Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

James Comey Seeking to Have Case Dismissed; Interview With Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ); Epstein Files Bill Passes. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired November 19, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:01:06]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: Happening now, breaking news: A bill that would force the Justice Department to release the Jeffrey Epstein case files is on its way to President Trump's desk. But there are still some questions about what happens once he actually signs it.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer with Pamela Brown, and you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

There's breaking news we're following. The Senate has officially sent a bill to President Trump that seeks to compel the U.S. Justice Department to release all of its files related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

BROWN: The House and Senate both approved the bill yesterday nearly unanimously.

CNN's Kevin Liptak is at the Kennedy Center here in Washington, where the president is set to attend the U.S.-Saudi investment summit.

Kevin, there are still a lot of questions about what happens once the president signs the bill. What do we know?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, plenty of questions. And what the White House has said is that the president intends to sign this as soon as they get it from Capitol Hill.

So, in theory, we should expect that to happen very, very quickly. But you're right. After that, it's not explicitly clear how soon we will see any of these documents or files come out of the Justice Department. To begin with, we don't exactly know what they have.

Remember, it was Pam Bondi who said some months ago that there was no so-called Epstein file. Now the Justice Department will be compelled by law to release what they do have. What seems clear is that not all of this will be released immediately. There will be redactions and certain names removed. And I think it will be clear that they don't want to violate any potential victims' privacy by putting out these documents.

The other question that is unanswered at this point is whether the investigation that President Trump has ordered into certain Democrats that are containing these files -- remember, he has named Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, among others, whether that will be used as pretext by the Justice Department to say, look, there's an open investigation here, we can't put all of these documents out.

And so it will now be in the Justice Department's hands in terms of what to release. But this is still quite a moment for President Trump, who for so long fought against the release of these files and fought against this vote in Congress to compel the Justice Department to put out what they had, in his view, that this is all a distraction.

And that's part of the reason why I think he will be very quick to get this law signed. And part of what he thinks it's distracting from is what he's doing here today, which is talking about investments that Saudi Arabia plans to make in the United States.

And you saw the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, in the Oval Office yesterday saying that he would invest $1 trillion in the U.S. He did not put a timeline on that. And I think that was probably for good reason. The Saudi sovereign wealth fund itself is only about a trillion dollars. And the kingdom at this moment is in something of a cash crunch as oil prices decline.

And so when those investments actually are realized, it is an open question, but clearly President Trump very eager to kind of take a victory lap on that front today here at the Kennedy Center.

BLITZER: And this -- he's heading over to the Kennedy Center, where you are, Kevin. What's the purpose of his speech that's upcoming?

LIPTAK: Yes, and I think what you will hear from the president today is really reiterating some of those announcements that he unveiled yesterday in the Oval Office, whether it was new partnerships on nuclear energy or his decision to sell Saudi Arabia those F-35 fighter jets.

What's happening behind me on stage right now is, you see the CEO of Nvidia, Jensen Huang, and Elon Musk, who is President Trump's sort of friend, foe, we don't know exactly, the founder of Tesla, talking about A.I. And that was a critical component of what the two men talked about in the Oval Office, as Saudi Arabia tries to move its economy away from a reliance on petrochemicals and more towards this innovative new sector.

[11:05:11]

And I think you will hear from the president today how he thinks the U.S. and Saudi Arabia can partner on that front. Obviously, that meeting in the Oval Office yesterday grew quite contentious when the president was asked about the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. He really exonerated MBS from any responsibility there, even though the CIA assessed that he likely ordered that killing.

But I think it just underscores that, at least in this Trump era, it is all about investments and financial partnerships, and civil and human rights may be taking back seat.

BLITZER: All right, Kevin Liptak over at the Kennedy Center.

We're waiting to hear from the president of the United States. We will see what he has to say on these important issues indeed. Kevin, thank you very, very much.

And still ahead: the former FBI Director James Comey still waging his multipronged legal fight to try to get his federal indictment dismissed.

BROWN: And CNN's new reporting on urgent U.S. efforts to hammer out a new peace plan with Russia.

You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:11:56]

BROWN: The nearly unanimous House vote to release the Jeffrey Epstein files took place only after the newest member of Congress, Democrat Adelita Grijalva, was sworn in, providing that final signature in the effort to sidestep Republican leaders.

Listen to what Grijalva said about that yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADELITA GRIJALVA (D-AZ): This is a demand from the nation, from people. It's not a partisan issue. So many people, regardless of political ideology, want to see what is in these files.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva of Arizona joins us now to discuss.

So, Congresswoman, thanks for being here.

You were supposed to be the deciding vote when this discharge petition went to the House floor. That changed when President Trump shifted and then came out in support of releasing the files. What do you make of the avalanche of support this got in the House and then in the Senate?

GRIJALVA: Yes, I think it really does speak to the fact that the American people want to know who is implicated and what positions of power they hold.

I mean, the fact that we had leadership here in the House, we have had the White House just doing everything they can to obstruct these files from, like -- and getting out, and then we even saw Trump in the Situation Room trying to influence another member to take their name off the list, and so I think the shift really has to do with the amount of political pressure from the communities, every community, every representative.

I heard from dozens of people saying, we -- you need to stick to your guns, don't change your mind, sign that discharge petition. I'm glad I did. And the fact that it is now -- and on its way, if not already on Trump's desk is an important step for the survivors.

BROWN: Are you concerned that there will still be roadblocks, though, for all these files to be released?

GRIJALVA: I am. I think anyone who has been paying attention to this issue and seen how this administration has tried to block this before, we have to be aware that something is coming.

And I just am waiting for that revelation to come. I think some of it might have to do with the fact that Trump is asking for an investigation. And we know that Biden wasn't able to release the files because of the Maxwell investigation. When an active investigation is happening, you tend to hold on to that information.

So I am worried about that angle, because I do think that there has not been a shift in Trump's desire to have this information out. I think that he has another way to keep it hidden.

BROWN: Then does that give it validity, though, for the DOJ to say, look, President Biden didn't release the files because of the investigation with Ghislaine Maxwell, we have got these investigations into Democrats and Epstein, we can't release the files now, regardless of there's obviously now this legislation that the president's expected to sign?

So that, of course, makes this different. But are you concerned they will use that as an excuse?

GRIJALVA: Oh, absolutely, because I think it's a pointed attack on Democrats. It's not on everyone who is implicated. It's just on Democrats.

And I think that it's that partisan rhetoric that is really not resting well with the American people. We want to know what -- who is implicated. We want justice for the survivors, and we want it now.

BROWN: I was speaking with one of your fellow Democrats, Delegate Stacey Plaskett, of the U.S. Virgin Islands on the show today. As you know, documents released last week showed that she was texting with Epstein during a 2019 House Oversight hearing where she questioned Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen.

And she told me that she was texting to -- texting him to solicit information and that they weren't friends, but she wouldn't say whether she regretted texting with a convicted sex offender at the time where it was well-known from that "Miami Herald" article that there were 80 women who said that they experienced sexual abuse because of him. Do you think that that was a mistake for her to be texting with him at

that time?

GRIJALVA: I think that what I would like to see is, if there is and there was a desire from leadership for that whole transaction to go through the Ethics Committee, and if that's the desire to have an investigation and find out really what happened, I think that is the only way that I'd be able to come up with a conclusion as to what happened and what didn't happen.

[11:15:06]

Right now, it's a lot of mud-throwing back and forth, very specifically to another Democratic colleague, and so I don't want to say what the result of that was until there is an investigation, if that's the desire.

BROWN: Right. And just to note, you did vote against this Republican attempt to censure Plaskett for her conversations with Epstein, but do you think there should be an Ethics investigation that a member of Congress, I know she's a Democratic colleague, was texting with a sexual predator in 2019?

GRIJALVA: Yes, I think it's important for us to understand what that whole transaction was.

Having been able to see just what happened with my colleague and an attempt to censure him in Chuy Garcia, I know that most of the time when you hear one little snippet of what happened, it's not the full story, and so I reserve judgment until I hear the full story.

BROWN: So then do you think there should be an investigation for the full story? She says again that this was about getting to the truth, that he was a constituent, they weren't friends, but would you like to see an investigation?

GRIJALVA: You know, I think that that's really up to Leader Jeffries, Minority Whip Clark, for them. I mean, they have access to information, and if they think that it's important enough to go to Ethics, then I would support that.

BROWN: I want to ask you about Speaker Johnson.

As you know, he ultimately voted to release the Epstein files. Before he did that, he slammed Democrats for using the matter as a political weapon, saying that it was a show vote. He says this bill doesn't protect victim privacy, claiming it doesn't have adequate protections and could create new victims.

What is your response to that? Do you share any of that concern?

GRIJALVA: I don't. I think the survivors actually went through and supported this piece of legislation. This Transparency Act is about bringing justice for the survivors and consequences for anyone who committed a crime against a child or young women. Pedophilia and rape is not something that anyone should want to keep

quiet. It's something that people need to know who's implicated there. And I'm absolutely certain that that act does provide the support and cover for victims or survivors to ensure that they're not victimized again.

BROWN: Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina has weighed in on this. Of course, he is not running for reelection. I believe we have that sound. I'd like to get your reaction to it. Let's play it. Oh, we don't have that sound.

But, basically, he is just calling on DOJ to release the files. He says: "Just" -- this is a quote: "Just release the damn files, period. I don't care about how the sausage is made. I just want it out in the open for everybody to consume." That's what he told CNN.

Are you getting that sense from Republicans that they just want this out there, so they can move on?

GRIJALVA: Absolutely.

I think everyone is in favor of that. And let's just remember that Trump has had the opportunity to release these files for months. He's been able to do that unilaterally. He didn't need a vote by the House, by the Senate. Congress didn't have to weigh in on this. If he wanted transparency, that could have happened a long time ago.

The fact that we're still sort of talking about this really speaks to the reluctance of this administration in getting this information out there.

BROWN: But what do you say to what Speaker Johnson says, that Democrats are just now calling for all of this and being so vocal and vociferous under the Trump administration and not before?

GRIJALVA: No, Trump is the one who made this a campaign strategy in saying that, on day one, he was going to come out and release all of the files.

And once he got into office and had an opportunity to look at it, and if you look at the -- just the tiny little bit of information that came out and how many times Trump is implicated in those e-mails, now we see why he's been reluctant to release that information.

BROWN: And he was named many times in the e-mails. There were also Democrats, including your colleague Representative Plaskett, as well as Larry Summers, that were in this.

And -- but, again, Republicans say, look, Democrats are just now acting like they care so much about the survivors, when they weren't doing this before. And Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted, I believe, in 2021. So there was time, right, for DOD to release the files under Biden.

Should more have been done then? GRIJALVA: You know, all I'm -- I'm walking into this right now. And

so as soon as I had the opportunity, I signed the discharge petition in order to ensure that this came out.

We're working from right this second. I do believe that Republicans are playing a lot of games and a lot of name-calling about who is responsible for what. Ultimately, let's get the information out there. Let's let people know who is implicated and have there be legal consequences for everyone, regardless of party.

[11:20:01]

I don't care who it is. If they harmed a child or young woman, they deserve to have legal consequences for it, period.

BROWN: All right, Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva, thank you so much. Quite a start you have had as a new member of Congress. We appreciate you coming on.

GRIJALVA: Thank you.

BLITZER: And, congratulations, Congresswoman, for being sworn in finally after all those days.

Also happening now, attorneys for former FBI Director James Comey, they are trying to dismiss this case brought by the Trump administration. How prosecutors are now responding.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:25:15]

BLITZER: Happening now, the former FBI Director James Comey's lawyers are in a Virginia federal court arguing that the indictment against him should be dismissed.

Comey is accused of lying during a hearing about whether he authorized leaks to the press. The judge today will look at whether Comey is being unfairly targeted for prosecution by the Trump administration.

Joining us now is the former federal prosecutor Ankush Khardori. He's also a senior writer for "Politico" magazine.

Ankush, thanks so much for joining us. Always good to have you here in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Walk us through what we're expecting from today's hearing.

ANKUSH KHARDORI, SENIOR WRITER, POLITICO: Well, look, the judge has a host of motions that he has set for a hearing this morning.

And you could expect, I think, the focus of the questioning and the judge's interest today to be on the motion that Comey's lawyers have filed alleging that he is the victim of selective and vindictive prosecution at the hands of the Trump administration, two slightly different arguments, but, effectively, that Comey was singled out as a result of animus on the part of the administration and also that he is being treated differently from other similarly situated people and he's being charged for something that other people wouldn't necessarily be charged with.

BLITZER: If the judge dismisses this case, Ankush, can the Trump administration pursue any other legal avenues against Comey?

KHARDORI: So this is something of an open question, at least by the administration's reckoning.

You would expect intuitively this case gets dismissed, the statute of limitations have already run. So you would think, OK, well, they may not have another avenue here. And I think that's probably right. However, there is a provision of law that the administration has cited that gives the Justice Department effectively another six months if an indictment has been dismissed for certain reasons.

It is very, very unclear to me that that provision is meant to apply or should apply in a situation like this one, particularly if the other judge who has a hand in this case who is handling the question of whether Lindsey Halligan was validly appointed decides to dismiss the case on those grounds.

So, yes, there are some options available, but they will also be litigated if we get there.

BLITZER: During today's hearing, one of the prosecutors said Comey was indicted simply because he lied to Congress. Is that enough to fight Comey's push to dismiss this case?

KHARDORI: It is not.

I mean, look, Comey's lawyers have produced reams of communications, public social media posts from Trump all about how he dislikes Comey and how Comey ought to be charged. The government cannot just wave away all of that evidence.

Now, I will say the standards for prevailing on a vindictive prosecution or selective prosecution defense are quite high. However, Comey has unusually strong facts. I mean, it is just not every day or really any day that you see a defendant walk into court with reams of sheets of paper being able to say, the president has been targeting me for years.

And by the way, this case was sort of jerry-rigged. They had to go get another prosecutor, fire the actual prosecutor, install a different prosecutor in order to get this over the finish line. I mean, these are unusually compelling facts.

BLITZER: How is this case, Ankush, similar to some of the other challenges we have been hearing from, for example, the New York attorney general, Letitia James, in your view?

KHARDORI: Well, so, for James, they are somewhat similar the arguments that she has made. Her lawyers have also made this argument about Halligan not being validly appointed. They have selected and vindictive prosecution arguments.

She has less of, I think, a public record available to her in order to sort of bootstrap those arguments. But they're definitely not frivolous, given the public record that does exist. She also doesn't really have the sort of the option that Comey may have to challenge a follow-on indictment on the theory that it's barred by the statute of limitations.

And she has in some ways a better argument than Comey, not to jump around here, on the question of selective prosecution, because, while Comey is being charged with lying to Congress, plenty of people are being charged -- have been charged with lying to Congress.

The type of prosecution that has been brought against James is extremely rare. And there are plenty of cases, including cases involving the president's political allies, that might have attracted similar prosecutorial attention, but have not.

So you can see, in these cases, they differ and are similar in certain respects.

BLITZER: Ankush Khardori, the former federal prosecutor, thanks, as usual, for joining us.

KHARDORI: Thank you.

BLITZER: Up next: Hundreds of Russian drones and missiles slam into Ukraine overnight, killing or hurting dozens of people, this as the White House renews efforts to try to reach some sort of peace deal.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)