Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Republicans Reject Trump's Election Map Push; Abrego Garcia Freed From ICE Custody; Ex-Obama White House Counsel Told Epstein Report On Abuse Claims "Rehashed Crap". Aired 7-8p ET
Aired December 11, 2025 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[19:00:28]
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Breaking news OUTFRONT, Trump rejected by his own party. Indiana Republicans say no to Trump's major redistricting push this hour. Finger-pointing and name-calling, it's open warfare. All this happening in the past few minutes.
And more breaking news. A major development tonight, the Maryland man whom Trump deported to El Salvador, now free tonight. A judge slamming the Trump administration for unlawfully holding him. His attorney is our guest.
And Jeffrey Epstein called her his great defender. She communicated with Epstein more than almost anyone else in the trove of documents released by the White House. So, who is she? Who is Kathy Ruemmler and why was she so close to Epstein?
Let's go OUTFRONT.
(MUSIC)
And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
OUTFRONT tonight, the breaking news, rejected. Republicans shutting Trump down and no uncertain terms on this one. They are refusing his demands to redraw Indiana's congressional map. Now, this is something that no one would have expected even a few months ago, right? When all this started with California and Texas, and Trump could just plow his way through red states.
But tonight, in a tense vote, more Republicans voted against Trump's wishes than for them. And that measure failed. And it failed in a big way. The vote 19 to 31.
This is a major development, just to state the obvious, because Trump has been pushing redistricting in states across the country for months. And in Indiana specifically, Trump pushed the redistricting plan there on social media in nearly a dozen tweets over the past few weeks, and even just hours before the vote, when they thought it would be close but still thought they could win, Trump pulled any kind of a fig leaf away such that there ever even is one on this, but resorted to blatant threats, saying the Republican Senate leader, Rod Bray, and his friends wont be in politics for long. And I will do everything within my power to make sure that they will not hurt the Republican Party and our country again.
Okay, well, you come out with that kind of a threat. What might happen to the vote? Well, Rod Bray didn't switch. The final numbers were stunning to the White House, which was prepared for a razor thin vote that they thought they could win. And those threats fell on deaf Republican ears.
Here's what one Republican just said about her no vote.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEAN LEISING (R), INDIANA STATE SENATOR: You wouldn't change your minds by being mean. And the efforts were mean-spirited from the get go. You know, if you were wanting to change votes, you would probably try to explain why we should be doing this in a positive way. That never happened.
So, you know, I think they get what they get. I mean -- and I very frankly, you know, I wish that President Trump would change his tone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: I mean, it's pretty incredible just to hear that. That's a Republican state representative coming out and saying something. And it wasn't just Trump that had put everything on the line for this. Vice President J.D. Vance wrote Rod Bray, the Senate leader in Indiana, has consistently told us he wouldn't fight redistricting while simultaneously whipping his members against it. That level of dishonesty cannot be rewarded, and the Indiana GOP needs to choose a side. Well, I guess they just did.
And then there's Don Jr. If Indiana Republican side with these Never Trumpers to do the dirty work of Democrats, I'll be spending a lot of time in Indiana next year campaigning against every single one of them. Okay, so it couldn't be more clear how big of a deal they thought this was and that this was a major litmus test, a loyalty test.
Republicans in Indiana failed it, but they didn't care. And Trump, just moments ago now trying to save face. Here's what he just said a bit of revisionist history.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I wasn't working on it very hard. It would have been nice. I think we would have picked up two seats if we did that. You had one gentleman, the head of the Senate, I guess Bray, whatever his name is. I heard he was against it. He'd probably lose his next primary, whatever that is. I hope he does. But because he's done a tremendous disservice, I wasn't very much involved.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Bray, whatever his name was, I guess he knows full well it's Rod Bray, and Rod Bray did vote against him. Kristen Holmes is OUTFRONT live outside the White House.
Kristen, you know, it's amazing. You hear Trump there saying, oh, I wasn't that involved. This guy Bray, whatever his name is. I mean, this meant a lot to him. It meant a lot to his allies.
A few months ago, they wouldn't have even had to think twice about something like this. But things have changed. How stunned is he by the margin here? I mean, this was not close.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. And, Erin, I want to note, yes, it meant a lot to them. But also they believe that that's one of the only ways that they could win the House by fighting this redistricting fight in many of these states, getting rid of these Democratic seats to pick up seats in an election that they know is going to be intense and likely going to result in Republicans not having control of the House. So, this is one way around that.
So, this is important to them both personally, because they put so much on the line, but also in the sense of Republican control for the last two years of President Trump's tenure in office. And you hear President Trump there saying he wasn't really involved. I will remind you that roughly 9:00 p.m. last night, he sent out that anyone who votes against the redistricting, he was -- he was going to primary.
And I will tell you, there were some concerns starting roughly yesterday morning, I started hearing from White House officials and some of the outside advisers who were working on this, saying that they believed that Rod Bray was whipping votes, that they believe that he was potentially even making promises to help any members who were primaried by President Trump if they voted against the map. So, it was circulating. There were definitely side conversations going on.
But it wasn't clear that they were going to lose the vote. And it certainly wasn't clear that they were going to lose 21 Republicans in that vote. And the number is stunning. And as you noted, President Trump is used to getting his way when it comes to Republicans, particularly this second time in office, that threat of being primaried really carried a lot of weight with any lawmaker in state senate, state house across the country.
So, now, you're seeing that that wields a little less power. And that's something that's going to be very striking for President Trump, particularly given what we are seeing across the country. In some of these elections where his endorsed candidate is losing the election. And again, by wide margins.
BURNETT: All right. Kristen, thank you very much at the White House.
And my panel is here.
I mean, Jamal, interesting. You know, Kristen was saying they thought they could win it. They thought towards the end -- oh, it might -- might be a little closer than we wish. But they thought they could win it. I mean, it's pretty stunning. This is not -- it wasn't even close. It wasn't like it came down to
the wire.
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah. You know, I haven't seen the reporting on this in Indiana, but I talked to some of the Texas state legislators when they were doing the redistricting case down there.
They told me Donald Trump was calling people on the floor. He was calling state legislators on the floor to lobby them to make sure they were going to vote for the bill. I don't know if that happened here, but I wouldn't be surprised if we found out that it did. One side effect of having so many Republicans vote for this is that it makes it very hard for the president to target anybody individually.
Maybe he goes after Rob Bray. He's the one person that he's named.
BURNETT: What's his name? Bray, I don't know. Yeah.
SIMMONS: But 21 Republicans, it's hard to muscle up 21 state house Republicans in one state in the middle of a campaign in the midterms, where you've got campaigns happening all over the country.
BURNETT: Gretchen, Trump just moments ago was talking about Bray. And here's what he said about him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm sure that whenever his primary is it's I think in two years, but I'm sure he'll go down. He'll go down. I'll certainly support anybody that wants to go against him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: I like that he knows exactly when the primary is, too.
SIMMONS: What's his name again?
(LAUGHTER)
GRETCHEN CARLSON, FORMER FOX NEWS HOST: I mean, he shouldn't expect anything less from Trump. And who thought -- I thought the biggest news coming out of Indiana in the last week would have been Indiana football beating Ohio State, but apparently, it's Indiana Republicans --
BURNETT: I watched on replay again last night.
CARLSON: Oh, I'm so sorry. Unless you love football like I do, but I digress. I digress.
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: Anyway, the big -- the big news here is that apparently the state senators in Indiana have more guts and more gumption than the members of Congress on the federal level because they were willing to stand up for what they believed in, and they thought that this was wrong, even though Trump was ordering it.
And I love what that female state senator said. She didn't like his tone. I mean, how long have we all been sort of talking about the idea that this would not be applicable to our children? We wouldn't want them --
BURNETT: She had that moment where she goes, you get what you get. And all of us here are parents are thinking, don't get upset.
CARLSON: You don't get upset. But the idea that tone might suddenly matter -- I mean, this would be a mammoth breakthrough if that actually starts to happen.
BURNETT: Right. And then all of a sudden, the context of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Nancy Mace, Paul, might come in.
I mean, the Heritage Foundation, GOP aligned conservative, obviously, just posted on social media. President Trump has made it clear to Indiana leaders if the Indiana Senate fails to pass the map, all federal funding will be stripped from the state. Roads will not be paved. Guard bases will close, major projects will stop. These are the stakes, and every no vote will be to blame.
You're an independent. But I mean, what about all this? And I guess he's supposedly going to be doing this in New York, too. Theres a lot of places that aren't going to get the roads paved. If this is the standard, but they're not afraid of this.
PAUL RIECKHOFF, FOUNDER & CEO, INDEPENDENT VETERANS OF AMERICA: They should be. I mean, good luck in a -- in a midterm election or in a swing state with that kind of a strategy. I think the bigger issue here is this is a victory for Indiana. It's a victory for Democrats, but it's a bigger victory for our democracy, right?
[19:10:01]
Because elections should be fair. And I think this arms race that's going on between the Republicans and the Democrats is leading us to mutual destruction for our democracy. I'm against redistricting in Indiana as an independent. I'm against it in California when they respond.
BURNETT: Right.
RIECKHOFF: And in Maryland with the same. And I think we need independent, nonpolitical folks who can redraw our districts if they have to be redrawn. And you can't have one side of the playing field also acting as the referee. And that's what we've got here.
And I think it's really bad for our democracy and has the potential to burn it all to the ground. But it's good to see people pushing back and people who are closer to the voters. This is a state senator who's going to hear it as soon as she walks.
BURNETT: And she -- and, Jamal, that's the thing. She's -- that she's a state senator. That's local, right? People know her. She knows them. That is where people are right now in terms of what they want to hear
and what they're saying to each other.
SIMMONS: Absolutely. I mean, I'm from Michigan. That's Indiana. I grew up around Republicans like this very common sense. People who believe in making the world work. They're conservative, maybe they want tax cuts. Maybe we differ on some issues, but really kind of common sense and normal.
Not like the MAGA that we are hearing about in Washington who are really out of control.
BURNETT: So -- yeah, go ahead.
CARLSON: I was just going to say that that you bring up a really important point that they probably heard from their constituents, because I don't think they would have voted this way completely to defy Trump because they're on -- they're on his team, right, for the most part. So they must have been hearing from their constituents that they -- and that's ironic as well, because if they're Republican constituents, it would have meant more votes.
BURNETT: Right, right.
CARLSON: More seats.
BURNETT: Well, that's pretty stunning that that's coming from the groundswell.
CARLSON: Yes.
BURNETT: And maybe that ties into some other stories we talk about, whether it be the economy or how people are feeling.
Berit, there was another thing that happened today, and this was also a major defeat for Trump, actually could have been something we could have had at the top of the program had this not just happened in Indiana. And that is Letitia James. So, we had that a week ago. So just in case it's like a soap opera and you tune into the show everybody every once in a while and you think, no, this is actually new.
Letitia James was once again a grand jury refused to indict her second time in, what, ten days or something like that? Seven days. I mean, that's pretty stunning.
BERIT BERGER, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: It is. I mean, I feel like you have all these former prosecutors on that keep saying this never happens, but I just want to, like, make it even more amplified. This really never happens. Like, maybe you get a grand jury that gives a no true bill saying no indictment. Maybe you get one every couple of years.
To get two back-to-back grand juries saying no dice. There's not enough evidence here for us to -- I mean, that is unheard of. And it really makes you wonder, what are they presenting this grand jury with? I mean, remember, it's a one-sided presentation.
She's not there presenting a defense. There's no arguments from that side. So, it is only the prosecutors putting forth the evidence. Clearly, not enough evidence to convince them.
BURNETT: Okay. So this is interesting. Aaron Blake here at CNN, he looked at the numbers all the way back to 2013. And so when you say this just doesn't happen and everyone says, oh, it's easier to indict a ham sandwich, whatever. You indict a ham sandwich. He found that grand jury declined to indict in 0.003 percent of cases.
BERGER: I love it when the numbers support what my gut is.
BURNETT: Just to say you're right.
BERGER: Yes, great.
BURNETT: Okay, so there's two things, though that I find amazing. One, it just doesn't happen from the grand jury perspective. But two, who brings the same case twice in seven days? Don't you have to go back and say, well, what stunk about this? What do I have to redo, right?
BERGER: I mean, so usually the recourse was if you got a no true bill and you wanted to try to represent it to a grand jury, you had to go to main justice. You had to present the case, make the case.
Why is this different? Did something just go awry? Was it a really funky first presentation? Did something go wrong? You had to justify it here.
That step seems to have been clearly, you know, glossed over because they went right back. I don't know if anything changed with their presentation, what evidence or if they were just rolling the dice at a different group of people would see it differently. I mean, look, they must have something there because they did convince the first grand jury they presented this to, to return an indictment.
BURNETT: Right. That's the one that got thrown out.
BERGER: That got thrown out.
BURNETT: Lindsey Halligan wasn't allowed to be in charge.
BERGER: Correct. Which wasn't about the merits of the case. That was just, you know, her position. So, they did convince one group. But the fact that you've now had two back-to-back -- I mean, there is no rule to prevent them from, you know, going again and again. I mean, they can keep doing this as long as --
RIECKHOFF: And they probably will, because it's not just about winning, it's about intimidation.
BERGER: Right.
RIECKHOFF: That's the same thing you saw in Indiana. So they're going to keep trying to intimidate people, not even at the higher levels but on down. Now they're taking on Senator Kelly. They're going to try at him. They may not win there, but they want to send a chilling effect across opposition and try to stifle any kind of political dissent, and I would argue free speech.
So, they're not just looking at the scoreboard. They're looking at the environment. And they want to intimidate people.
BURNETT: They're less likely to -- I mean, Letitia James is racking up legal bills, right? Right. That's one thing we know, right?
RIECKHOFF: Right.
BURNETT: And they know that and that that does carry a cost, whether you're in the media or elsewhere. That's the chilling effect.
SIMMONS: It does carry a cost. And, you know, people keep saying this never happens. You know what's different right now? Donald Trump is the president of the United States. And he's got his fingers all over the Justice Department.
And I think what's really different is he's probably the one telling them, take it back, take it back again. Keep going, because Donald Trump doesn't like to be seen as a loser. And as long as they're fighting, he can say, we're still in the game.
BURNETT: So, about that, do you think he is? Because, Berit -- I mean, it would not seem to be professional with all the people who are working on this, and I understand Lindsey Halligan hadn't tried a case and whatever. People can say whatever they want to say about her pejoratively. But within the Justice Department, within the Eastern District of Virginia, they wouldn't want to look stupid. And they don't -- and they look stupid right now.
CARLSON: Yeah.
BURNETT: So, who is telling them to do this?
CARLSON: They're all trying to please one person.
BURNETT: So, it is --
CARLSON: And that's the president. When I sat here last week and you said, will they do it a third time, I said, 100 million percent. And if you say, will they do it?
BURNETT: I should have said, how many days, Gretchen?
CARLSON: I know, yeah. But I will say again that I think that they will go again. I mean, the interesting thing is Berit and I were talking about this off camera. They went to Norfolk, Virginia, last week. They were in Alexandria or Norfolk -- yeah. And they were in Alexandria today. What -- what are they doing with the different cities to and where will be next? But I guarantee you.
BURNETT: How can they do that. Like flip to place to place. How does that work?
BERGER: Yeah. I mean, there's not a mechanism for doing that. We were talking about it. She's like what is -- that doesn't happen either. I don't understand unless you have a different set of prosecutors. And so maybe you would go to that office, but, you know, maybe you couldn't get another grand jury pool.
Again, these are sort of -- I'm just hypothesizing here because this is not anywhere close to the norm or what we would see. I mean, you would never go back to represent a case to a grand jury in a different city. It really just strains my mind. I don't --
BURNETT: Okay, well, I'm glad because to a layperson that seems really messed up. So I'm glad -- I'm glad that it actually is.
BERGER: That is the legal term messed up.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you all very much.
And next, breaking news, released. The Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador is now free. Actually free, walking out, not in custody. A judge ripped into the administration for unlawfully holding him. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, remember that name? He's out. His attorney is next.
And Trump's homeland security secretary left a hearing early today. Left early after being questioned about the administration's policies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She's leaving.
I'm just going to take the position she was scared of my questions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: A very odd moment. And why is -- what are we, "The Today Show"? Except for now, all people eat is red meat. I'll eat that. And Harry is here to tell us something we don't know about that giant steak.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:21:44]
BURNETT: Breaking news, a free man. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man that the Trump administration sent to that notorious prison in El Salvador earlier this year has been released, released tonight from ICE custody. He's free.
In a blistering ruling tonight, a federal judge ripped into the Trump administration, they say, for unlawfully holding Abrego Garcia. I mean, this is a major defeat for the administration. They have fought this tooth and nail. They have made him the poster child of the immigration situation in this country.
For months, they have been saying, quote, "He will never go free on American soil." That's a quote from the Department of Homeland Security spokesperson. He will never go free on American soil.
Well, he is free on American soil right now. It is a brazen statement, given that the administration has said that -- oh, actually, even they say it was a mistake to deport Abrego Garcia in the first place.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: It was an administrative error as to why he was deported.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: One that, of course, could have been quickly rectified. But here we are months later, in and out of facilities. They've tried to send him to different countries around the world, and now tonight, at least free.
OUTFRONT now is Kilmar Abrego Garcia's attorney, Simon Sandoval- Moshenberg. Of course, you know him. He's been on this program many times.
And, Simon, I appreciate your time tonight. I know that you're in the middle of this, and I know you've just had a chance to briefly speak with Abrego Garcia. How's he doing?
SIMON SANDOVAL-MOSHENBERG, ATTORNEY FOR KILMAR ABREGO GARCIA: Yeah, I mean, this -- this case is about two things, really. It's about a man, you know, a father, a sheet metal worker. His wife, Jennifer, a U.S. citizen who's been fighting for him tooth and nail.
You know, his -- his U.S. born autistic child, they're an hour away from seeing each other again for the second time all year, right? I mean, they've been separated for a whole year now, with the exception of one short weekend in august. Other than that, he's been behind one form of bars or another for pretty much the entire year.
But this case has always not just been about one man at the same time. It's also about, you know, the fight between power and law, right? And the Trump administration's desire to use this one man to make a point that they can do whatever they want, whenever they want. And today, what we saw is the triumph of law over power. I don't think this case is over, but it's a huge victory today.
BURNETT: So and as you said, you don't think it's over. I mean, where does this go from here? As you said, he's been out one weekend of the entire year. He's free tonight.
They said he'll never be free on American soil. Do you expect he'll stay free? I mean, what happens here?
SANDOVAL-MOSHENBERG: Yeah. The government has a lot of tools in its toolbox, right? I really wish that I could say that with this, you know, they're going to leave well enough alone. This family suffered enough. This man has suffered enough. He was tortured in prison in El Salvador earlier this year.
But, you know, we've been around the block long enough to know that it's very unlikely that they're going to leave him alone. And I think they're going to keep coming after him. The exact means in which they do that, we don't know. But, you know, he's built a very strong legal team and also a huge base of community support. And we're going to keep fighting for him.
But he's now got new legal options as well, right? He now has an open runway to apply for asylum in the United States, if that's what he chooses to do.
[19:25:06]
Back in 2019, the only reason he was denied asylum was that he didn't file within one year of arriving in the United States. He sort of blew the statute of limitations. Well, the government's fixed that problem for him now, right? And so, and he's got a very strong claim to asylum, again, based on being tortured in prison in El Salvador in March and April.
So, if he chooses to apply for asylum, I think he's got a very strong claim.
BURNETT: So, I want to play something for you, Simon, that the White House press secretary said about Abrego Garcia today. Let me play her.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Abrego Garcia is present in our country illegally. He is a proven human trafficker. He is a proven gang member. The administration has evidence of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: In all of this, and I've seen their filings, right. They have charged certain things, and then they have referred to some of the things they're about proven gang member. And they have done that in sort of in passing, in allegations as opposed to actual charges.
I'm curious, Simon, at this point, have you seen what evidence that they say they have of those specific claims?
SANDOVAL-MOSHENBERG: No. And how many courts have looked at this now? I mean, the District of Maryland, the middle district of Tennessee, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, the U.S. Supreme Court, 9-0, the original immigration judge back in 2019 who granted him protection from deportation to El Salvador in the first place.
You'd think by now if they had this really strong evidence, they would have filed it in one of those courts, but they haven't. I mean, I think it's significant that it's the White House press secretary who's saying that because the judge in Tennessee has already ordered the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to stop making these scurrilous claims
BURNETT: Simon, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Obviously, a significant night as we wait to see what happens next. Thank you.
SANDOVAL-MOSHENBERG: It's good to be with you on this night.
BURNETT: All right. And next, a grand jury refusing to re-indict Letitia James for mortgage fraud. We just talked about it briefly with our panel. But, you know, it's interesting. This is the same thing that Trump is going after others for, including Eric Swalwell. He is next.
And another KFILE exclusive. A former Obama White House attorney, now an executive at Goldman Sachs, the storied investment bank. But back in the day, she was giving Jeffrey Epstein legal and P.R. advice. Why was Kathy Ruemmler so close to Epstein?
Andrew Kaczynski of KFILE is stepping up. He's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:31:39]
BURNETT: Tonight, a KFILE exclusive on the woman that Jeffrey Epstein called, quote, "my great defender". Now, you've probably not heard of her before, but she communicated with Epstein more than almost anyone else in the emails released by the House last month, which, if you read through them all, raised the questions who is she?
Epstein turned to her when he was in trouble, when he needed legal advice or P.R. advice when responding to negative press about his sex offenses. Her name is Kathy Ruemmler. She was White House counsel to President Barack Obama.
She now is the top lawyer at the storied investment bank, Goldman Sachs. And even though other high-profile figures have lost their positions after their emails with Epstein were revealed, people like Larry Summers, right, different situation, but his name was in those emails and see what's happened there. Goldman Sachs still employs Ruemmler. They are defending her.
And KFILE's Andrew Kaczynski is OUTFRONT now.
Andrew, that in and of itself is different than what we saw most obviously, Larry Summer's case. But anybody else sort of in close proximity to Epstein, it's not -- it's not seen as a good thing. So this is remarkable reporting that you have you saw her name in here more than almost anyone -- almost anyone else you went through. You found out. Can you tell us more about the relationship between her and Epstein?
ANDREW KACZYNSKI, CNN KFILE SENIOR EDITOR: Yeah, absolutely. Look, so CNNs k file, we went through the newly released emails, texts and Epstein calendar entries, and they reveal a friendship that we found was far deeper and far more personal than previously known. These documents show more than 100 exchanges that Ruemmler was scheduled to meet with Epstein more than 50 times in a five-year period.
BURNETT: Wow.
KACZYNSKI: And look, these weren't just brief check-ins. They included lunches and dinners with celebrities. People like Bill Gates, Woody Allen, Steve Bannon and, Erin, in message after message, we found Epstein was turning to Ruemmler. She was clearly a trusted confidante, someone Epstein turned to when he was worried about headlines examining his history of abuse of minors.
Ruemmler appears to have even helped -- this is something we found -- even helped craft a public relations statement for Epstein in response to a forthcoming "Washington Post" editorial in 2019 that was calling on congress to investigate him. Now, this was a few months before he was indicted on federal charges. Take a look at this right here.
Epstein texted someone. We don't know who it is because it was redacted by house investigators, but he texted someone with what he called the Ruemmler proposal, writing, this is what Kathy suggests we tell "The Washington Post".
Now the statement starts, the criticism is wrong, and the middle sentence here is really key. It says far from receiving a sweetheart deal, Mr. Epstein was subject to a lengthy, aggressive and highly unusual federal investigation for what were, in essence, local offenses.
So, Erin, we asked Ruemmler, did you write this statement for Epstein that said he didn't get a sweetheart deal? And she did not answer that question directly. She instead told CNN this, "I was one of a number of lawyers Epstein informally reached out to for advice. I had no knowledge of any ongoing unlawful activity on his part."
Another example is 2018, when an article was published asking how Epstein escaped scrutiny. You can see it right there. It was in "The Daily Beast" during the #metoo movement. Epstein sent the article to Ruemmler, to which she replies back to him, quote, "Calling it a novella of rehashed crap."
Now, we asked Ruemmler about this, and Ruemmler told CNN she was calling the article crap, but not the allegations, saying I was obviously referring to the reporting, not the allegations of any victims.
[19:35:09]
I have deep sympathy for anyone victimized by Epstein, and as I have said many times, I regret ever knowing him.
BURNETT: All right, I want to ask you another question, but just to be clear here, the deal that she referred to is a sweetheart deal. Just to be clear, we are referring to the deal with Acosta in Florida.,
KACZYNSKI: In 2008, yeah.
BURNETT: He got to, you know, go home every day.
KACZYNSKI: Yeah, the very famous one that is called the sweetheart deal. Absolutely. That's what we're talking about.
BURNETT: I just want to be clear. So she's -- okay. So that's important.
All right. Now, you also found that Epstein said that Kathy Ruemmler could vouch for his character.
KACZYNSKI: That is right, Erin. In a 2017 text, Epstein was trying to connect with Bill Gates. But Gates's wife at the time, Melinda, wouldn't allow it because of Epstein's history as a sex offender. In this text exchange, Epstein offers Ruemmler to be a mediator, telling someone, "Bill met my friend Kathy Ruemmler, Obama counsel for five years. She would love to meet Melinda and give her the other side of Jeffrey," Epstein wrote, adding, "She is an arch feminist who is my great defender."
We put that statement to Ruemmler and she told us that she never met with Melinda Gates and she said, quote, "I have no control over how Epstein categorized, characterized me, or our interactions. I was not his defender. I never advocated on his behalf with any third party. Not Melinda Gates, not the press, not a court, not a government official."
Ruemmler told CNN she never represented him, nor was compensated by him. And a spokesperson for Goldman Sachs, where she earned $22.5 million last year, said this to us. "Epstein referred business to Kathy, including a European bank. He advised that became a client at Latham and Watkins. This naturally involved meetings and gatherings, including with other prospective clients, as occurred with other business associates" -- Erin.
BURNETT: Okay. So fascinating. Just to be clear, she says she never defended him, but, but he back to your point about "The Washington Post". He said, you know, Kathy --
KACZYNSKI: She said she wrote that statement.
BURNETT: "The Washington Post", the criticism is wrong.
(CROSSTALK)
KACZYNSKI: And even, you know, even in that email to or the text, the exchange over "The Daily Beast" story, where she called it a quote, novella of rehashed crap, she said, I wasn't talking about the allegations. I was talking about the report. But the report was on the allegations.
BURNETT: Twenty-two and a half million dollars last year?
KACZYNSKI: Twenty-two and a half million dollars, the compensation package according to Goldman Sachs, at least.
BURNETT: I'm speechless. KACZYNSKI: Yeah.
BURNETT: All right. Andrew Kaczynski of KFILE, thank you very much. It's incredible reporting.
All right. Well, tonight in Washington, the DHS Secretary Kristi Noem accused of dodging questions. She left a house hearing on worldwide threats early, which was disrupted several times by people protesting Trump's immigration tactics.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTI NOEM, DHS SECRETARY: I have to actually leave this hearing early because the FEMA Review Council is giving their report today on suggestions for changes to FEMA.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you for not taking your foot off the gas.
NOEM: I have to co-chair it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would now recognize the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Johnson, for five minutes of questions.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She's leaving.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: The FEMA meeting was abruptly postponed by the White House at noon, just minutes before the hearing. Noem then did not return, even as the hearing continued for another 90 minutes, another hour and a half and the ranking member, Bennie Thompson, accused him of lying about her reason for departing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. BENNIE THOMPSON (D-MS): This is embarrassing display from someone who can't take the heat is disrespectful to the committee and the Constitution, the separation of powers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: OUTFRONT now, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell of California, a member of the homeland security committee which held this hearing with Noem.
So, Congressman, obviously you were you were there for this. What are your Republican colleagues saying about this? Yeah.
REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): Yeah, I'm running for governor of California because of what Kristi Noem is doing, and Donald Trump is doing. So I'm actually in California right now with friends and neighbors who are being chased through the farm fields that they work in, who have the military in their streets, and who believe that people like Mr. Garcia and also Miguel Lopez, one of my constituents who was deported after being here for 30 years, deserve to be with their families. That's exactly why I'm running. And what happened today is not
surprising to anyone.
BURNETT: So, are you -- do your Republican colleagues share your frustration at all? I mean, what's their reaction to what she said and then leaving and the time passing and the excuse that was given?
SWALWELL: Let me tell you what they tell me privately. They say that what is happening is un-American, but they are being told by their family members and loved ones is one Republican told me at the gym. He said, don't be the tallest poppy in the field because they're scared that if Donald Trump comes after you, you get death threats and your life completely changes.
[19:40:06]
To that I say, get a different job. But what Marjorie Taylor Greene has been saying is true that death threats come in. But what I'm also seeing right now is that more and more people are less and less scared, particularly Republicans of Donald Trump. In fact, you saw today in Indiana, they rejected his redistricting play. You saw a grand jury reject again to indict Tish James.
And so, strength has to be in numbers because Donald Trump's physical decline is only matched by his political decline right now.
BURNETT: So, you know, we were talking about the redistricting failure in Indiana for the Trump administration today. There was also the Letitia James story, which we were talking about a few moments ago, where a grand jury failed to indict Letitia James. Now, this was the second try by team Trump in seven days, right, to indict her for mortgage fraud.
Obviously, this is a similar thing to what the Trump administration is going after you for mortgage fraud. Of course, broadly, you're facing criminal referral over your homes in California and Washington, D.C. So what do you make of what just happened today in the Tish James case? I mean, do you think the same thing will happen with you?
SWALWELL: People are recognizing it to be nonsense. They see what the Trump administration has done to Adam Schiff as nonsense. They see what he's done to Lisa Cook on the Federal Reserve board as nonsense. And in my case, it's absolutely nonsense.
And in fact, Erin, I only own one home, so it makes no sense in the world as to what is going on here. But when I talk to Californians, I can't speak for the rest of the country. They just want the guy to lower costs. And they think if he put the same energy in lowering costs as he does going after his political enemies, he'd be popular. In fact, he said day one, he's going to lower costs. And the message from Californians is, sir, you're O for 320.
BURNETT: New report from "ProPublica" came out this week. I know you're -- you know, you're in the midst of your campaign. So I don't know if you saw it, but it was about mortgage fraud, and it was pretty stunning. They reported their headline. They said two of Trump's own mortgages match his description of mortgage fraud. And according to their investigation, they say in 1993, Trump signed a mortgage for a Bermuda style home in palm beach, pledging that it would be his principal residence. Seven weeks later, he got another mortgage for a seven-bedroom marble floored neighboring property, attesting that it too would be his principal residence.
And just to point out, they say neither of them ended up filling that role. They were both reportedly used as investment properties. Now, Trump's not accused of committing mortgage fraud. It's the standard of his own administration and Bill Pulte that would lead this situation to even raise these questions.
Do you see a double standard here, though? I mean, you know, when they dig, they find things like this
SWALWELL: Yeah. And there's many members in the cabinet who have the same scenario. There's many senators who have the same scenario. And I'm not suggesting that they go investigate those individuals. I'm just suggesting follow the law and don't weaponize the Department of Justice against your enemies, as the president is doing.
And again, when you just talk to regular people, they look at a guy who, when he's not weaponizing the department of justice, he's on the golf course and he's been on the golf course 70 times this presidency. They just want him to step into a grocery store one time. This entire campaign, his victory, his mandate was to lower costs. If he focused on that, I promise you he'd be successful. And I want him to be successful in lowering costs.
BRUNETT: All right. Congressman Swalwell, we appreciate your time. And thank you so much.
SWALWELL: My pleasure. Thanks, Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Good to see you. And next, a story that has captured America's attention, the University of Michigan's football coach, now in police custody. This whole thing just unraveled so speedily and bizarrely, new details coming in on what happened.
Plus, why is Harry Enten still bringing this steak into the studio? Well, I guess he's about to -- my god, there's a nice, like, the Excalibur sword.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:48:14]
BURNETT: Tonight, Trump denying inflation posting on social media quote affordability just 13 months ago is a disaster for the American people. But now, it's totally different, exclamation point. When will I get credit for having created with no inflation, perhaps the greatest economy in the history of our country? The president's spokesperson also saying this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) LEAVITT: Has slowed to an average 2.5 percent pace. This is down from what the president inherited. The president inherited 2.9 percent in January. Today, it's at about 2.5 percent. So, we're trending in the right direction.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Okay. What the president and the White House are saying is wrong. We'll show you the consumer price index from September, the last month we have data for because, you know, there's sort of a mess with the data because of the whole shutdown thing. And then they keep saying stuff isn't coming out. Prices were 3 percent higher than they were a year before, and the inflation rate has actually increased year over year for five consecutive months.
And just to zoom out a bit, right, the reason that all of this is such gaslighting is the reality is that the reason consumer confidence numbers are so bad is this: since COVID, grocery prices are up nearly 30 percent.
And Harry Enten is OUTFRONT to tell us something we don't know.
Harry --
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Yeah.
BURNETT: Harry brought this gigantic 45-ounce porterhouse steak out here, and I'm a big steak eater, so I'm looking at it and I'm thinking -- will I say that I'm allowed to have a bite of this steak after its been sitting out in the set for all this time? I mean, this steak. So this kind of steak would always be expensive.
ENTEN: Yeah.
BURNETT: But what about now?
ENTEN: Yeah. I mean, prices for beef are out of control and prices for steak are out of control, Erin Burnett. I mean, if you just look at the price increase over the last year and compare it to where we were even before that, you just see that the prices.
[19:50:00]
Look at this, we're now up to more than $14. The cost of a sirloin steak per pound. That is up from a little bit less than $12 a year ago. So that's a massive increase, more than $2, about two and a half.
And look at where we were in 2010. It was less than $6. Less than $6.
BURNETT: Like 300 percent inflation.
ENTEN: You got that exactly right. So yes, this is a lovely piece of steak, but a piece of steak like this, I think it's 45 ounces, is only becoming more and more expensive.
BURNETT: I mean, it's absolutely incredible, but it's perfectly cooked too. Look at that.
ENTEN: I know. I'm going to eat it after this. You and I can split it.
BURNETT: Yeah, I like, you know. Okay.
ENTEN: I'm tempting you.
BURNETT: Now in the Venn diagrams of the world, there is a Venn diagram of Donald Trump, Harry Enten and Erin Burnett, okay, and one of the things that they all share appears to be a love of McDonald's.
ENTEN: Oh, I love McDonalds. And this almost also tells the story of the fact that beef is having such difficulties at this particular point because look at McDonald's, the sales of beef in terms of how much folks are actually having. You see that, it's just absolutely look at this 300 million pounds of chicken sold at McDonald's, compared to 150 million pounds of beef. Even McDonald's, Americana beef chicken I is outdoing beef.
BURNETT: Wow. All right, tell me something else I don't know.
ENTEN: I'll tell you something else you don't know. Do you remember this ad? Let's take a listen to it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's a very big one.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Big fluffy bun.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's a very big, fluffy bun.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Where's the beef?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Oh, yeah.
ENTEN: Great ad, great ad. Of course, Fritz Mondale used in the debate against Gary Hart in '84 during the Democratic primary. That ad was so successful, it helped raise Wendy's revenue. Get this by 31 percent. My goodness gracious.
Where's the beef ad really was great for Wendy's. But you don't have to ask yourself where's the beef here? Because hold on. Lets get a shot of it. Look at this beef. Look at this beef. It's just so good.
BURNETT: Wendy's burgers are better than McDonald's burgers. McDonald's fries are better than Wendys. That's my opinion.
ENTEN: Do a bang bang. Both places.
BURNETT: All right. Harry, thank you.
ENTEN: Thanks. BURNETT: And next, why was the University of Michigan's football
coach suddenly arrested? This whole story so bizarre? We've got new details coming in.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:56:15]
BURNETT: Tonight, we're learning some new details about the University of Michigan's head football coach, Sherrone Moore, who is right now in police custody. College football reporter Pete Thamel saying Moore had been acting strange, in his words, prior to his stunning firing for an inappropriate relationship with a staff member. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HAMEL, ESPN COLLEGE FOOTBALL REPORTER: There have been a lot of uneasiness on the Michigan staff. Sources have told me Sherrone Moore had been acting strange, berating assistant coaches, not acting in a normal way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: OUTFRONT now, Austin Meek, he was with Moore three days ago. He's a staff writer covering Michigan for "The Athletic".
It's a bizarre story, Austin. You were with him just 48 hours before he was fired. And you heard that reporting there where Thamel was saying Moore had been acting unusually, berating assistants. There were signs of strain.
Did anything stand out to you when you were with him?
AUSTIN MEEK, STAFF WRITER COVERING MICHIGAN FOOTBALL, THE ATHLETIC: Nothing seemed out of the ordinary on Monday, when reporters met with Sherrone Moore, he talked about Michigan's 2026 recruiting class. He talked about the upcoming bowl game against Texas. Really gave no indication that anything at all was amiss. Certainly no -- no warning at all about what was coming just a couple of days later.
BURNETT: So, NFL insider Michigan alum Adam Schefter today said Moore thought people at Michigan were out to get him. Here's what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ADAM SCHEFTER, ESPN FOOTBALL REPORTER: I do know that he felt like people had it in for him for an awful long time. While he was at Michigan, he felt like there were people who were out to get him. So, all of these things can all be true. It's possible that Michigan does have evidence that he had an inappropriate relationship with a staffer, and it could be that Sherrone Moore is right that people had it in for him.
(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: Does that -- does that fit with you? And I guess the thing about all of this that has stood out to me just as a layperson here, is that having an inappropriate relationship with a staffer wouldn't ordinarily lead to being in police custody in the standard sense of it, right? So, the whole thing just seems very bizarre
MEEK: Yeah. That's correct. So, the situation that led to Sherrone Moore being in police custody, as I understand it, occurred after he was fired. There was an incident at an apartment complex in Ann Arbor. Police were called there and then later detained Sherrone Moore. So that was the sequence of events after his -- after his firing.
But, yeah, certainly just a very you know, a very strange sequence of events for a program that's really been under siege. The sense that Sherrone Moore felt that people were out to get him may have come from the fact that this program was under numerous NCAA investigations. There have been other legal issues involving the program. So, if he was feeling the pressure from that, perhaps that came out in some of the behavior that that was referenced earlier.
BURNETT: So. Austin, as we know, he's in custody right now. I mean, have any charges been filed?
MEEK: Charges have not been filed, according to the Washtenaw County prosecutor's office. Charges, if they're filed, are expected to come tomorrow. He's expected to be arraigned tomorrow. That was the latest word that we heard, so I would expect fairly soon we'll have some clarity in terms of what charges he might be facing here.
BURNETT: And quickly, I know that you've seen him many times coaching. We understand again that there's been an evidence possibly of this inappropriate relationship. We don't know at this point, but you've seen him many times with his family. Did anything stand out to you?
MEEK: You know, that is one of the images that comes to mind when I think about Sherrone Moore is just seeing him. After games, he'd often leave the postgame press conferences and his young daughters would be waiting for him with his wife. So just a very, a very sad situation to think about what it means for, for him and his family.
BURNETT: Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. It was such a such a mystery as we've said.
Austin, thanks so much. Really appreciate you coming on.
MEEK: Thanks, Erin.
BURNETT: And thanks to all of you as well for being with us.
"AC360" starts now.
