Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Trump: "I Want Everything" On Epstein Shown, "As Long As It's Fair"; Revolt Inside The Fed?; Tip On NYC Gunman. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired July 30, 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:
An Epstein tease. The DOJ pressing a judge to release the transcripts from the Epstein investigation. But those documents only include the transcripts from two law enforcement officers. No one and nothing else.
Plus, a revolt inside the Fed. For the first time in 32 years, two members of the Fed break with the majority when it comes to cutting interest rates. Is Trump's pressure campaign working?
And breaking news, our John Miller with stunning new details about a tip line call made in Las Vegas about the very same man who shot four people dead in Midtown Manhattan.
Let's go OUTFRONT.
And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
OUTFRONT tonight, the breaking news. President Trump tonight appearing to again call for the release of more Epstein files.
But there's a big catch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I want everything to be shown, you know, as long as it's fair and reasonable, I think it will be shown. And it should be shown.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: As long as it's fair and reasonable, and see, that's where everything becomes subjective. Because what is fair and reasonable? Who is making the assumptions on that? Because Trump has said that a lot of what's in the Epstein files should never see the light of day.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It's a hoax that's been built up way beyond proportion.
This Jeffrey Epstein hoax.
It's all been a big hoax. It's perpetrated by the Democrats. I call it the Epstein hoax.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: So, anything that Trump thinks is a hoax that's in the files doesn't get to come out. Only the things seemed fair and reasonable to his team. Well, that's pretty significant.
And maybe that is why tonight, the one thing his Justice Department is asking a court to release is the Epstein grand jury transcripts. And it sounds kind of grand, right?
Well, at this hour, though, we're learning what is in those transcripts, and that may provide very little information, because we now know that the transcripts include the testimony from only two witnesses, an FBI agent and an NYPD detective. Now, that's good. And that's important, but that's the tip of the iceberg.
And Trump knows that these transcripts are a slice of the story, not the whole story. Is that why for weeks, team Trump has been selling these files as the end all and be all. You know, you get this and you've got it all and we can move on.
I mean, on July 17th, Trump said, based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I've asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent grand jury testimony, subject to court approval. This scam, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end right now.
Bondi responded the same day online, saying President Trump were ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts. Two days later, Trump says, I've asked the Justice Department to release all grand jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein.
But again, the testimony that would come out in this that could be released does not include Epstein's victims. It doesn't include anyone close to Epstein. It doesn't include his former associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving 20 years after being convicted of helping Epstein groom and sexually abuse underage girls.
It's a tiny fraction of the mountain of evidence that the DOJ and the FBI have that exist, according to their memo earlier this month, the searches uncovered a significant amount of material, including more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence, 300 gigabytes.
According to the administration, that's tens of thousands of videos of Epstein. So if this judge agrees to release the grand jury transcripts, it most likely will not put an end to the, quote/unquote, abundant public interest that the DOJ says is now surrounding the case, interest that has exploded, especially after CNN learned that Bondi told Trump in May that he was named multiple times in the files, even though he's denied that she told him that she did.
Trump and Epstein were friends, of course, in the '90s and the early 2000s. Trump now says he cut ties with Epstein after Epstein, quote, stole women who worked at Mar-a-Lago, a claim that Trump did not want to talk about any more today. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Mr. President, what did you think Epstein was stealing those women for?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: It's the million-dollar question, and of course, there was no answer.
Paula Reid is OUTFRONT live in Washington.
Paula, you've read through the DOJ filing where they're now asking a court to put out the grand jury testimony. What more can you tell us?
PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: The biggest revelation, Erin, from this memo is that even if the government wins on this long shot bid to unseal these transcripts, they don't really amount to very much. This is not going to quell the outcry, the demand for more transparency from the Justice Department, which, as you noted, is the one in possession of most of the outstanding evidence.
[19:05:08]
It was just 10 days ago that the Justice Department made this request to unseal transcripts from grand juries related to Epstein and Maxwell in Florida and New York. Now, it was pretty clear that they were trying to buy some time. Amid this political firestorm, the judge in Florida said no, but the judge in New York said, tell me more. I have some more questions. I need to know more before I weigh in here.
That's how we got this memo late last night. And in this memo, the Justice Department told the court, quote here, the passage of time has not dulled the public's interest in these cases.
Erin, I think we can nominate that for understatement of the year. But the memo also revealed that the transcripts are really only from these two law enforcement officials. Now, not shocking to people who cover cases like this. You don't put your whole case on in the grand jury. It's a low bar.
So, you bring in a couple law enforcement officials to summarize your evidence, and then you bring out your victims, in this case, your blockbuster witnesses at trial, which is what they did for Maxwell.
But here in this memo, I mean, they are admitting that even if they win here, this is not going to solve the larger problem they have with these demands for additional material. Now, the victims in this case, they also have about another week to weigh in here on this request. So it's unlikely we're going to get an answer this week. But we could get some insight into what the judge is thinking late next week.
BURNETT: All right, Paula, thank you very much.
And Lulu Garcia-Navarro is with me from "The New York Times", Spencer Kuvin, also with us, who represented nine clients who've made claims against Epstein, including a 14-year-old who reported Epstein and sparked the probe. And Holly Baltz, "The Palm Beach Post" investigations editor covering the Epstein case.
So grateful to all of you.
So, Spencer, you know, when people want to see, they want to know, right? They want to know what happened. They want to know what other rich and powerful men were involved. And they want to know what all the people around Epstein did and knew, right? That's what people want to know.
So, in the grand jury testimony, when that comes out, we're going to get answers to all those questions?
SPENCER KUVIN, REPRESENTED 9 CLIENTS WHO MADE CLAIMS AGAINST EPSTEIN: No, sadly, you're not. You're only going to get partial answers to the questions with respect to the four victims that were part of the grand jury testimony. That's it. And even then, you're not going to get the testimony from the victims themselves. We knew during the original investigation that the FBI had interviewed at least 40 potential victims at that time. And then when the fund was opened up after Epstein's death. There were hundreds, hundreds of victims that applied to the fund.
The FBI has this information. The DOJ has the information, release it, redact the names of the innocent, redact the names of the victims, but release the rest of the information.
BURNETT: Yeah. And, you know, from what you talk about, Spencer, and also, Tara Palmeri, you know, she's done extensive reporting on this. She has said she's aware of at least a thousand names of victims. A thousand. So you're talking about four in the grand jury.
I'm just trying to give everyone a sense of the scale. And we don't even know on the other side of the ledger here, in terms of the men.
Holly, your paper did sue to make grand jury transcripts public in the Palm County and -- Palm Beach County case, sorry, back in 2006, right when Epstein had his first legal run in with pedophilia. You've looked through those documents. There was some survivor testimony in that.
You know, that's more than what the DOJ is even asking to make public at this point. Where do you think new information, real new information exists at this point about Epstein?
HOLLY BALTZ, THE PALM BEACH POST INVESTIGATIONS EDITOR COVERING EPSTEIN CASE: Well, you know, I do wonder about the FBI investigation at that time. I know the petition was denied earlier this week to uncover that, I guess investigative material, because it never resulted in indictment, but it was going to be a 60-count indictment, according to the federal prosecutor, who was negotiating the sweetheart deal.
And so, you know, it sounds like their investigation was extensive. I just don't know that investigative materials in a criminal grand jury are generally released. And it didn't look to me from that petition with Judge Rosenberg that they were asking for that --
BURNETT: Yeah.
BALTZ: -- specifically. So --
BURNETT: So -- so, Lulu, in this in this context, I mean, Trump says he wants everything to be shown. You know, he wants everything to be shown. But then he also calls it a hoax.
And his White House has made it clear that that anything about Trump that's in there, they don't seem to be credible. So, it seems pretty clear that that they want to control what people see.
[19:10:01]
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: That's clear. I think the other thing that's clear is that there is now a consistent message coming out from Trump and his allies, which is I'm doing everything I can.
It's sort of -- if you remember before about his tax returns, everyone was saying, give me your tax returns, give me your tax returns. It's under audit. It's under audit. It was under audit forever.
BURNETT: I have no problem putting it out there. I'm happy to put them out there. They're under audit.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But they're under audit. And this is a similar tactic which is kind of running out the clock, if you will.
BURNETT: Yeah.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Sort of performative transparency. Look, we're going after this thing. The judges say no, you know, the judges may say yes, but maybe when we get it, it isn't exactly what everyone wants. But as time goes on, maybe people will be less interested.
And so, I think there is one true thing here, which is they are sitting on a lot of evidence. There are things they could do that don't necessarily need to go through the courts, and they haven't done it. And the question remains, why not?
BURNETT: Right. And, Spencer, this question remains why not? To me? I mean, I -- you know, you just take all politics about this aside. And I know it's very hard to do that when you know that people like Bill Clinton and Donald Trump are possibly all over these files. Okay?
So I get it's hard for people to take the politics out of it, but it does seem that there are other names in there of people who could have engaged in wrongdoing, right? Even though those two individuals have not been accused of that, but of people. And yet the DOJ now, I mean, you'd think they'd be pounding the table to get this out there. Why aren't they?
KUVIN: Yeah, without a doubt. Listen, listen, I have said repeatedly that the victims want this information disclosed as long as the victims are protected. But the perpetrators should all be held to account for what they've done.
The president has the opportunity to immediately release this information by signing an executive order today. All he has to do is put pen to paper and demand by executive order that the DOJ release this information.
Why hasn't he done that? Someone needs to ask him. Will you sign an executive order demanding the release of this information immediately? And if not, why?
And listen, this crosses over as you said, this is nonpolitical. This happened during the original -- the original prosecution was during the George Bush administration. And then we had Obama, and then we had Biden, and then we had Trump one and now Trump two, none of them released this information.
BURNETT: No.
KUVIN: You know, the victims are angry at all political sides on this.
BURNETT: Yes. And you know, when you say the question is, why? Let me just play again that moment in the Oval Office today where Trump was already leaving, but a reporter shouts out a question that is at the core of much of this. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Mr. President, what did you think Epstein was stealing those women for?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: You know, Lulu, that really -- that really is a crucial question for Trump, right? It's what did you know and when did you know it? Virginia Giuffre who he had indicated yesterday was one of the people he was referring to was 16 or 17 years old when Epstein hired her away from the spa at Mar-a-Lago.
Epstein's not in the hospitality business. He doesn't run spas.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: No. And we know, and Trump himself said in an interview in the early 2000 that, you know, alluded to the fact that Jeffrey Epstein liked young women and so, it is a question, right? He brought it up himself.
This person was stolen from me. Leaving aside the language that humans aren't exactly property.
BURNETT: Right, right.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But, you know, this was taken from me. Did he know at that point what was going on? Did he have any idea that Jeffrey Epstein was running this massive sort of pedophilia ring?
BURNETT: Right. I mean, and, Holly, just to be clear, this this stealing away of Virginia Giuffre, as Trump has referred it to, happened in 2000. The infamous quote to New York magazine about how what a great friend he was of Jeffrey Epstein's and that he liked girls young was in 2002, right?
So the falling out wasn't over Virginia Giuffre. That was two years after that. "The Miami Herald" reported that Epstein's name remained on the membership list of Mar-a-Lago all the way up until 2007, which would be even past when he was convicted of pedophilia.
BALTZ: Almost, in 2008, he pleaded guilty, but yeah, you know, and also supposedly their falling out was in 2004 over the bidding for a mansion on Palm Beach, which Trump won. But you know, and Trump in 2019 said, yeah, I haven't had anything to do with him for 15 years. So that, you know, kind of defies the timing on a lot of this.
BURNETT: Right. And it certainly raises the question, right, if it was really over real estate and not even over hiring away these women -- there's a lot of questions.
[19:15:07]
Thank you all very much.
And now, Democrats are considering turning to an obscure law. And they're doing this to try to force the Justice Department to release the full Epstein files.
Plus, breaking news, cashing in. CNN is learning tonight that Trump is quietly discussing plans to host the G-7, major gathering of world leaders. Guess where? At his own Doral Golf Club.
Plus, Trump predicting the Fed is about to do what he's been asking for, for months -- cut interest rates.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I hear they're going to do it in September. Not today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: They defied him today. Will they in September?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:20:13]
BURNETT: Breaking news, CNN learning President Trump wants to host the G20 summit at his own resort, specifically the Doral golf club in Florida, a move that would benefit him personally, hosting the leaders of the most powerful countries in the world, their entourages, et cetera, right? It's a major event, a venue he owns.
It comes as Trump is already facing questions about conflicts of interest, using his trip to Scotland to promote his luxury properties there, from which, of course, his family and he benefit. And in the Middle East, visiting three countries where his family has
real estate deals, some of whom have given billions of dollars to his own son-in-law.
Alayna Treene is OUTFRONT, live from the White House, breaking this reporting tonight.
And, Alayna, what are you learning?
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah, Erin, I'm told that the president has been privately discussing wanting to host the G7 summit or, excuse me, the G20 summit at his Doral Club in Miami.
Now, this is actually something when I caught up with the White House official about this, that they said he had been discussing for weeks. And I would remind you that back in his first Trump administration, he actually originally was trying to do this with the G7 summit then. He wanted to have it at his Trump club in Miami, and that faced a lot of outrage. He ended up actually reversing course on that because so many people, including from his own party, were saying that it was inappropriate to have a gathering of world leaders at his own property. And it comes and you mentioned this, Erin, but in the past, the president has been accused of violating the Emoluments Clause, which essentially says that a president cannot accept foreign gifts or money of any kind from foreign leaders.
And I remember back then covering the first Trump administration, they had argued that they would run it, you know, without profit as his property, that it would actually save costs. So I'm curious to see whether or not these same criticisms and same type of excuses kind of pop back up. And just one other point as well, saying how this has been discussed for a week. We actually saw in June an aide, we had spotted an aide carrying a sign into the Eisenhower Executive Office Building that essentially said G20 Miami 2026, just again showing that this is kind of been thought about and discussed about for some weeks now.
So, we'll see if this is ultimately where the president goes on this. But this is something, Erin, I'm told he does want to do.
BURNETT: Yeah. And that sign would prove obviously there's been a lot of discussion about it.
All right. Alayna, thank you very much. Of course, thinking back to the first term, the Trump Hotel, everyone may remember the Saudis and all of the foreign government dignitaries that would fall over themselves to stay there because they thought that would be a good thing.
OUTFRONT now, Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, he is a member of the Judiciary Committee.
And, Senator, I appreciate your time.
So, you know, I don't know if you could see the video there, but the Trump aide coming in under his arm with the poster Miami 2028 or whatever it said for the G20 and Trump wants to host the G20 at the Doral in Florida. That's, of course, his golf club.
Is that okay?
SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE (D-RI): Well, Trump's inability to steer away from self-dealing for himself and his family and his business interests as president creates all kinds of risks of corruption. And those risks are worsened when you're dealing with international relations, when you're dealing with opportunities for foreign governments and foreign officials to curry favor or even flat out buy favor in the way that they do business with Trump, personal and business interests.
So, yeah, it's a real -- it's a real concern. It's a continuing concern.
BURNETT: I'm curious, do you think, I mean, the Emoluments Clause, right, existed for a reason, but it appears whether whatever you talk about the letter of the law and the spirit of the law and the spirit of the law is constantly being trounced, right? That's the reality.
So, does it -- does it mean anything anymore? Is this something that anybody will ever respect, any future president will ever respect? Or is self-dealing now just the norm?
WHITEHOUSE: Well, clearly, self-dealing is the norm for Trump. And the question in the emoluments clause we've litigated that in the past, and the court has not been very helpful to the litigants. So, you know, this goes back to the earliest days of the republic, when a piece of jewelry -- I think was a jeweled box was given to one of the founders. And that kicked all this off.
I can assure you that whatever the little box was, it was given to one of the founders was a trifle compared to the massive financial favors that are being poured into Trump business interests by foreign governments and foreign influencers.
BURNETT: Well, thank you for -- I did not know that about the little -- the little jewel box. I'm sure some watching didn't as well.
[19:25:00]
So, you learn something new every day.
I want to ask you also and I had indicated this coming into the commercial break, but Senate Democrats have sent that letter to Trump's DOJ. And in it basically, they're invoking a 100-year federal law that is not well known. And they're doing it to try to request the full and complete Epstein files, right? Not just these grand jury transcripts, as the Trump administration currently is requesting.
This asks for everything -- all records, documents, audio, video, all of it related to Epstein and his clients. And here's what your colleague, Senator Schumer, said today about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): It's not a stunt. It's not symbolic. It's a formal exercise of congressional power under federal law.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: A source tells CNN, Senator, the DOJ isn't expected to comply. So, do you think that this is more than symbolic, that this is a real path to get the Epstein files?
WHITEHOUSE: Well, there are two Senate Democrat efforts that are going on right now. One is from the finance committee, where Senator Wyden has identified a thousand or more suspicious activity, reports of financial transactions involving Epstein, and noted that the reason that they are prompted as suspicious activity reports is so that they can be properly investigated to determine money laundering or other criminal activity, and the Department of Justice under Trump and under Attorney General Bondi, has done nothing.
So he's put them on the spot to deliver those investigations or produce the suspicious activity report information for our committees to look at.
On the other side, on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, they have a special law that allows any five members to put a letter out and obliges by law, federal agencies to respond to document requests when they come through that mechanism. So, Gary Peters, the ranking member on that committee, has organized that.
And I think a certain amount depends on what the response is from the Department of Justice. I would not rule out the possibility that if they get completely stonewalled, that a Republican on the committee might not join to make it a proper subpoena.
BURNETT: Right, which would of course be very significant. And I know some of your Republican colleagues do feel passionately that this information should -- should be released.
You're also urging the DOJ to publicly commit that Ghislaine Maxwell will not be pardoned. Senator, I know there are Republicans who agree with you on this. But Trump, when he responded to a question about this, does not say he won't pardon. He just focuses on the fact that he's allowed to do it and doesn't take it further than that.
And there are many Republicans who seem to be deferring to him on this. Here are a few.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Well, I mean, obviously, that's a decision of the president.
SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD): That's up to him.
SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): I don't know enough about Maxwell or the -- or the conversation to even weigh in on that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Of course, she's serving a 20 year sentence for sexually abusing and enabling Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse underage girls.
Are you concerned that by the equivocation in some of those responses?
WHITEHOUSE: Yes. I mean, obviously, my Republican colleagues are very frightened of Trump and his political operation that surrounds him, which is very threatening and intimidating, and its relations with Republican senators. So I don't think anybody wants to cross him unnecessarily.
But at the same time, there are a lot of victims in all of this. And if Ms. Maxwell gets a pardon and then it turns out that we start to get this information, it's out there. Ultimately, this information will come out.
It's going to be really, really damaging to Trump and Republicans who went along with any consideration of a pardon --
BURNETT: Yeah.
WHITEHOUSE: -- particularly before this information is out there. I'd add that everything about the deputy attorney general of the United States flying down to Tallahassee, Florida, to personally do a witness interview with an incarcerated subject, is completely inexplicable under any of the normal operations of the Department of Justice.
It's a weird, weird situation, and it makes it look like he's there, not on behalf of the United States government or the Department of Justice. But back in his role as Donald Trump's criminal attorney.
BURNETT: All right. Well, Senator, I really appreciate your time. And by the way, I want to emphasize you are a former U.S. attorney. So, when you talk about something being really weird, you're, you know, you're saying it from experience, from actually being on the law enforcement side.
Thank you so much, and I appreciate your time, Senator.
WHITEHOUSE: Thank you.
BURNETT: And next, we have breaking news, a serious split inside the head of the Fed history making. Two of the members of the Fed now backing Trump in his war to cut interest rates, something we haven't seen in more than 30 years.
Plus, breaking news, our John Miller with incredible new reporting tonight about a call to a tip line in Las Vegas involving the gunman who stormed a New York City skyscraper and killed four people.
[19:30:08]
What was the call about?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: Breaking news, the Federal Reserve defying Trump, voting to keep interest rates unchanged for the fifth consecutive meeting. But for the first time in 32 years, two Fed officials who voted actually dissented.
[19:35:02]
They wanted the Fed to make cuts now. Now, that's hugely significant, as I said, because it's just something you don't usually see. Thirty- two years you'd have to go back to see dissents like that.
President Trump, during a signing ceremony for a bill on veterans housing that happened before the Fed's decision continued his attacks on the Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, and predicted that the fed will cut rates at its next meeting.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This legislation provides desperately needed relief to veterans and their families who have fallen behind on their mortgages, of which there are a lot, because we have somebody that doesn't want to lower interest rates, and probably won't lower them today, I hear they're going to do it in September.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Dan Ives, Peter Tuchman, Einstein and Ives are here with me.
So, Dan, fifth consecutive decision to not cut. But there was this dissent. Okay. What do you read into this dissent first ascent in more than three decades?
DAN IVES, GLOBAL HEAD OF TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH, WEDBUSH SECURITIES: It's very significant because I think it shows even within the Fed, you're starting to now see a split because the view that, okay, it's time to cut. Powell is obviously putting a line in the sand saying not just no cuts. But I think even when it comes to September, looks like probably 50/50.
Look this is going to -- this sort of battle, not just between Trump and Powell, but I think in terms of just the overall markets, it's going to continue to fester as we go into September.
BURNETT: You know, Mohamed El-Erian was saying the other day that Powell needed that this -- you were going to get in a situation where you can't cut because you look like you're caving, even if you think it is the right thing to do to cut. And then that is a big problem for the institution. And he thought that was the reason that Powell at this point should resign, not because he disagreed with what Trump was doing. He just said that the situation we're in.
You actually think Powell should have cut interest rates today.
PETER TUCHMAN, TRADER AT THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE: You know what? I do. We have dissent amongst the two of us here.
IVES: Dissent, yeah.
TUCHMAN: We had -- we had dissent, you know, because look, I think he didn't because he did not want to look like he was caving. But at the end of the day, he always talks about that. The decision is a data- driven, data-driven decision.
And today, if you look into the nooks and crannies of the situation, GDP came out today, right, from 2.4 to 3. That's a big move, right? That shows there is growth, right?
The fear about cutting before was that there would be stagflation, if we were going to cut during a low or slow growth environment.
BURNETT: But if you're growing with rates high, you don't need to cut growth to spark growth.
TUCHMAN: But you know, but -- look, but everything set up today, it would -- he disagrees with me but I think it could have been a great pivot for him to go. You know what? These things are setting up for an opportunity for me to do it. And I'm going to do it. I would have -- I thought it would have showed strength, not weakness.
IVES: I agree with a lot of what he's saying. I just think the signaling about a potential cut in September, that's really what the market wanted. But look --
TUCHMAN: And he didn't give us. And he didn't give -- that was disappointing because if he's not going to cut --
BURNETT: The odds he cut in September actually went down.
IVES: They went down, and went down over --
TUCHMAN: Really odd.
IVES: -- from over 60 to less than 50 percent, as he started to signal that.
TUCHMAN: Right. Well, well, and now, if you talk about the situation that were in, you're in a situation where Trump's not saying they're going to do it in September. So now if they do it in September, he definitely looks like he --
IVES: And maybe he does another visit to -- for the building. And you put the hard hats on as well. Right? I mean, no -- but -- I mean, it's true.
BURNETT: I mean, which I guess leads to the point of whether it makes sense to have him there -- have Powell there at all.
But you also have in the market, you've got, you know, Mark Zuckerberg got a lot richer, right? Was it Mark Zuckerberg got a lot richer?
TUCHMAN: Yeah. Yeah. Well, Microsoft and Meta both blew out earnings today.
BURNETT: Okay. Blew out -- I mean, you're seeing jumps in stocks that are so enormous.
TUCHMAN: Enormous. When you and I were on the floor back in the day, you didn't see 50 point moves like that. BURNETT: No, no. And not -- and not -- and there was no, no, no
companies that were as, as highly valued as these companies are.
TUCHMAN: They were.
BURNETT: Okay. So it's like things are booming along like everything's great.
TUCHMAN: Right?
BURNETT: Is everything great? I mean, you know.
TUCHMAN: I think everything's great.
IVES: I would just say like, look, the tariffs also adds a huge X variable for the Fed, right? That's a big reason in terms of the circular argument -- in terms of why Powell is sort of, you know, obviously hesitating. But look, no doubt, I mean, you are seeing massive growth when it comes to A.I. and as we've talked about, it's almost a bifurcated market.
BURNETT: And nobody's looking, though at the details of the trade deals, right? There's a trade deal and the market says, okay, great. There's a trade deal, right? We can -- we can move along, right? But --
TUCHMAN: We are not looking into the -- into --
BURNETT: The details -- the devil is not in the details, apparently.
TUCHMAN: You know, while we were all focused about what was going on in the Middle East, it appears. Right. And appearance is a big factor here, that there was a lot of backroom diplomacy going on, right? Remember when we started this thing back in February? Deal, deal, deal, done, done, done. Lutnick and Bessent, right?
And then we had that void for a while where nothing was done. And now we are checking off the boxes, whether -- whether they're done or not, you know, it seems like we're going in the right direction. Market seems strong.
We are sort of flatlining at a record high here, right, for a lot of different reasons.
IVES: And also August 1st, look, as you get into Friday, that's the trade deadline.
[19:40:00]
So now the question is how hard is that deadline, and what the deals ultimately look like?
BURNETT: Yeah. And I guess my question to you, because you're dealing, you know, it's covering Tesla and covering Apple, right, at the heart of this. Does it really matter whether the deals are good or not good? Or does the market just care that the deadlines were met and their deals and they want to move on?
IVES: Well, it does matter. And especially in terms of what the big one is going to be in terms of China, I mean, that's important in terms of from a supply chain and everything else. India is important as well.
And look, it doesn't matter until it matters. And it comes down to right now, you know, the market is viewing it glass half full. But it does matter, as me and Peter have talked about in terms of the actual details.
TUCHMAN: Right. And the detail, we will -- we will eventually -- we will have to find out the details. I think that that's going to be the next thing.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you both very much.
And next, breaking news, we're just getting in new details from our John Miller. A call to a tip line about the shooter in New York who killed four people. New details next on that breaking news.
And Trump's response to the Epstein files, sparking a civil war inside the MAGA movement. A major shift, though, now is underway, and you'll see what it is in a special report, ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:45:47]
BURNETT: Breaking news. We are now learning of a call to a tip line in Las Vegas about the gunman in the deadly shooting in Midtown New York. The call just hours after the attack, talking about the behavior of Shane Tamura.
Our John Miller has these new details as investigators on the ground in Las Vegas tonight confirm that Tamura bought the rifle from a supervisor at his job at the horseshoe casino in Las Vegas, and that Tamura also bought the car he used to drive to New York to commit the crime in. He got that from that supervisor as well.
Chief law enforcement officer -- enforcement and intelligence analyst John Miller is with me here now with the breaking news.
And, John, so first, you know, as you've been talking to sources involved in the investigation, what are they learning about this tip call?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: So, a lot even though it, you know, isn't a tip that came in before that could have helped them. It rounds out the picture.
So, during the night of the shooting, as we're putting that picture on the air, a gun dealer in Las Vegas who was at a gun show at a Las Vegas hotel back in June, says, I know that guy. He was -- he was at my booth, basically for a long time, and he said he purchased a trigger assembly for a -- for a rifle. And then the next day, he came back and returned it and said, I need
the money to buy 500 rounds of 2 to 3 ammunition. The same ammunition that was used in the shooting. And then he came back the next day and actually repurchased the trigger assembly. And apparently had found enough money to do both.
But what that tells us was at least as far back as June, he was looking to customize weapons by changing the trigger assembly by hundreds of rounds of ammunition, not just to do his attack, but likely to do target practice.
BURNETT: All right, so this person calls in and they see the image and say this, I just taking a step back here. So, someone goes in and buys would you say 300 to 500?
MILLER: Five hundred.
BURNETT: Five hundred rounds.
MILLER: That's enough for about 16 fully loaded 30-round magazines.
BURNETT: And nobody would say anything about that at the time.
MILLER: Well, it's a gun show, so it's filled with gun enthusiasts. And here's a guy who has a license for concealed carry. So he's authorized to buy ammunition and gun parts.
BURNETT: Yeah.
MILLER: It's the kind of thing that would set off alarms in some places. But in the environment of a gun show where everybody coming through the door is probably doing lots of target practice and --
BURNETT: Then in that context.
Okay, so I know the gunman's parents are cooperating and answering questions. And there's also more details on his background, right? He had had that letter saying, you know, he alleged he had CTE, which, of course, can't be diagnosed -- diagnosed until an autopsy.
What are you learning?
MILLER: So, they did the search warrant on the studio apartment yesterday. And, you know, in the days to come, they're awaiting the search warrant on his locker at the horseshoe casino. They're awaiting the search warrant to get into his laptop, even though in his suicide note, he supplied the password, they still need to get that search warrant.
But what they find in the apartment is a single round for that rifle, other ammunition. But they also find a tripod for that rifle. Now, that's a -- that's another interesting thing that speaks to what was he planning? You know, when you're changing the trigger, it may mean you want something for close combat, rapid fire. It may mean you want something with a smoother trigger pull for long distance shooting like a sniper. But when you have a tripod for the weapon, that means long distance,
more stability, better accuracy. So, we really have to ask ourselves, did he have on his menu maybe a sniper attack? And if the NFL was the target, would that have been at a game? These are questions, not answers that investigators are going through. Until he came to his final plan, which is I'm going to fly to the what he believed was the NFL building in New York and just opened fire the minute I walk in.
BURNETT: Yeah. Well, and as you point out, the answers to -- getting answers to those questions is so crucial.
All right, John Miller, thank you very much, with all of those new details tonight.
And next, the White House continuing to face a barrage of questions over Trump's handling of the Epstein investigation. But there are some voices now that are very notably subdued when it comes to the story.
[19:50:02]
An important report, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: Tonight, Trump ally Joe Rogan repeatedly slamming the Trump administration over the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE ROGAN, PODCAST HOST: He's like, well, we have a film. We're going to release that film. And the film has a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) minute missing from it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah.
ROGAN: Like, do you think we're babies? Like, what is this?
How does Pam Bondi say we have thousands of hours of footage and then Kash Patel says, we don't have anything that you're looking for.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Rogan demanding answers, but he has increasingly isolated in that demand.
Donie O'Sullivan is OUTFRONT with more on how MAGA is starting to fall in line.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRIAN GLENN, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REAL AMERICA'S VOICE: Those that say they'll no longer support President Trump because he didn't release every single thing we've ever known about Jeffrey Epstein just because they say they're done, they're not done.
DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER (voice-over): The Epstein saga has rocked the MAGA base for weeks.
MIKE BENZ, TRUMP SUPPORTER: February 2015, Trump stands at CPAC.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bill Clinton?
TRUMP: Nice guy, got a lot of problems coming up, in my opinion, with the famous island with Jeffrey Epstein.
BENZ: Like you trained us to go after this issue.
REPORTER: Does the president believe that justice has been served in Epstein case?
O'SULLIVAN: President Trump can't get away from questions about Epstein.
REPORTER: Ghislaine Maxwell says she'll only testify if you pardon her or she gets immunity.
O'SULLIVAN: But at the White House, few of those questions are coming from Trump supporting media outlets.
GLENN: If you look at the, you know, 20 of the top 47 promises President Trump made, he delivered on all those campaign promises.
O'SULLIVAN: Brian Glenn, is the White House correspondent for MAGA media outlets, Real America's Voice.
GLENN: People say, why don't you ask questions about Epstein? I'm like, because everyone else is asking the question, Epstein.
STEVE BANNON, HOST, "THE WAR ROOM": We need to get to the bottom of Epstein because Epstein is the key that picks the lock.
O'SULLIVAN: Some in MAGA were initially unhappy with Trump's handling of the Epstein case, but after "The Wall Street Journal" broke this story and Trump denied it and sued the paper for defamation, many in the MAGA base rallied to his defense.
BANNON: This is a centerpiece of the deep state trying to destroy Trump, going to destroy Trump and going to destroy the MAGA movement.
MATTHEW BOYLE, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, BREITBART NEWS: In the wake of "The Wall Street Journal" attack on the president, I think the administration has already taken several of the steps that that are going to be good steps in the right direction. So, but the idea that Donald Trump is covering up the whole Jeffrey Epstein thing like that doesn't make sense, right?
O'SULLIVAN: Matthew Boyle is Washington bureau chief for Breitbart, an outlet that supports Trump but has asked questions about Epstein.
You mentioned "The Wall Street Journal" story as an attack. I mean, was that an attack or was it just "The Wall Street Journal" reporting a good scoop? BOYLE: Well, the president says that he never wrote that thing, and I
have no reason to believe that he did, right? Like I at this point, I don't know --
O'SULLIVAN: But their reporting shows --
BOYLE: Well, their reporting says that he did write like they say that. But I mean, we've seen other media outlets get stories wrong about President Trump.
O'SULLIVAN: Potentially trying to distract from Epstein, the Trump administration has started baselessly accusing Barack Obama of treason, even posting a fake A.I. video of the former president being arrested. Trump posted the video of Obama getting arrested.
GLENN: Well, you know, you know, we all know that President Trump has an insane sense of humor. You know, he is -- he's a -- he's -- he likes to troll. And we all know that. He is the master at that.
Could that in a way mislead the base, thinking that that's going to happen? I think there's a chance that that could happen because people will see that and go, oh, it's going to happen. It's going to happen next week. When it doesn't, they get a little disappointed.
O'SULLIVAN: But while some in MAGA might be happy for now on how the administration is handling Epstein --
REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): You guys can watch Brian's preshow.
O'SULLIVAN: -- Brian and his girlfriend, the Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, warned that the Trump base still wants answers.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, who's your partner, said, if you tell the base of people who support you of deep state, treasonous crimes, election interference, blackmail and rich, powerful elite evil cabals, then you must take down every enemy of the people -- if not, the base will turn and there's no going back.
GLENN: Pretty hard words. Maybe people in the administration saw that tweet. Maybe they understand that they have to be as transparent and do what's best for the American people.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BURNETT: Donie, that's just so fascinating.
So, if, if, if many in MAGA, in the base, MAGA media base, certainly right now are uniting behind Trump on Epstein, is that -- is that then a done deal or could sentiment shift again just as quickly?
O'SULLIVAN: Yeah, they certainly could change very quickly, Erin. And you know, it's interesting. There is we spoke to a few different outlets at the White House, as you saw Breitbart for, you know, it is clearly a Trump supporting outlet, but it's covered the White House for a long time, and it does occasionally ask the president and his administration tough questions. They've asked questions about the Epstein story.
But these new outlets that have been left into the White House press corps over the past few months, like the My Pillow people and Brian Glenn, as you saw there from Real America's Voice, these outlets haven't been asking those questions, even though their audiences are extremely interested in this Epstein issue.
You heard there, Brian, saying why he didn't -- didn't ask these questions. But certainly, you know, if these outlets are supposed to be part of the press corps, they are supposed to be holding the administration to account. So, I think their audience would be expecting more of them -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Tony, thank you very much.
And thanks so much to all of you.
"AC360" starts now.
