listeners might not have access to those reports if this bill does become law and the funding goes to zero?
INSKEEP: Well, I will say that NPR is heard by tens of millions of people, some 43 million people consume us on some platform or another. And we would argue that we're trying to add something to the media environment in a time when there are a lot fewer local reporters, a lot fewer international reporters, and a very divisive national press.
Now, I do want to mention one thing. You played that clip from Senator Cruz. I'm happy to tell you that Senator Cruz has been interviewed on NPR. It's been a little while, but I've enjoyed talking with him and I've invited him back.
Russell Vought, the president's budget director, who also talked about NPR bias, has been on NPR. It was an extremely informative interview a couple of years ago. Steve Bannon, the president's adviser, has been on, the president has been on.
A lot of Republicans are on there. A lot of Democrats are on there, too. There are people on there who maybe if you're conservative, you don't agree with. You're going to hear a trans person on the radio or someone that perhaps you don't agree with.
But our idea is to hear people in their own words to get their stories across. And that means that whatever my personal view might be is a little bit less important because you're getting to people's actual stories. I would argue that's a thing that we do when we do our job well.
BURNETT: Well, I mean, you do your job so beautifully, but I wonder, Steve, and I think there's so many watching who wonder this or who listen to you, you know, especially we hear about, you know, Stephen Colbert and the show going away and it's unclear as to why.
Do you catch yourself self-censoring or doing anything different now, given the administration's focus, given all of this scapegoating.
INSKEEP: I understand the question. I think my duty is to do my job and to serve the audience the very best way that I can, day after day.
And I'm aware of something, by the way, Erin, as I'm sure you are too. We have freedom of speech in this country. We have the freedom of the press. Sometimes you pay a price, sometimes someone will be unhappy with your story. Sometimes someone will lash out. And I think you have to price that in as a journalist.
And that's especially important for us now in these divisive times. We have to tell the best story we can. We have to recognize humbly, we don't always get the whole story. So we'll come back tomorrow and do some more.
And if somebody doesn't like it, we'll be prepared for that and try to do work that we can defend.
BURNETT: All right. Well, you know, thank you so much, Steve. And I will say it's seven hours until you're up and you've got us do work and you've got to find a way to get to bed, and you'll barely sleep, and you'll keep doing it again and again as you have. And we're so grateful for it. And thank you so much.
INSKEEP: Thanks for your great work, Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Thanks to all of you for being with us.
Anderson starts now.
