Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Jack Smith Dismisses Trump's Criminal Jan 6 & Classified Docs Case; Trump: U.S. Will Charge 25 Percent Tax On Anything From Canada & Mexico; Israeli Cabinet To Vote On Ceasefire With Hezbollah In Lebanon. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired November 25, 2024 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: --and the bottom line is in the clothing industry, and what Macy's operates in, small margins mean up to a 154 could cover their entire profits from the last quarter.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: One thing I do know, expenses are hard.
ENTEN: Expenses are very hard. I have not done my expenses in two months. But I promise you, Elizabeth Hartfield, my dear boss, I am going to do them soon.
BERMAN: And let's hope, they don't make up $154 million.
ENTEN: I tend to doubt it.
BERMAN: Harry Enten, thank you very much.
The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts right now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Straight from THE SOURCE, tonight.
A sweeping announcement coming out of Mar-a-Lago just now, that will affect how much you pay for everything from food to cars. Breaking details on what Donald Trump warns is coming, on day one that he's back in office.
And the President-Elect is free and clear in both of his federal criminal cases, after the Special Counsel, Jack Smith, dropped all charges today. But will he still issue a report? And if so, what will it say?
And fallout from a story that was first reported here on CNN. One of Donald Trump's closest and most trusted advisers now under investigation by Trump's own attorneys. And Trump himself is weighing in tonight.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Both of those striking federal cases that made history against Donald Trump have now been dismissed, and the only U.S. President to ever be criminally charged is now fully reaping the benefits of winning back the White House.
Special Counsel, Jack Smith, moved to drop his charges, in the election interference and the classified documents cases, given the long-standing Justice Department policy that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted.
Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington quickly granted Jack Smith's request today. And of course, down in Florida, Judge Aileen Cannon had dismissed that documents, case over the summer, as Smith was trying to revive it, but now is no longer doing so. It may not be the last that we hear of that case, though, because others were indicted there as well.
More on that in a moment with our experts.
But tonight, Jack Smith made sure to mention this, in his filings. He said, quote, "The Government's position on the merits of the defendant's prosecution has not changed... the circumstances have." Those circumstances, of course, being Trump's reelection to office.
It's been an extraordinary turn of events since Smith first announced these indictments, which I should remind you, were handed down by grand juries made up of American citizens.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACK SMITH, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: Charging Donald J. Trump with felony violations of our national security laws as well as participating in a conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Charging Donald J. Trump with conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to disenfranchise voters, and conspiring and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding.
We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Of course, not everyone. The President-Elect, reveling in this major victory, posting, "I persevered, against all odds, and WON."
Now, Jack Smith left the door open for charges to be brought again in the future, after Trump leaves office in 2029, when he'll be 82-years- old.
My lead sources, tonight:
Elie Honig, former federal prosecutor.
And Maggie Haberman, Senior Political Correspondent for The New York Times. Elie, can we just talk about how Jack Smith did this? And was this his only option, essentially, that he had left, given Trump is promising to fire him, two seconds after taking office?
ELIE HONIG, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: It was his only option. He had to do it. He did the right thing, today.
It's important to understand why, though. It's not because of that promise to fire him. It's because, and Jack Smith said this in his motion, it's because of the DOJ policy, which goes all the way back to 1973, Watergate.
COLLINS: Which is a policy, not a law, right?
HONIG: Right. It's an internal -- exactly. That's a good point. It's not a statute. It's not passed by Congress. We don't actually know if it's right or wrong. It's just been DOJ's internal view, back from Watergate. They reevaluated it during the Clinton era, in 2000. They actually reevaluated it now. I found that interesting.
Jack Smith said in his motion today, I went back to OLC, these genius Office of Legal Counsel, these constitutional lawyers. I said, Does it apply here? And they said, Yes. I, Jack Smith, am bound by that. Hence we move to dismiss.
MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, NY TIMES: And remember, this OLC memo, opinion, advice -- whatever we're going to call it.
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: This has come up with Trump before.
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: This came up when he was President, previously. And there was the Robert Mueller investigation, and there was the question of, Will Trump be indicted in this investigation? And it was easy to lose track of this, but it was pretty clear that Mueller was very unlikely to challenge that policy, and he never did.
COLLINS: Yes. But the idea that he's saying charges could still be brought in the future. I mean, looking at that, Elie, is that at all realistic? I mean, there's certainly some people who would be hoping that that would be revived in 2029.
HONIG: No.
COLLINS: But the idea of that happening, I think, you know? And Trump could pardon himself, I don't know.
HONIG: Let's be real. That's not happening. I mean, it is only in the most theoretical, possible sense.
HABERMAN: Right. HONIG: I mean, imagine this, right? Fast forward four years. Who knows where anyone will be in four years.
[21:05:00]
You're going to have whoever wins the White House, whether it's Gretchen Whitmer or JD Vance or whoever, new A.G. is going to say, Let's revive a case that's been dismissed four years ago. That's probably statute-of-limitation-ed-out that has to do with 20 -- it is just, it is over. People are clinging to that thin read. It's not coming back.
COLLINS: But you know what's not over is what happens after this. And this is what I'm really curious to watch, when Trump does retake office.
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: Because it's how they handle this now, when they're back in power.
Dan Scavino is one of Trump's longest, most loyal aides. And he tweeted just a few moments ago about "Many people's lives were destroyed over the past 4 years since we walked out of the White House." He said, there was "A relentless barrage of knocks on the front door at home... subpoena, after subpoena, after subpoena." Over the last four years, "I have lots of questions."
HABERMAN: Well, and they all feel that way in Trump's world. I mean, I think you have to remember that it is not just the January 6 investigation, which related to a lot of people who were in the White House, and we've obviously seen the fallout of that.
Then there's the documents investigation in Florida, which related to a much smaller group of people actually, who were around Trump. But they all feel as if their lives were turned upside down, and they were, you know, they were hanging on in the hopes that he would win.
I mean, Trump was very clear with a number of people, back in 2023, when he got indicted, that, if he won, this would all go away. That's obviously what happened.
No, the Manhattan case doesn't magically go away that he was convicted in. But it's -- they're not sentencing a sitting president. We've seen that get delayed indefinitely now. And the Georgia case is a real question mark for me.
He is articulating what they all feel. What that ends up looking like, Kaitlan, I don't know, because there are civil service rules about the prosecutors who worked on these cases. And so, the question becomes, Trump can't just fire them. He doesn't have that magic power. But it is very clear that his team is talking about this.
COLLINS: Can they make their life hell, though?
HABERMAN: That's what I was about to say. And they can make it so miserable that, in the hopes that they leave, that they just go off on their own. And then if anybody is left, then they'll figure out what to do.
HONIG: Yes, I think we need to -- I need to throw a red flag here on these -- this kind of comments by Dan Scavino, and others, because we're seeing it regularly, these threats, We're going to prosecute the prosecutors, investigate the investigators.
HABERMAN: Yes, right.
HONIG: I mean, look, I have been critical of Jack Smith. I stand by all of my criticism of him. I think there were times he did things that are against DOJ principle. But if we're talking about opening a criminal investigation, there is zero evidence to justify that.
And you make a good point, Kaitlan. Even an investigation, I mean, there are safeguards that would hopefully prevent some sort of ridiculous indictment. But even an investigation can turn someone's life upside down. It's extraordinarily expensive. You get a subpoena? That's six figures to defend them.
COLLINS: But that Trump team is going to say, That's what you did to us.
HONIG: Right. And--
HABERMAN: What they say now.
HONIG: Yes, it's childlike retribution. I mean, if Trump was wrong, there -- there is an examination to be done of that.
And I have no problem with the Inspector General, DOJ's internal watchdog, doing a dive, and saying, Jack Smith stepped over the line here, here, and here. They did it to James Comey, a scathing report.
But if you're talking about opening criminal investigations? Whole different story.
COLLINS: But can we -- but that doesn't stop the Trump team. I mean, I understand that you're saying that's the norm.
HONIG: Nobody can stop them, yes.
HABERMAN: That's the point.
COLLINS: But I was thinking--
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: Then--
COLLINS: --Pam Bondi is his new pick for Attorney General.
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: And we were looking at what she said about a year ago on Fox News.
HABERMAN: It's pretty blatant, yes.
COLLINS: Well, listen -- listen to her in her own words.
HABERMAN: Yes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAM BONDI, PRESIDENTIAL-ELECT TRUMP'S PICK FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL: The Department of Justice, the prosecutors will be prosecuted, the bad ones. The investigators will be investigated. Because the Deep State, last term for President Trump, they were hiding in the shadows. But now, they have a spotlight on them, and they can all be investigated, and the house needs to be cleaned out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I mean, what does Attorney General Pam Bondi do, if she's confirmed, and the President calls her and says, I'd like you to investigate J.P. Cooney, and Molly Gaston, and these prosecutors--
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: --who are on Jack Smith's team.
HABERMAN: I think you can expect that Pam Bondi, and everybody else, who has to go through a confirmation hearing, are going to be asked by the Democratic senators about those comments. And it will be very interesting to see what she says.
I mean, to your point, there was a lot of celebration about Matt Gaetz not being in that role anymore, and with reason. Matt Gaetz was investigated by that department and has all kinds of baggage. But it's not as if the I'm-going-to-clean-this-all-out vow from Pam Bondi is especially different.
There are so many unanswered questions, Kaitlan. But if the idea is that there's lots of people around Trump in the White House who are going to try to prevent him from doing this? I think people are sorely mistaken.
HONIG: Yes, I think this Justice Department is going to look very different than the first Trump Justice Department, right?
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: Jeff Sessions recused himself off Russia, and Mueller was appointed. Nothing like that is going to happen this time though, right? Pam Bondi is not going to be taking herself off big cases.
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: There is not going to be a special counsel investigating the administration.
COLLINS: Rod Rosenstein is not walking through that door.
HONIG: Rod -- Bill Barr even, I'll say, you know? I mean, right.
HABERMAN: Will there be any special counsels at all? I mean, either -- they've spent months, talking about how terrible Jack Smith was, as a special counsel.
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: It'll be interesting to see what this looks like.
HONIG: I think--
HABERMAN: Sorry.
HONIG: --there is not going to be any special counsel in the traditional sense--
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: --of investigating the administration.
HABERMAN: Right.
[21:10:00]
HONIG: Which is what we've seen historically. My question is, will there be a special counsel go in the other way.
HABERMAN: That's my point.
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: So.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: Does any of this factor into Jack Smith's mind when he's considering writing a report? I mean, the line I keep hearing is--
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: --Well, the report won't have anything surprising or new in it.
But I still think having it together and publishing something scathing, right before Trump takes office, reminds me of, when Trump was informed about the Russia investigation right before he took office, and how that affected--
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: --the first six months of his presidency.
HONIG: Right, yes.
COLLINS: Changed the next four years of it.
HABERMAN: Yes. I mean, look, Trump is very much, as you know well, about information control. And so, the idea that there can be this information that he is not overseeing, that can get out there, in some way, is -- I am positive when he gets around to focusing on it will be an issue for him.
But what that looks like? I don't know. I mean, I do think that this is sort of related, not entirely on point-point, but it is related. The fact that the transition is not--
COLLINS: I loved that setup.
HABERMAN: Doing my best here. Stay with me, will you?
HONIG: With a full stop.
HABERMAN: The fact that the transition is at Mar-a-Lago and not in New York, like last time, half New York, half Washington. And this is not my New York bias speaking. It's that it actually, they can exist in this bubble, this sort of Halcyon bubble of, We won, we did it all, we are going to come in and we're going to -- we're going to shake things up.
And Washington is not Mar-a-Lago. And it is a very big government. And so, they are going to show up, and they're going to want to do things a certain way. And he's going to want to control information, and function in the way that he prefers functioning. And that will still be a challenge for him.
COLLINS: Can I ask you? Because we interviewed a witness in the classified documents case here, who was just -- he wasn't a whistleblower. He just was there and witnessed it and was brought in by investigators--
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: --and questioned, and talked about what he saw. Had worked for Trump for a very long time, he's very loyal, Brian Butler. The -- he was very good friends with Carlos, who was also indicted in this case.
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: Carlos. And Walt, Trump's close aide, who I presume, will be following him into the White House.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: He never leaves his side, essentially.
Jack Smith made it sound like that case can still go forward against the two of them, who have been -- who are his co-defendants. Can that happen? What does that look like? Could Trump just -- I mean--
HONIG: Yes. COLLINS: --who's prosecuting that case?
HONIG: A 100 percent it can go forward, until Donald Trump issues a pardon at 12:04 p.m., on January 20th, when he gets inaugurated.
Yes, I mean, I thought that was actually an interesting decision by Jack Smith today. He could have said, Whole thing's over. We're done. Instead, he said, Look, Trump's the president. He's got to come out of the case. But the other two, Nauta and De Oliveira, he said, We're going to continue. But I think that's just a formality. I don't see any universe in which--
HABERMAN: I agree.
HONIG: --Donald Trump allows that to go forward.
COLLINS: It's a president thing.
HONIG: It's just a--
HABERMAN: You can say it -- better than I can.
HONIG: --raw use of the pardon power thing.
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: Elie Honig. Maggie Haberman. Great to have you both here.
HONIG: Thanks.
COLLINS: We'll be back in a moment.
Also breaking tonight, President-Elect Trump has just threatened to impose sweeping tariffs on Canada and Mexico, additional ones on China, saying he's going to carry through on one of his biggest threats of the campaign.
And also tonight, a CNN Exclusive, why some of Trump's attorneys are investigating one of Trump's attorneys?
[21:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Breaking news, this hour, as President-Elect Trump has just announced that starting on day one of his administration, he'll charge Mexico and Canada, a 25 percent tax for all products coming into the United States, "ALL" in caps there.
That could raise costs for Americans on everything coming across either border. We're talking about cars, electronics, oil, wood, food, avocados, maple syrup. Trump says it's to force the U.S.'s closest neighbors, to take action on illegal immigration and crime and drugs. But he's not stopping there. After that, just a few moments later, he also posted this on Truth Social, saying the United States will charge an additional 10 percent tariff on all of China's many products coming into the U.S. Of course, those many products include everything. Smartphones, computers, washing machines, toys, video game consoles.
My team of political and economic sources join me now.
And Rana, just on the Mexico and Canada aspect, 51 percent of all fresh fruit, 69 percent of vegetables, according to the USDA, come from Mexico.
RANA FOROOHAR, CNN GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYST, GLOBAL BUSINESS COLUMNIST & ASSOCIATE EDITOR, FINANCIAL TIMES: Yes.
COLLINS: These are voters who just put Trump in office because they trusted him more on the economy. How should they be reading a promise like that from Trump tonight?
FOROOHAR: Oh man. Well, I was always astounded. I have to say that he ran on, I'm going to lower inflation. When, if you look at the policies, tariffs included, it's all about raising inflation, right? And it's also raising the dollar, which is going to have a larger impact in the market.
I want to just say, though, I think this is an opening gambit. I don't want to say that, All right, this is going to be the way it's going to be from day one. Trump says a lot of things.
COLLINS: You think he's bluffing?
FOROOHAR: I think that -- I think that what's happening fundamentally now, that's different under this President, is that the U.S. market will be used as a chit on a gambling table, that is the global economy. I mean, that is -- that is the way you have to look at it. We are not in trade as usual. We are not in the economy that we've known, frankly, for the last 40 years or so. It's going to be totally different.
COLLINS: I mean, Alyssa, you worked for Trump, as his communications director in the White House. I mean, there are moments, where Trump says he's going to do something and backs down. He did it in his last time, in office. He definitely put tariffs on. But there were certain ones where advisers could talk him out of that.
What does that look like in round two?
[21:20:00]
ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, Donald Trump has basically two core policy beliefs. He believes the border should be secure, and he believes in tariffs, even when his economic advisers have, at times, recommended strongly against them in the previous administration. This is something he ran on, and was vocal about, and I'm not surprised that this is one of the first things that he's announcing, despite warnings from fellow Republicans who have said, This is actually just going to increase the cost of goods on everything. A lot of folks are calling it an Amazon tax. Anything that you're buying, that is coming from China, you're going to pay a lot more for.
There will be advisers around him. I'll be curious to see how his incoming Treasury secretary wants to react to this.
Steve Mnuchin, in the first administration, was somebody who often pushed back on some of the efforts to put in place, bigger tariffs.
But you have people like Peter Navarro, who is in his ear, saying, This is the way to hold Mexico, China and other places accountable.
COLLINS: And he's expected to get a top job, Peter Navarro.
But speaking of his Treasury secretary pick, Scott Bessent, who we were just talking about--
FOROOHAR: Yes, yes, yes.
FARAH GRIFFIN: Yes.
COLLINS: --here on Friday. He did a CNBC interview, right after the election, and was talking about tariffs. And this is what he said about the effectiveness of how they're implemented.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, TRUMP'S PICK FOR TREASURY SECRETARY: I would recommend that tariffs be layered in gradually, which would the -- the price adjustment would be over a period of time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And S.E., when you hear that -- I want to get both your thoughts on this. But when you hear that, congressional Republicans, or business Republicans, who, like Trump, have said for a long time, these -- it's a threat. He's threatening this, to stop fentanyl coming across the border, to stop illegal immigration.
The question is, what does it look like in January, if he actually does have to put these on?
S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Bad.
Remember there -- there was a thing, long time ago. It was called a fiscal conservative. Do you remember what that was?
FOROOHAR: Yes.
FARAH GRIFFIN: Family.
CUPP: I do. It was good times. It was good times. And that was-- FOROOHAR: They're fixed in the Midwest though.
CUPP: A few are still around. But for us, that meant lowering the debt and the deficit. That meant anti-inflationary economic policy. And foundational to that was anti-protectionism, and that means opposing tariffs. And that's for a century. That's not new. That was bedrock to the right.
And that's why you're still seeing some Republicans and some conservatives, like the Club for Growth, and National Review, write column after column, begging Trump to abandon this, and even to stop talking like this, because even the threat triggers a trade war. No one wins a trade war. That's just, we know that.
And to your point, I talked to voters for six months. The main thing they wanted was for Trump to lower the cost of goods. The exact opposite is the first thing he's going to do when he gets into office, if he follows through with this.
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: And Kaitlan, you got to know, this is a dynamic process.
FOROOHAR: Yes.
SIMMONS: People aren't just going to sit back and say, Oh, wow, you raised our tariffs. We're going to sit here and let it happen. They will then respond in some way.
And so, these are three of our largest trading partners that are out there. So we just think about our exports. I just wrote it down. We export $427 billion to Canada. We export another $362 billion of goods to Mexico, and another $200 billion of goods to China.
And you know one of the things we export to China? Soybeans. And you know where soybeans are grown? Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, all states that voted for Donald Trump. So, he's supposed to be representing these voters, and he may, in fact, be putting them in a position, where they're going to have a harder time selling their products, and it's going to cost us money.
COLLINS: What about oil?
FOROOHAR: Yes.
COLLINS: I mean, the U.S. imports 4.3 million dollars -- million barrels of oil a day from Canada.
FOROOHAR: Yes.
COLLINS: What does that look like when there's a 25 percent tariff on that for people who rely on that?
FOROOHAR: Well, not good. And food and fuel hits the lower 25 percent of the sort of socioeconomic ladder, hardest of the working people, that many of them that voted for Trump are going to get hit.
But I want to say two things. I think, again, we have to think about this as a bargain--
FARAH GRIFFIN: Yes.
FOROOHAR: --as a game that Trump is playing. And not to justify tariffs--
COLLINS: And voters trust Trump on this. I mean, that's--
FOROOHAR: We do. Yes, right.
COLLINS: I mean, the numbers overwhelmingly showed that.
FOROOHAR: A 100 percent. And I think that they are aware that we are in a new world where, you know -- yes, there used to be, when everybody was coming together in the kind of Anglo-American-style capitalism, and that was one thing to have, trickle down, low deficit and debt.
Now you're competing against China. You're competing against countries that have fundamentally different economic systems.
And not a huge fan of tariffs, but I do think that they are one tool in the toolbox that can be deployed in strategic ways. You saw Biden do it, too. So this is not just a Republican--
FARAH GRIFFIN: Well, and how he's messaging it -- how he's messaging it matters.
FOROOHAR: Yes.
FARAH GRIFFIN: So, he's kind of framing this as, We're doing it because we're having fentanyl come over the border.
FOROOHAR: Yes, which is a thing.
FARAH GRIFFIN: We're having the legal flow of people in the country. And those are real issues--
FOROOHAR: Yes.
FARAH GRIFFIN: --that voters said that they cared about.
FOROOHAR: Yes.
FARAH GRIFFIN: And I think this is also getting ahead of if he does go forward with this mass deportations that he's talking about? We're not talking about Obama numbers of like 2 million people. You're talking 10 million people. That impacts the agriculture sector, that impacts the hospitality sector, there's major economic impacts. And I think this gives him some cover, when people start realizing the downside of also his immigration policies.
COLLINS: Yes, or when the tariffs are put in place in guacamoles.
FARAH GRIFFIN: I mean--
COLLINS: Really extra--
FARAH GRIFFIN: Anything but--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Really extra Chipotle.
FOROOHAR: Yes, exactly, portion smaller.
CUPP: Well.
[21:25:00]
COLLINS: Everyone, thank you for that. Stand by.
Up next, as I mentioned at the top, this is something to note, a CNN Exclusive today, as one of Trump's longest, and closest aides that you often see by his side, is under investigation by Trump's own attorneys in a possible pay-for-play scandal. That reporting, after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, as CNN was first to report earlier, one of the most influential figures at Mar-a-Lago, and a power player who often has President-Elect Trump's ear, is now under investigation by Trump's own attorneys.
[21:30:00]
Multiple sources say that Boris Epshteyn tried to make money off of his influence with the President-Elect, and accuse him of asking potential Trump picks for top jobs, for money, in exchange for him then pushing for them to get jobs or playing matchmaker with other people who are getting jobs in the administration. In one instance, CNN is told he is accused of wanting as much as $100,000 per month.
Now, I should note, this investigation that we're talking about here is not criminal in nature. It's being done internally in Trump's orbit.
Epshteyn, I should note, is currently facing charges in the Arizona fake electors scheme. His connections to Trump have been very documented in other cases. If you'll remember, looking through all those briefings, he popped up as Individual 3, Individual A, and in one of the now-dropped cases we were just talking about, he was Person number 5. In another, his email traffic matched that of Co-conspirator number 6. You see just how close he is to Trump.
And in a statement tonight, he tells us, quote, "I am honored to work for President Trump and with his team." And "These fake claims are false and defamatory."
Maggie and Elie are back with me.
Maggie, let me just start with you. Because, I mean, obviously this had been kind of a rumor that was going around for in Trump-world. Now, though it's under investigation by Trump's own attorneys, I think the question is, what does that look like?
HABERMAN: Well, Trump ordered his attorneys to look into this, because he was getting told, according to our reporting, by several people who he trusts, that this kind of influence peddling, alleged influence peddling, was going on. He ordered Dave Warrington, who was essentially the campaign's General Counsel, to look into it.
Warrington has, over the course of the last couple of days, we are told, and produced some kind of report that explained in detail, two instances, we are told, according to people who have seen it, where Epshteyn did this. One of which was allegedly with Scott Bessent, who was Trump's pick for Treasury secretary.
And Treasury Secretary, as you know, was the messiest fight for who was going to get the job, in a Trump-world that has seen an awful lot of knife-fighting lately, since the election.
Now what ends up happening after that? The recommendation was that he should not be allowed around Trump essentially that, I think -- I think the language as described to us was that his access to Trump should be, quote-unquote, terminated. Whether that ends up happening remains to be seen.
As you said, Epshteyn has denied that this is the case.
It's up to Trump. Trump has a long history of getting irritated, when people make money off of him, as he would put it. Epshteyn has worked for a number of Republican candidates, in 2022, despite having pretty limited political experience of his own, one of whom was open with The New York Times, in 2023, that he was hiring him because he thought that he had good relationships around Trump.
So whether this ends up mattering, I don't know. I certainly imagine it's going to make it harder for Epshteyn to get people to hire him right now.
COLLINS: Yes, it was that Don Bolduc from -- when he was running in New Hampshire. I think he was on the record with CBS today, saying that, yes, he did pay him money. Trump said part in that statement--
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: Well, actually, let me read the Trump comments tonight, because--
HONIG: Sure.
HABERMAN: Ours was Carl Paladino, just to be clear.
COLLINS: OK.
HABERMAN: It was a different candidate and time, yes. COLLINS: Well, so, Don Bolduc is going--
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: --on the record tonight.
And Trump, we have his comments, where he was saying, essentially, people making -- he said, I suppose, quote, "Every president has people around them"--
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: --"who try to make money off them on the outside. It's a shame, but it happens. But no one working for me in any capacity should be looking to make money. They should" be here only "to Make America Great Again."
HABERMAN: Well just--
COLLINS: I want to give to you, Elie, on this.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: But like, when you see those comments, what do you read into that--
(CROSSTALK)
HABERMAN: Well, what I read into it is that Trump is sending a warning.
But you'll also notice that he didn't name Epshteyn. And you'll also notice that the person who he gave that comment to was John Solomon, who is a conservative writer who was also, was Trump's representative engaging with the National Archives, back in 2022. So this is not what the Trump team would often call fake news. This is somebody who Trump really trusts and talks to. And I think that that is significant.
But what it ends -- almost no one is ever fully dead in Trump-world. Kaitlan, you know this. I mean, we, I think in 2021, I think it was, that we were all informed, or maybe 2022 that Corey Lewandowski was out of Trump-world. That was the actual quote. Corey Lewandowski is very close to one of the Trump appointees for DHS, Kristi Noem, so, and he's been seen around as she is talking to people for, to staff her own cabinets.
So, who knows what this means. And also, who's going to -- who would investigate these allegations, at this point? The Trump DOJ? I mean--
HONIG: Yes--
HABERMAN: --it just -- it's--
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: It's complicating. COLLINS: That's a great question.
HONIG: We're going to be asked that question a lot, the next four years.
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: Who is going to do anything about this? And I think the answer a lot of times is going to be, Nobody.
COLLINS: Is this illegal, by the way?
HONIG: So -- that's exactly where I was going
HABERMAN: Right. And to be clear.
HONIG: Yes.
HABERMAN: I'm not saying it is. I'm saying that--
COLLINS: Right.
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: But is it?
HABERMAN: -- somebody's going to suggest that--
HONIG: Probably not.
HABERMAN: Yes.
HONIG: And Donald Trump's quote that you showed, where he says--
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: --Everyone has people around them trying to profiteer off of access?
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: He's right, and--
HABERMAN: Including him, a lot of other people who make money around him.
HONIG: Yes, true.
HABERMAN: Yes.
HONIG: I mean--
COLLINS: Yes, but I remember a little bit of a kerfuffle that they were upset when they were accusing Hunter Biden of doing this?
HONIG: Exactly. So-- COLLINS: I don't know if you remember that.
[21:35:00]
HONIG: --fortunately, for a lot of people, including Boris Epshteyn, including Hunter Biden--
HABERMAN: Yes.
HONIG: --influence peddling is not a crime. And the Supreme Court made sure we knew that.
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: About 10 years ago, there was a case--
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: --brought against the then-Governor of Virginia, actually, fun fact, brought by Jack Smith--
HABERMAN: Jack Smith. That's right.
HONIG: --at the time.
HABERMAN: That's right.
COLLINS: I can't--
HONIG: That -- I mean, of course, it all comes full circle.
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: And the Supreme Court, this was not a partisan or ideological decision. Nine-zero -- I think it was eight-zero. I think there was a vacancy. But unanimously, Ruth Bader Ginsburg--
HABERMAN: Yes.
HONIG: --agreed with (inaudible) phone calls and meetings (inaudible) the federal (inaudible) criminal law. So look, I mean, if Boris Epshteyn is taking money from people on the promise of access? He would not be the first.
HABERMAN: Well, and one other thing too, that I just want to make a point, and what I was saying about how nobody's ever really dead.
Trump credits Epshteyn with helping keep him out of legal trouble. Epshteyn assembled -- yes, he is under indictment himself in Arizona. He also assembled the legal team around Trump. He advocated this strategy of delay, delay, delay that they used, that ended up pretty successful, because the federal cases didn't go to trial. One of the indictments was dismissed. He was not sentenced before Election Day, which was a huge deal.
COLLINS: Yes. HABERMAN: And that means a lot to Trump, too.
COLLINS: And you know what I was also thinking about, is Trump had this very small circle around him--
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: --after he left office.
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: It shrunk so much to where, as you reported, he was surprised there were no reporters waiting to--
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: --to follow him around like.
HABERMAN: Yes. Where's the pool? Yes.
COLLINS: But Boris Epshteyn is someone who was there.
HABERMAN: Totally.
COLLINS: Who was always around him, and kind of never strayed from Trump's orbit--
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: --like a lot of people did.
HABERMAN: That's right.
COLLINS: And I wonder how that factors into how he thinks about something like this.
HABERMAN: I think that's a big piece of it. He is one of a small group of people, who didn't -- didn't, in Trump's mind, abandon him, I mean, when he was really at his lowest point, and he was something of an outcast in political circles, certainly, at least outside of the Republican base, and he was kicked off Twitter, he was off Facebook. You can go on and on and on.
And so Trump really values the people who have stayed with him when he was down.
HONIG: I wonder if you both think, like, what is his role going to be, in this White House? I mean, Trump--
HABERMAN: I don't think he will have a role, quite honestly.
HONIG: Maybe none. But could he have a Michael -- pre-flipping Michael Cohen-like role?
HABERMAN: Well that is--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Can I--
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: Can I quickly play--
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: --Eric Trump tonight? Because Eric Trump was asked about this on Fox, just a few moments ago. And you always have to read between the lines. But his answer, I thought, was interesting.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIC TRUMP, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, TRUMP ORGANIZATION: I've known Boris for years, and I've never known him to be anything but a -- but a good human being. So that said, I will tell you, my father has been incredibly clear, You do not, you do not do that, and under any circumstance.
I certainly hope the reporting is false. And I can also tell you, if it's true, you know, the person will probably no longer be around.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HABERMAN: Well, that's actually not very--
HONIG: There you go.
HABERMAN: That's not subtle. So, I mean, it was--
COLLINS: Right?
HABERMAN: It was -- it was--
COLLINS: That was my reaction to hearing that.
HABERMAN: Yes, it was gentle about -- about Boris Epshteyn. But it's -- it's a warning. I interpret that as warning shot.
HONIG: Yes, that's a red line.
HABERMAN: Yes.
HONIG: I mean, again, Michael Cohen sort of had a falling out over that too.
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: And Donald Trump didn't want him profiting. He ended up--
HABERMAN: Right.
HONIG: Michael Cohen ended up stealing from Donald Trump. They came out in the trial, but. HABERMAN: Michael Cohen had a problem because he was under investigation and talking to people who were investigating Trump.
HONIG: That too.
HABERMAN: That's--
HONIG: That too.
HABERMAN: That was the--
HONIG: Right.
HABERMAN: That was the falling out.
HONIG: It seems like one sure way to get yourself drummed out though.
HABERMAN: Yes.
COLLINS: We'll see what happens.
Elie Honig. Maggie. Great conversations.
HABERMAN: Sure.
COLLINS: Thank you both for being here.
Up next, here on CNN, major news coming out of the Middle East, as Israel could be on the verge of a ceasefire deal in Lebanon. The question is, could it happen and is it going to happen in just hours?
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Right now, we are just hours away from the Israeli cabinet voting on a U.S.-backed ceasefire deal with Lebanon, where more than 3,000 people have been killed since Israel launched a ground invasion there, in mid-September. That came after months of back to -- back- and-forth border attacks between Hezbollah and Israel, with Hezbollah launching rockets at Israel for months, in solidarity with Hamas.
Tonight, even as the two are continuing to trade fire, the White House is advising, quote, We are close to a deal. Something that, of course, cannot be said of the war in Gaza, where more than 43,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to the Ministry of Health there.
My source tonight is Barak Ravid, CNN's Political and Foreign Policy Analyst, and a Global Affairs Correspondent for Axios, and one of the best-sourced reporters in the Middle East.
And so Barak, when you look at this, right now, as we're hours away, what seem to be the sticking points in this deal?
BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL & FOREIGN POLICY ANALYST, GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: Good night, Kaitlan. Honestly, I don't think there are any sticking points. I think there's a deal. It's done, basically. That's what I hear from both U.S. and Israeli officials. You hear the same from some Lebanese officials, who are saying it on the record to the Lebanese press.
And I think we're all waiting for the Israeli security cabinet to vote on it, tomorrow morning, Eastern Time, the afternoon, local time. And once the Israeli cabinet approves, and there's no reason to think they won't, I think shortly after, we'll see an announcement of President Biden about the ceasefire.
COLLINS: But what kind of response is it getting among the cabinet? Because one of the most far-right members of it, the National Security Minister, Ben-Gvir, called it a big mistake. And how is Netanyahu -- Prime Minister Netanyahu approaching this?
RAVID: Well, Ben-Gvir would be against any deal unless it says that he's becoming the Prime Minister. So, you know that's not a -- yes, that's not a big surprise. It's the default for him to be -- to be against anything.
[21:45:00]
But what's interesting is that Ben-Gvir, unlike, for example, the hostage deal in Gaza, did not threaten to leave the government. And I think that says a lot. His other far-right ally, Bezalel Smotrich, didn't even say that he's against the deal. So, I think that at the end of the day, you see that the vast majority of the members of the cabinet are in favor.
And even though, by the way, this deal is not popular at all among -- in Bibi Netanyahu's political base, the majority of his voters are against this deal. But he's going to push it anyway, and there's no reason to think it's not going to pass in the cabinet.
COLLINS: On the region, just overall as obviously, it is an incredibly tumultuous time, what's been happening there? We're two months out from a change of power, here in the U.S., with Trump taking office. What are the expectations that you've heard, both from Israelis, but also just in the broader region, about what that means for all of these key decisions that are being made?
RAVID: So, I think, Kaitlin, in the broader region, you see very clearly how everyone got the message that Donald Trump is the next president.
End everyone are recalculating their moves. From Iran that has sort of like, I think, recalculated, or is reviewing whether to respond to the latest -- to the recent Israeli attack, and it seems that it's not going to do anything. To the Palestinian Authority that decided to open a new page with Donald Trump, to the Israeli government, to others in the region.
So, I think everyone are looking at Donald Trump and are taking their -- making their decisions accordingly. COLLINS: Yes. And given that, Trump has named Mike Huckabee, the former Governor of Arkansas, to be his Ambassador to Israel. He's close to Netanyahu. We've seen him there. He's backed ideas that Netanyahu has pushed annexing parts of the occupied West Bank.
I want you to listen to something he said, in 2008.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE HUCKABEE, PRESIDENTIAL-ELECT TRUMP'S PICK FOR U.S. AMBASSADOR TO ISRAEL: Basically, there really is no such thing as -- I need to be careful saying this, because people will really get upset -- There's really no such thing as a Palestinian.
You have Arabs and Persians. You don't have -- And there's such complexity in that. But there's really no such thing. That's been a political tool to try to force land away from Israel.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Calling it a political tool to try to force land from Israel. I mean, I wonder, if he gets confirmed, what that -- what that impact has on this?
RAVID: Well, honestly, Kaitlan, I don't think it's going to have any impact. Because last I checked, Donald Trump, when he was president, proposed a peace plan that included the establishment of a Palestinian state with a capital in parts of East Jerusalem. So, I guess, Donald Trump thinks that there is such a thing as Palestinian people, and it's not just a political trick against Israel.
So, I think Ambassador-to-be Mike Huckabee, and you already said it, by the way, he's not going to set the policy. He's going to implement the policy.
And as far as I know, and I heard it from numerous sources, Donald Trump hasn't changed his mind about the two-state solution. Donald Trump hasn't changed his mind about his aspiration to get the deal of the century. And Donald Trump definitely hasn't changed his mind about him wanting to get a historic peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel.
If that's all true, then I think Mike Huckabee will have a problem in implementing what he believes.
COLLINS: Great points. Barak Ravid, as always, thank you.
RAVID: Thank you.
COLLINS: Up next. She has been leading the anti-transgender bathroom crusade in Congress and online. But Republican congresswoman Nancy Mace wasn't always saying that, actually, just last year. We'll tell you what CNN's KFILE has uncovered tonight.
[21:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: As recently as last year, Congresswoman Nancy Mace referred to herself as, quote, "Pro-transgender rights," and said that she supported children exploring their identities by changing pronouns, hairstyles or clothing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY MACE (R-SC): Well, I'm pro-transgender rights, I'm pro- LGBTQ. Just don't go to the extreme with our kids. Our kids should--
MAJOR GARRETT, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, CBS NEWS: Define extremism there for me.
MACE: Well, sex change surgery, the hormone blockers that sterilize our children. We shouldn't be doing that when a child is pre-pubescent or going through puberty. Let that child go through the natural process of life, and let them make that permanent decision when they're older.
Now, if they want to take on a different pronoun or a different gender identity, or grow their hair out, or wear a dress, or wear pants, or do those things as a minor, those are all things that I think most people would support. Be who you want to be. But don't make those permanent changes when it's a child. I mean, that's just abusive.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Those remarks, uncovered by CNN's KFILE, and they stand in stark contrast to what we've been hearing lately, and what Nancy Mace has been doing. Continuing to target the first openly transgender person who was just elected to Congress, two weeks ago.
[21:55:00]
In addition to posting about it nearly non-stop online, Mace introduced that resolution, last week, to block transgender women from using the women's restrooms at the Capitol, which was then followed up on by House Speaker Mike Johnson, implementing just that.
Back with me now, Alyssa Farah Griffin, and S.E. Cupp.
And S.E., does what Nancy Mace is saying there contradict what she is doing now?
CUPP: Well, listen, that first argument is fine. I think what she was doing was leading with compassion on an issue that is very emotional for a lot of people. And I think the point she was making there is a popular one.
What she has done now -- and you can have within that, that same framework of trans rights, you can say, Well, this, I think, is fair, and this is unfair, maybe to our girls in sports, for example. You could say that. There are a lot of policy issues to discuss in this bucket of trans rights. The problem is Nancy Mace got -- went crazy. I mean, this is deranged. To do 326 tweets in 72 hours is deranged. That's not normal. And it's performative. The second, one trans woman gets into Congress, and it's completely performative, because she will have her own private bathroom in her congressional office.
FARAH GRIFFIN: Right.
CUPP: They all do.
FARAH GRIFFIN: Every member office has a private bathroom--
CUPP: Right.
FARAH GRIFFIN: --for the member of Congress.
CUPP: So, this is cruel, and it's to be punitive, and it's to be on display being punitive -- punitive.
And it doesn't have to be that way. Like I said, you could have a very good policy conversation about these complicated issues.
COLLINS: Yes.
CUPP: This is not it.
COLLINS: Well, it's--
CUPP: This is just gross.
COLLINS: Sarah McBride is -- was just elected, and is now -- this is what she's being asked about repeatedly. And, for her account, she's basically said, I'm focusing on the work. This is a distraction, I'm not -- you know, she's not trying to, like, get into the Nancy Mace tit-for-tat.
FARAH GRIFFIN: So, I interviewed her recently. And when she ran, she ran, is like a centrist Democrat focusing on pocketbook issues, for the voters of Delaware. And she actually explicitly said, I'm not running to be a spokesperson for any movement, to be a spokesperson of the transgender movement, for example.
And Nancy Mace seems to keep trying to goad her into a fight that she is not trying to have, and she's ignored it at every opportunity that has come up. And this is classic Nancy Mace. She's been on every side of every issue. She was for Donald Trump. She was against Donald Trump. She's back to being for Donald Trump.
She was -- had a, what I think was, a nuance, probably at least 50 percent of this country agrees with what she said in 2023, on trans issues. And there are legitimate issues voters care about, like trans women in sports. This is such a small issue that only even affects people in the Capitol, and really, just one person there.
CUPP: It really doesn't.
FARAH GRIFFIN: It really doesn't affect.
CUPP: It really doesn't.
FARAH GRIFFIN: It's so -- it would be -- and this notion of victimhood, and this that, like, you can't be in a bathroom with somebody who's trans, it's just it's insulting to the community. And I don't think most Americans actually feel that way.
COLLINS: Well, and listen to what she was articulating there in that conversation with Major Garrett of CBS. And having that, saying you can do this, but here's kind of where I draw the line.
And I mean, look at her website now. And just to warn people, before we show these images. There are T-shirts that say things, Come and take it. The other one says, No balls in our stalls. They have her name right underneath it.
I mean, she's not -- you know, you talked about how many times she's been posting online. And she's also selling merch off of it.
CUPP: Remember when Matt Gaetz stormed the SCIF?
FARAH GRIFFIN: Right, yes.
CUPP: Remember that? Matt Gaetz stormed the SCIF. He was invited, like, There was no need to storm the SCIF.
But like, the performative aspect of today's Republican House is so unserious, and it is so for celebrity and to be famous. That's why she's got her name under this really dumb, stupid T-shirt slogan.
This is not why people elected you, to do this performative BS. They want you to solve their problems. Sarah McBride, using her own bathroom, or some--
FARAH GRIFFIN: Yes.
CUPP: --or one of the unisex bathrooms in the Congress, is not one of people's problems.
FARAH GRIFFIN: I could--
COLLINS: Well can we listen to Sarah McBride, just really quickly? Because you mentioned talking to her. She also just did an interview with "Face the Nation." And listen to what she said there.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARAH MCBRIDE (D), U.S. REPRESENTATIVE-ELECT: Every single time we hear the incoming administration, or Republicans in Congress, talk about any vulnerable group in this country, we have to be clear that it is an attempt to distract.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FARAH GRIFFIN: Yes, I think she's trying to refocus the conversation. COLLINS: But it might work, I mean.
FARAH GRIFFIN: I mean, of course, Nancy Mace already has merch. That's the most predictable thing. And to be honest, if anyone, any adult, tweets about one topic, 300 times in one day, someone should do a wellness check. Like that's just--
CUPP: Deranged.
FARAH GRIFFIN: --that's not normal behavior of somebody.
CUPP: Yes.
FARAH GRIFFIN: But there is something to just simply distracting and not focusing on the issues. She was asked by Liz Landers in an interview, Nancy Mace, Why aren't you talking about Boeing taking jobs out of South Carolina? She didn't have an answer for it. She hadn't communicated with Boeing or her constituents at the time on that.
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: She hadn't posted about it, as Liz pointed out.
FARAH GRIFFIN: She -- yes. And instead--
CUPP: It's crazy.
FARAH GRIFFIN: --she posted 300 times about a bathroom issue that really doesn't affect anyone.
CUPP: Crazy.
COLLINS: Final thought? It's crazy?
[22:00:00]
CUPP: Listen, well, listen, some of this is on voters, because we keep electing the Marjorie Taylor Greenes, and the Matt Gaetzes.
COLLINS: Yes.
CUPP: Do we want better? We can have it.
COLLINS: S.E. Cupp. Alyssa. Great to have you both. We'll end it there.
Thank you all so much for joining us, on this Monday night. I'll see you here, tomorrow.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT" is up next.
