Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Swirling Crises Follow Trump To Scotland Ahead Of Key Meetings; Harris Weighs California Governor Run As Dems Debate Potential Impact. Interview with Rep. Eric Burlison (R-MO); New Reports Raise Questions About Hegseth's Leadership; Commanding the Play. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired July 27, 2025 - 08:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

[08:00:18]

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST (voice-over): In the rough.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome to Scotland, Donald.

RAJU: As President Trump tees off overseas --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's a foul smell in Scotland right now.

RAJU: -- he faces urgent questions about a major tariff deadline and deepening starvation in Gaza. Will he make any progress?

Plus, no end in sight.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm focused on making deals. I'm not focused on conspiracy theories.

RAJU: As Trump tries to put miles between him and the Epstein saga. Could a new tactic by his team backfire?

REP. RALPH NORMAN (R-NC): It's not going to die down.

REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): It's the number one phone call that we get.

RAJU: By far?

BURLISON: It's probably 500 to 1.

RAJU: A conservative congressman who's pushing for more information, Eric Burleson, joins me live.

And, shake-up. A big win for Democrats as they try to take back Congress. Can they overcome the odds?

INSIDE POLITICS, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power, starts now. (END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (on camera): Good morning and welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. I'm Manu Raju.

President Trump is on the world stage this week as crises and controversies are confronting his White House. Back home, the Jeffrey Epstein saga has bogged down his presidency, and there are no signs it's dying down. And across the globe, wars he promised to end immediately, only seemingly getting worse. In the Middle East overnight, Israel opened up more aid corridors as the starvation crisis devastates Gaza. And as talks to end the fighting stall.

And pressure in Europe as the president gears up for key meetings this morning over his trade war with his self-imposed tariff deadline just days away.

This morning, the president is mixing official and personal business at Trump golf courses in Scotland.

I want to bring in CNN's chief national affairs correspondent, Jeff Zeleny, who is traveling with the president in Scotland.

So, Jeff, what are we expecting from Trump's meeting with European Union's leader today? And what's been the reception so far from the Scottish people?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Manu.

President Trump is back on the golf course here in Scotland this morning at Trump Turnberry. He'll be playing golf for a couple hours before he is heading into a very important and critical meeting with the chief of the European Commission. Of course, there is a deadline looming on tariffs for next Friday. The president has set a deadline for, if there's not an agreement brokered, there could be a 30 percent across the board sweeping tariff that would really spark a trade war, a transatlantic trade war.

So, the president is going to be meeting with Ursula von der Leyen in just a couple hours to try and negotiate some type of an agreement. Now, what officials are telling us is that they believe a leading possibility is cutting that in half. A 15 percent across the board levy. Certainly, that would end some of the uncertainty that that really has been going through European businesses. Of course, America is the biggest trading partner of the European Union.

The two have had a frosty relationship in the past. But the president, when he arrived here in Scotland, seemed to signal optimism.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Ursula, we'll be here, highly respected woman. So, we look forward to that. In terms of a deal, were meeting with the European Union, and that would be actually the biggest deal of them all if we make it. (END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: So, we will see if a deal comes together. Of course, this is just one in a series of the on again, off again trade war that really has been a through line of the Trump administration. I'm told the commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, and the U.S. trade representative have flown here over the weekend. They will be joining these meetings as well.

So that is the working part of this trip. But there's plenty of private vacation part as well. And that is the golfing that was underway all day yesterday. And that is the real purpose of this trip. The president coming here to Scotland to view his golf courses and open a new golf course that's named after his mother. Of course, she is from Scotland, so he has expressed a fondness for this country. Of course, he's visited many times before.

But yesterday, protests also broke out, not to the extent of the 2018 protests. We saw thousands of people in the streets during his first term as president, but there were significant protests here in Edinburgh and elsewhere, and talking to many demonstrators, they are concerned about the president's foreign policy as well as his stance on democracy. So certainly not a warm welcome from Scots here. But the president is largely ensconced from all of this, playing golf and then having a meeting today with the E.U. chief and meeting tomorrow with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer -- Manu.

[08:05:01]

RAJU: All right. Jeff Zeleny, live for us in Scotland, thank you so much.

And let's break this all down with my excellent panel this morning. "Politico's" Dasha Burns, Jasmine Wright from "NOTUS", CNN's Isaac Dovere, and "The Wall Street Journal's" Molly Ball.

Nice to see you all.

Trump overseas -- look, this has been a tumultuous second term to say the least. This has probably been one of the most tumultuous periods of his second term, not just with Epstein, but also these crises overseas. In Gaza, the starvation crisis in Gaza doesn't seem to be getting any better. This is obviously a difficult period for the president.

MOLLY BALL, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Indeed, although he seems like he's having a great time over there, we should say.

But I think it is a reminder that, you know, he has left the domestic chaos behind to some degree and to a remarkable extent, we did see the Epstein scandal start to sort of consume Washington and the administration, but it's a reminder that there are just as many crises facing him overseas as well, whether you're talking about all of these trade deals that have yet to be made with the with the deadline looming, whether you're talking about the international crises that he promised to resolve, pretty much instantaneously, which are not only ongoing but seem to be getting worse, certainly in the case of what's happening in Gaza.

It's a stark reminder that that conflict is very far from being resolved, despite Trump's promises. So, I think all of this is a looming sort of cumulative political problem.

RAJU: Yeah. And it adds up, right? It adds up to how he's perceived among the American public, among his voters. And it was striking poll from this past week was the Gallup poll talking about how he is viewed now among voters, a significant drop among independents from January, 17-point drop from 46 percent approval to 29 percent. And that's been somewhat consistent with other polling as well.

Dasha, you cover the White House. How concerned is the White House about all these different problems adding up for the president?

DASHA BURNS, WHITE HOUSE BUREAU CHIEF, POLITICO: Well, the White House is really frustrated right now and President Trump in particular has been furious, as some sources have described it to me because of this Epstein scandal, that they just have -- have never been in this position where the president cannot change the subject on something he's so good at wielding the media, at spinning the narrative. And that's just not working right now.

At the same time, this is a moment where they really thought that they would be doing a victory lap. Six months in, they've gotten their agenda passed through Congress. He's making these deals. But a lot of those promises that he made, to your point, Molly, they have not been fulfilled. And he's got these two strong men in Putin and in Bibi, guys that he thought that he had great relationships with, that he could wheel and deal with, and that is not working. Those two are massive crises that have his base split, by the way, you're seeing some folks get frustrated with his seemingly unconditional support of Bibi Netanyahu and what he's doing in Gaza, and frustration with getting further involved with Ukraine. Some are championing it like Lindsey Graham, others are not.

So, his base is not on the same page on a number of issues. Of course, Epstein has been looming over all of it, but that's just one element of a number of cracks that have formed over the last six months.

RAJU: And that's why he's trying to do things to get the base back in line. You mentioned some of the things he's trying to do to change the narrative on this. We saw just over the past day on his Truth Social post.

You're going to get a sense of what Trump is thinking. Just look at his Truth Social post. Of course, this is Barack Obama in the O.J. white van escaping the LAPD, as a Trump has been basically accusing Obama of committing crimes and suggesting that he and others should be prosecuted, even saying that in another post yesterday that Beyonce, Oprah, Al Sharpton, Kamala Harris, among others, they should all be prosecuted.

BURNS: Not Beyonce. No, let's not go to Beyonce. Come on, she's in Vegas right now. We're all excited.

JASMINE WRIGHT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NOTUS: I know, the last night of her tour, my God. Listen, this is just food for the base. These are the greatest hits that the president can play. The normal people, that he can be derogatory towards, that his base will pick up, particularly in a moment where you're right, there is that split. There is that tension.

I was talking to one White House official last week, and he was complaining that we continue to say that this is a distraction, or that the president is trying to distract. But the reality is, is that Donald Trump does not want to talk about Epstein. That was very clear when he left the U.S. on Friday. He -- when he was continuously asked by the press, both when he left the White House, when he got to JBA and when he got to Scotland, whether or not he's considering a pardon from Ghislaine -- for Gislaine Maxwell, he said, I'm not even thinking about that. I'm allowed to do that. But you should be talking about Bill Clinton. You should be talking about all these other people who are not me.

And so, the White House is consistently facing this kind of breakdown with their base. It's unclear how far it goes and how long they will ride with the White House, as they kind of try to move the ball a little bit with --

RAJU: But he was -- you know, you can close the door on the Epstein saga from doing a lot of different things. But on the Ghislaine Maxwell piece of it all, why not just say, there's no way I would pardon.

WRIGHT: Yeah.

ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: He could -- he could say a lot of things, like all of these meetings also, including having his former criminal defense attorney, who's now the deputy attorney general, meet with Maxwell, that could have happened six months ago. It's only happening now because of the pressure that he feels on this, as is the case for everything else going on.

I talked to somebody close to Bill Clinton the other night when there was the revelation in "The Wall Street Journal" about the birthday greeting that Clinton had sent, and the person said, listen, we broke up -- Clinton had broken off his relationship with Epstein long before, but has called for a release of all the materials. That's what Donald Trump used to be doing. That's what J.D. Vance used to be doing. Kash Patel used to be doing. Now that they're all in power, they are not releasing all of it. And in fact, what they're doing is dragging out this process more and more and more.

RAJU: And the polls also bear out that this is actually something that Democrats, Republicans and independents agree with in terms of should there be more information released, this question about has the government been open and transparent about the Epstein case? Sixty- seven percent of the public say the government is not transparent about Epstein, and that includes 60 percent of Republicans. This is a rare -- you don't see that when it comes to. BALL: And that's why this story continues to have legs, is it's not

just coming from a few influencers. It's not just coming from the media. It is really penetrated into pop culture in a way that we don't often see with Washington scandals.

I have heard from elected officials on both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats, that they are hearing a surprisingly a surprising amount from their own constituents about this story. So, if, you know, the White House might have thought that this was an inside the beltway thing, that they could safely ignore. But I think, you know, it's showing up in "South Park". It's showing up all over the place because it really has sort of penetrated the popular consciousness.

And that means that, you know, if members of congress are hearing this every time they have a town hall over the month of August, if they're hearing this every time they go out and try to talk about legislation that they just passed through Congress or anything else, the story is not going to die because the pressure is coming from the public.

BURNS: Though I do think that Democrats are at risk of overreaching on this. One thing that I hear from my White House sources is every time Democrats talk about this, they feel a little sense of relief because the president can then point and say, look, this is a Democratic witch hunt. It's not my voters that are the problem. It's the -- it's the Democrats.

And I do think that Democratic voters, for the most part, are going to want to hear their leaders talk about health care, talk about the economy. And it is a little bit disingenuous given Democrats didn't make this an issue until it was a problem for President Trump. And that feels yucky to some people.

RAJU: Yeah. And they did wait -- they didn't really say anything about this during the Biden years. Now Democrats see divisions and they're jumping on it. And that's one they have seen some success, though, in exploiting those divisions in the House. We saw that last week. So how do Republicans also feel about the way the president has handled this issue on Capitol Hill? Should they -- should he do more to get ahead of the story?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: What do you think about the way that the White House has handled this Epstein matter, this sort of drip, drip, drip, rather than putting everything out.

SEN. KEVIN CRAMER (R-NC): I don't know, I'm kind of a rip the band- aid off sort of guy myself.

RAJU: Do you think the appearance is that they're not releasing it because his name is on there. Are you worried about that appearance?

CRAMER: Well, yeah. I mean, I think that's the -- that's the risk you run doing what they're doing. But I don't know everything that they may know. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Release all the Epstein stuff.

RAJU: You think all of it?

GRAHAM: Yeah.

RAJU: Justice Department should?

GRAHAM: Yeah. Just -- yeah, release. Release stuff. I want to protect victims, but be as transparent as you can with Epstein.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Rip the band-aid off.

WRIGHT: Yeah, rip the band aid off. I mean, they want to get over this hump. They want to stop talking about Epstein. They want the White House to release what they have in the DOJ to release what they have and move forward.

The problem is, is that the DOJ has effectively stayed on this kind of drip, drip, drip environment. Were obviously hearing periodic updates about the conversations with maxwell. We're hearing periodic updates about whether or not there's an ongoing investigation to see if there should be more documents released. And so, unless they do a full sail transparency release, you're going to continue to see update after update after update. Keeping this in the media.

RAJU: Yeah, no question about it.

All right. There's more to discuss including brand new details and concerns as former Vice President Kamala Harris decides whether she'll run for governor of California.

And the president's base demanding action on the Epstein files. I go one on one with the conservative House Republican about what he's hearing back home.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: How much are your constituents clamoring for more information about Epstein right now?

[08:15:02]

REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): It's the number one phone call that we get.

RAJU: By far?

BURLISON: It's probably 500 to 1.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) RAJU: Any day now, Kamala Harris will announce her decision on whether she'll run for governor of California this weekend. We're learning about some surprising new concerns from top Democrats in her state about how her potential bid could affect other key races in California, and even control of the U.S. House.

Our Isaac Dovere has a deep dive on all of this in an article this morning. There you see him on the screen. He's sitting right here, too.

DOVERE: Yeah.

RAJU: What do you know?

So, this is a really good story, Isaac. One of the -- I want to read to you a quote that you from a from a Democrat, a House Democrat didn't want to put his or her name on it.

[08:20:05]

I'm not surprised when you're criticizing someone in your own party. Oftentimes --

DOVERE: A California House Democrat.

RAJU: A California House Democrat there saying there's no groundswell for her candidacy. In fact, it would only fire up Republicans and hurt our ability to win the 4 to 5 seats that we need to win the House and hold on to three seats that we just flipped in 2024. She comes with baggage.

It's the first time we're hearing about real fears about the impact she could have down ticket in the critical race for the House.

DOVERE: Yeah, and look, in the article I get into is that Harris has in the last couple of weeks asked for from her aides, for stuff about starting a political action committee for doing. a 501c4 that would be focused on building up Democratic institutions. Also looking at a potential calendar through southern states. If she would be going through with a 2028 run.

But most people around her believe that she will likely land on running for governor of California for a lot of reasons that would take out the 2028 presidential possibility for.

What I did is I talked to a lot of people on the ground in California, in the house, who are looking at what it would mean for them, how it would affect their races, including a lot of these marginal House Democrats, among them George Min, who at Dave, I'm sorry, who won a seat in orange county last year, flipped a seat or held that seat, I'm sorry.

And he said he was having a nice time talking to reporters about what his district would be and how tough it was. I asked him about Kamala Harris, and he literally bolted away from me and ran onto the House floor. I asked George -- RAJU: I know how that feels.

(LAUGHTER)

DOVERE: Yeah, you do, more than most.

George Whitesides, another congressman who did flip a seat in the outskirts of L.A. last year, and I asked him about it and he paused for a very long time thinking about what to say. And finally ended on, well, if she decides to run, that's her prerogative.

That said, a lot of California Democrats are looking at the current field of gubernatorial candidates and saying they don't see someone in there who has the stature and the experience to stand up to Trump. And they know, based on what this -- six months have been so far for Gavin Newsom, what he's been dealing with, that that's going to be a big part of whatever Californias future holds.

RAJU: And you talked to -- he talked to Nancy Pelosi, who obviously, you know, very well writing a book about Nancy Pelosi. Her quote is very telling. She said, Isaac asked her what should she do here, Harris? She said, I want her to do whatever she wants to do about running for governor.

BURNS: And that's the kind of quote that just screams, please do it.

DOVERE: I mean, they do have a long history, those two.

WRIGHT: Long story.

BURNS: A long and tortured history.

BALL: But it really is remarkable for someone who was just the standard bearer for the party in a massive national election that you really can't find people who are saying, yes, we love her, she's our heroine, and we can't wait for her to get in this.

I found the same thing when I was reporting in California a couple of months ago, that you don't find a huge amount of people saying that they can't wait for her to run, and you don't find a huge amount of people saying that they think she would be great at the job either. It's not necessarily the position that her background and experience, they feel make her uniquely suited for, despite all of her qualifications.

And there's -- and I think there's also a sense of where has she been since the election, right? Tim Walz has been out there on the trail, pounding the pavement on a sort of apology tour, trying to figure out what went wrong. She's really been in hiding. She's made a few public appearances but she has not been out there really -- and, you know, you have a Democratic base that is angry and terrified and really wants to see their leaders fighting. And she hasn't been out there fighting.

RAJU: Yeah, that is interesting. What do you make of that? You covered the Harris campaign. She's -- she has not -- she's been really behind the scenes made so few public appearances.

WRIGHT: But if I put my historian hat on, I think it's actually quite similar to what she did after the 2019 race. When she got out in November. That was a very crushing moment for her. The same as last November 2024, and she took a few months off. And you really didn't see her get back into that conversation.

I mean, she was doing a couple of those COVID videos, but you didn't see her get back into the conversation until the vice presidential conversation started. And so, I think that you're seeing her take her time, be with her family. According to sources that I've talked to.

But they all do feel like she is really preparing, at least really thinking about it in her mind, what it would mean to get in and whether or not she runs. And I think that they feel that she might, whether or not she's made that decision, though, I think is kind of a question mark.

BURNS: And you all know what happens if Harris gets in. What happens on the other side, right? One Mr. Ric Grenell has told me that he's not running for California governor unless Kamala Harris decides to run, and then he is very likely to jump.

RAJU: That would --

WRIGHT: I think that would motivating argument.

RAJU: That would be quite.

WRIGHT: I don't want to be governor unless she runs.

RAJU: That would impact things down ticket, TOO.

[08:25:00]

I do want to talk about one other big development that's happening in the race for control of the United States Senate. That was the decision that's expected within the next day or so of the former governor of North Carolina, Democratic Governor Roy Cooper, to announce that he is, in fact, running for the Senate, the open seat being vacated by Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican.

This is what Cooper said last night in Raleigh, North Carolina.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROY COOPER (D), FORMER NORTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR: Everybody who's planning to run for office next year, please stand up. Stand up, guys.

Hey, I'm not sitting down, am I?

(CHEERS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Not so subtle. We very much expected to run. Yes, exactly. So, look, North Carolina is a tough state, no matter what, for

Democrats and Republicans, too. But Democrats have not won there since 2008. That's when Kay Hagan won that Senate seat back then. Since then, Republicans have won. There have been some very close races as well, but this is going to be a difficult map for Democrats, no matter, even with Cooper in the race to take back the Senate.

BALL: That's right. I mean, they did -- Roy Cooper is their best recruit here, and they feel very good about the race with him in it. But it's still a tough state at the federal level. They have, of course, Democrats have won statewide races in North Carolina when Roy Cooper was the candidate, the current governor and the -- and other statewide races last year, it's just -- when -- but when it's a Senate race, it's different. Voters look at a Senate candidate in a much more partisan way. They see you as someone who's going to go to Washington and either vote for John Thune or vote for Mitch McConnell. So, they care much more about that partisan label than in potentially a governor's race in a -- in a reddish purple state.

DOVERE: But that said, Roy Cooper has won in 2008 and 2012 and 2016 and 2020 and going all the way back, he's won since -- every race that he's gotten into North Carolina. He is the strongest Democrat in North Carolina.

Importantly, for thinking about the geography of North Carolina, he comes from eastern North Carolina, which is a place that not a lot of Democrats have been winning in for a long time. He definitely has the accent of somebody from that. He has that credibility as attorney general and governor. That's why the Democrats were so desperate to get him to say yes. And he has --

BURNS: And in other marquee races, they're still trying to get --

DOVERE: Yes, for sure.

BURNS: Maine, for example, there still is not a marquee Democratic recruit.

RAJU: And the question is in Maine, will Susan Collins, in fact, run? She's indicating she will, she has not made a final decision yet. And Janet Mills, the governor, will she jump into that race as well for the Democrats? Huge questions. But the magic number for Democrats, of course, is four to pick up the Senate. And there are not many options to flip seats and there to defend a big one in Georgia as well.

All right. Next, I speak with one Republican congressman fielding hundreds of calls from his constituents about the Epstein files, what he says about the Trump administration's response?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:32:30]

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST: Members of the House are back home this week after an abrupt end to the session, as lawmakers in both parties pushed for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, ultimately forcing Speaker Johnson to close for business a day early until after Labor Day.

Does that mean this controversy is going to simmer until then?

I'm joined by conservative Republican Congressman Eric Burlison of Missouri, who sits on the Oversight Committee and has called for the files to be released.

Congressman Burlison, thank you so much for joining me this morning. Appreciate your time

REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): It's good to be on.

RAJU: Absolutely.

BURLISON: Thank you.

RAJU: Yes. So how animated are your constituents about the Epstein files and the lack of information that has been released so far?

BURLISON: Yes, I think it comes mostly from a concern that government might be keeping secrets from them. That the intel community might have some kind of intelligence on government officials, whether it's our intel community or a foreign intel community.

All of these -- all of these are questions that people have in mind and so we are definitely getting phone calls. People are interested in knowing the facts and don't want us to drop. The investigation.

RAJU: You said -- you told me last week about 500 to 1 were the amount of calls that are coming in. Is that still the case? And how much of it is driven by the concern that, you know, the voters were promised repeatedly that this information would be released by this administration?

BURLISON: Yes. I think that that part of this problem is that there were some false expectations that are created., and that's a political mistake.

I think that, you know, saying that you're going to be able to deliver when you -- when you haven't even looked at all of the files and what's available was probably a misstep.

And so I think that that is one of the things that they're playing, you know, that they're having to deal with.

The other thing is they're having to deal with the fact that it's really difficult or almost impossible to disprove a negative. Or in the case of a conspiracy, it's almost impossible to disprove a conspiracy unless you have, you know, unless you have 100 percent of all the facts. And unfortunately, that's the situation that, that we're in.

So -- but I think that you only fan the flames of conspiracy if you don't demonstrate that you're -- that you're trying to get the information released.

[08:34:49]

RAJU: We know from reporting, Congressman, that the Justice Department briefed Trump in May that his name was in the Epstein files. That's not to suggest Trump did anything wrong other than having a past relationship with Epstein.

But do you worry that it may appear to some that this information is not being released because Trump is mentioned in the files?

BURLISON: Yes. To me, knowing Trump, I would -- I would be really shocked if there was any kind of nefarious connection. I think that knowing this -- this dynamic and being in the political world, what you see is that you're encountering thousands, if not thousands of people every day. You're -- you have to in order to create these social networks.

It doesn't mean that you participate or even know and certainly people that encounter elected leaders, they want to be close, but they don't -- nobody like airs their dirty laundry to elected leaders unless they get extremely close, I'm sure.

And so to me, that's part of this dynamic. I'm certain that Trump -- it was connected through social and we've seen the photos. They were both -- they were both high in New York scenes and so they're going to know each other and be around each other.

The question is did Trump go to Epstein's island? Was he one of the individuals that Maxwell tried to -- tried to get his girl to sleep with?

He says that's not the case. I believe him, but at the end of the day, I think the American people want to know who did go to Epstein island and who Ghislaine Maxwell did set up arrangements with.

RAJU: And Congressman, your committee, the Oversight Committee now is planning to issue a subpoena for these files. And also two Democrats on your committee, Robert Garcia and Ro Khanna now want the Epstein estate to turn over the birthday book from his 50th birthday, where Trump and dozens of others were listed as contributors. Would you like to see that book, the birthday book in the name of transparency?

BURLISON: I haven't -- I haven't heard about the birthday book. I don't know that that -- if that has any kind of bearing on as evidence on who was being arranged to have sexual encounters with -- with girls.

I'm more concerned -- that's what I'm actually concerned with is trying to -- instead of finding out who he went to a party with or a birthday party with, I care more about, you know, who actually went to the island and who was arranged to sleep with a -- with a minor.

RAJU: So it sounds like you probably they want a subpoena, the Democrats do, for that book. It sounds like you probably wouldn't support that, is that right? BURLISON: I mean, I'm not going to oppose anything that's being --

that's going to come to light. But I'm saying I wouldn't be focused on that. I don't know why they would be focused on it, but I wouldn't be opposed to that coming to light.

RAJU: Your committee also issued a subpoena for the deposition with Epstein's convicted conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell. They want that deposition by mid-August.

Now, the administration gave her limited immunity during her meetings last week with Deputy Attorney General Blanche.

But this is what James Comer, your committees chairman, told me last week about whether your committee would give immunity to her.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAMES COMER (R-TN): I don't think there are many Republicans that want to give immunity to someone that may have been sex trafficking children.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Do you agree with Mr. Comer that Maxwell should not be given immunity?

BURLISON: I think that if we're -- we should take her testimony as very with a high skepticism, right. But I also think that if it -- I'm not opposed to giving some kind of immunity. What I would be opposed to is giving any kind of clemency or pardon that -- that's not something that I think that any Republicans are going to be willing to do.

RAJU: Yes. So that was my next question, because Trump has not refused, not ruled out a pardon for Maxwell. Do you think that would be a mistake for Trump to pardon her?

BURLISON: I do, I think it would be a mistake. At the end of the day, she committed heinous acts that I think that it would be a disservice to her victims where she did not have to serve her sentence.

RAJU: All right. Congressman Eric Burlison, thank you so much for joining me this morning. Really appreciate your insight and your perspective.

BURLISON: I appreciate you.

RAJU: Absolutely.

And for us -- is Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in hot water with the White House? More on that next.

[08:39:23]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE SEGMENT, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Nobody was texting war plans.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It was sensitive information, not classified.

JOHN RATCLIFFE, CIA DIRECTOR: The secretary of Defense has said the information was not classified.

HEGSETH: What was shared over Signal, then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified, coordinations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Indeed, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and others in the Trump administration have been adamant that military plans he sent in a Signal group chat earlier this year had, quote, "no classified information".

But new this week we learned the Pentagon's inspector general had evidence that there was classified info on those messages, according to people familiar with that review. This comes amid a slew of reports about Hegseth's rocky tenure leading the Pentagon.

[08:44:50]

RAJU: My panel is back. Jasmine, you have a -- your colleague has a story out at NOTUS, "Hegseth's Signal scandal is wearing on Trump officials". What are you hearing from inside the White House about his standing right now?

JASMINE WRIGHT, NOTUS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, my colleague John Seward reported this great piece, everyone should go look at NOTUS, basically talking about there's a kind of weariness setting in at the White House over Hegseth's tenure.

Top White House officials, some of them sources told them are on, is on thin ice with them really pissed off at him, not just for that Signal gate, which obviously kind of continues to linger on in the background, but other instances in which the White House has felt that Hegseth had acted and not given notification to the White House, particularly on that issue of stopping some U.S. weapons from going to Ukraine. The White House felt very caught off guard by that.

Other instances in which they felt that Hegseth wasn't giving proper due to the White House in these really important actions.

And so I think that just over really the last six months, we've had about three rounds of kind of scandals or controversies with Hegseth, that's really set in kind of a weariness tone.

But the reality is, is that the president still likes him --

RAJU: Yes.

WRIGHT: -- and potentially all of these scandals may be, you know, if people thought that he would leave the administration, the question is whether or not all these scandals kind of keep him there, because Donald Trump doesn't want to fire people.

DASHA BURNS, POLITICO WHITE HOUSE BUREAU CHIEF: Look, White House officials are frustrated. The Pentagon is a mess, that continues to be the case. There's not the proper staffing in place to help Hegseth through some of these challenging moments. There's widespread acknowledgment of that behind the scenes in the White House.

However, to your point, he is still, in the president's eyes, someone he wants to keep. He fought really hard for him to get confirmed. When he fights really hard for somebody, he fights at just as hard when the media comes after him.

RAJU: Yes.

BALL: And so.

RAJU: But there's just been so many reports about this. You know, first, the Pentagon still says there is no classified information shared. That was a statement from the chief spokesman about the findings that are in this ongoing review.

And -- but there are also other stories, too. I mean, the story about how Hegseth's team just yesterday from the "Washington Post" was told by the White House to stop polygraph tests, to try to catch leakers, and also fighting with his generals. And so this has been an ongoing problem.

MOLLY BALL, "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL": And we've seen the staffing, particularly around Hegseth at the Pentagon, be in constant chaos. So it's these to Jasmine's point, it's these ongoing headaches, more than any particular aspect of Signal gate.

There's a feeling that, you know, because the president stood by him through a Signal gate and defended him, there was an expectation that he would get his act together And instead it's been this continuing headache.

So that's what's driving that feeling of weariness is the feeling that he was given a sort of new lease on life. He was given a sort of second chance here.

And rather than get everything together and make it look like it's running on all cylinders, there just continue to be all of these problems.

ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Yes. And look, that's all the internal drama and the soap opera that it tends to be around the Trump White House and all this stuff.

We know, though, that the Pentagon is having a lot of troubles with the way its functioning and a lot of problems with politicization, generals being -- this is the American military. They're tested every day, and we don't know at what point they could be tested in a bigger way. And that's what this is really coming down to.

RAJU: No question about it.

All right. There's much more on that and more coming up. Why is President Trump threatening to block a football team's new stadium and could he even do that?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Should the Commanders change the name back to Redskins?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, you want me to make a controversial statement? I would.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[08:48:33]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: So just how far will President Trump go to get the Washington Commanders to change their name back to the Redskins?

You'll recall that Washington's NFL team faced years of intense controversy, ultimately dropping the name Redskins in 2020 over backlash that it was insensitive to Native Americans.

But Trump is now demanding the team change its name back and threatening to block a deal to bring them back to Washington from Maryland.

Writing last weekend, quote, "I may put a restriction on them if they don't change the name back to the original Washington Redskins and get rid of the ridiculous moniker Washington Commanders. I won't make a deal for them to build a stadium in Washington.

Then the White House doubled down the next day.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEAVITT: The president was serious. And as part of the art of the deal, part of his negotiating skills, as you know, sports is one of the many passions of this president, and he wants to see the name of that team change.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Now, team officials are shrugging off the threats, saying they are focused on preparing for the upcoming season.

And this week, the D.C. city council is set to consider a nearly $4 billion stadium deal that would bring the team back to D.C.

That was greenlit by Congress last year and signed into law in one of Joe Biden's final acts. That means Trump's hands are largely tied, at least according to GOP Congressman James Comer, who led the charge to make the bill law.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Do you think the president can block this?

COMER: I don't think he can. No, I don't --

RAJU: Why not?

COMER: I mean, I just we've passed the bill that, you know, it was the last bill Joe -- it was my bill. And Joe Biden, was the last bill the poor old autopen signed before the -- before the administration ended. So I think we're in good shape on the stadium.

[08:54:53]

RAJU: And you don't think they should change their name back to the Redskins?

COMER: I didn't say that.

RAJU: What do you think?

COMER: I agree -- I agree with President Trump. I would rather it be the Washington Redskins. I agree with him on that.

RAJU: But it should be their decision.

COMER: Well, it's -- you know, it's a private business. It's their decision. But yes, I agree with what he said about the Cleveland Indians, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Now back in 2013, Trump sung a much different tune on whether presidents should have a say in the fight over Washington's football team. Then, after President Obama suggested a name change, Trump said that Obama should, quote, "not be telling the Washington Redskins to change their name. Our country has far bigger problems."

Now Congress has the authority to intervene and can block D.C. laws. So could Trump pressure Republicans to do just that? We'll have to wait and see.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. You can follow me on X @mkraju. You can follow the show INSIDE POLITICS and follow me on Instagram @manu_raju.

If you ever miss an episode, just catch up wherever you get your podcasts and search for INSIDE POLITICS.

Up next, STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH. Jake's guests include White House budget director Russ Vought, Oklahoma Senator Markwayne Mullin, and Arizona Senator Mark Kelly. Thanks again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. We'll see you

next time.

[08:56:03]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)