The following is a lightly edited transcript of the July 29 episode of the
Daily Blast podcast. Listen to it here.
Greg Sargent: This is The Daily Blast from The New Republic, produced and presented by the DSR network. I’m your host, Greg Sargent.
Speaking to reporters from abroad, President Trump rambled at his greatest length yet about the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. But his argument actually undermined itself. He claimed to know about elite Democrats and liberals who had gone to visit Epstein. But all that does is raise the question that won’t go away: If this is what the Epstein files would actually reveal, then why isn’t Donald Trump ordering their release? What makes this all worse for Trump right now is that Elon Musk just came out and attacked Trump on a real point of vulnerability in this whole scandal. All of which confirms that none of this is sustainable for Trump. Jennifer Rubin, editor in chief of The Contrarian, recently wrote a good piece laying out why Trump should be panicking over this scandal. And everything we’ve been seeing underscores that point, so we’re talking to Jen about all this today. Good to have you on, Jen.
Jennifer Rubin: Nice to be here.
Sargent: So a quick reminder on the latest, Trump’s Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has now twice interviewed Epstein’s accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, who’s doing time for sex trafficking. This raises the possibility that Blanche, who was Trump’s personal attorney, is trying to get Maxwell to exonerate Trump. Maxwell would then possibly get a pardon from Trump in return. We don’t know if that’s the game, but it’s possible. OK, with that in mind, listen to Trump talking to reporters about this whole mess.
Donald Trump (audio voiceover): And by the way, I never went to the island, and Bill Clinton went there supposedly 28 times. I never went to the island, but [former Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers, I hear, went there. He was the head of Harvard. And many other people that are very big people, nobody ever talks about them. I never had the privilege of going to his island, and I did turn it down, but a lot of people in Palm Beach were invited to his island. In one of my very good moments, I turned it down. I didn’t want to go to his island.
Sargent: Epstein Island is, of course, his compound. Jen, what do you make of what Trump said there?
Rubin: It’s really unbelievable. I want to go back to something that we shouldn’t lose sight of. The number two man in the Justice Department, Trump’s personal lawyer, went to go see Maxwell in prison. There is no universe in which that is acceptable. There’s no purpose for it. If they wanted to get more information or they wanted to discuss some aspect of her case, the line prosecutor would be the person to do it. The only purpose of sending Todd Blanche there would be something nefarious, which is exactly why I believe he was sent there. So we say it and we know it’s wrong, but we just want to never forget how utterly corrupt, how utterly inappropriate this entire thing is.
So you’re right in that it’s not just Trump. Sometimes we in the media shorthand this. And of course we want to know what’s in there about Trump. But we want to know who’s in it, whoever is in it. We want to know what powerful people, what famous people, and [what] other people knew about this, profited from it, contributed to it, enabled it, or were themselves participants. And of course, Maxwell herself was a participant. And all of this hullabaloo about how she is just convicted of the trafficking—she was an abuser herself. That’s what the witness is. That’s what the victims tell us. So the notion that number one, we should have this high-ranking person in the Justice Department chitchatting with her in prison. Number two, that we should be quiet and take Trump’s word for it that he is not in it. And even if he’s not in it, we should be content. And third of all, that somehow she is a victim in all this just blows my mind.
Sargent: Well, it’s just so unbelievably absurd that Trump is trying this. I really think it’s sometimes worth stepping back and stating the obvious about the Epstein files, which, to clarify, are the bulk of material that law enforcement gathered in the process of investigating Epstein’s sex trafficking, Trump is saying two things about this whole scandal. First, that the Epstein files are a dem hoax, that they’re actually filled with dirt on elite Democrats. And second, he won’t release the Epstein files. Now Jen, if the first were true, he would release them. It astounds me that Trump presses ahead with this nonsensical argument, which actually refutes itself and is damning to him. And we again saw it with that rambling quote.
Rubin: What’s more, we know a lot, not all that’s in this, which has already identified him as having been on the plane, having attended functions with Epstein. Julie Brown, the great investigative reporter who I know you have talked to, who originally began digging into this at the time of the original sweetheart deal—pardon the expression—back in 2007, 2008, has documented enormous categories of documents, some of which we have seen. We don’t have a client list, but we have his phone directory, which lists all election people, including Donald Trump. We also know that there are categories of documents out there that we have yet to see: Maxwell’s trial records, a settlement in the U.S. Virgin Islands, a civil suit that was brought against the estate, records from Epstein’s plane that are in the possession of the FAA and the U.S. Marshals. I could go on and on. There is no justification for keeping any of this secret. While Epstein was alive, or while there was an ongoing investigation, of course you can understand the need for secrecy. And this other bullshit argument that we have to protect the victims. Suddenly, Trump is all about the victims. Right. These names can be, of course, blacked out—of course not revealed.
But what he is protecting are the men who were involved, are the names of those people. We have lots of questions. How is all of this financed? Where was the money going? Are there in video tapes of any of this? A host of really important questions. And when people say, Well, bad stuff might come out about the Democrats, fine, let them out.
Sargent: Yes.
Rubin: If there’s bad stuff about Bill Clinton or anybody else, I don’t care. It should all come out. And this notion that suddenly, the Trump people have finally figured out that a hoax and that a scheme of QAnon that everyone in the Democratic establishment is a sexual pervert and a sex trafficker.… Suddenly, that whole thing comes back to roost because in fact, he is at the center, not because we know he’s done any criminal activities, but because he holds the documents that would reveal one of the largest sex trafficking, largest sex exploitation rackets in modern American history.
Sargent: Absolutely. And Elon Musk understands Trump’s vulnerability here very well. He has just jumped in again and trolled Trump hard on this. What happened was a random person tweeted that what’s now going to happen is Ghislaine Maxwell names Dems in the Epstein files, says Trump did nothing wrong, then Trump pardons her and MAGA hails her for taking down the real pedophiles, i.e. Democrats, without releasing anything. Now Musk responded to that scenario with a bullseye emoji. I have to say, Musk may be right on this point. Two questions, Jen. Do you think Trump is capable of trying this scheme? And if he did, would MAGA really go along with something that corrupt after screaming for release of the Epstein files for years?
Rubin: I don’t think it is sustainable, and the reason is because Republicans have panicked. They realize they look like fools. You have Mike Johnson, the toadiest of them all, the chief toady, who basically says, No, we’re not going to. We should not be granting a pardon to this woman. And yes, he finally agrees as do a bunch of Republicans that the document should be released. I don’t know how this is sustainable. And you know someone is feeding information to The Wall Street Journal. You don’t have to read between the lines to figure out that someone gave the journal that disgusting note that other information is being leaked. And the reason is because they had a thousand FBI agents pouring through these files.
Essentially, what’s the number one rule in Washington? Everything leaks. You cannot have this many people involved in something so scandalous and keep it bottled up. So it’s either going to come out in drips and drabs, or it’s going to come out and flood the zone—but it’s going to come out one way or the other. And the only question is how much damage, how much responsibility can Trump avoid? And I would like to think that there’s a limit to what these people can stomach. I would like to think that the MAGA people have some capacity for reflection. And I guess where I come out is that there will be a core of MAGA people—there’s always a core of MAGA people—who either won’t believe it or they’ll believe conflicting things, just like you’ve pointed out. But there will be some truly disgusted Republicans who say, OK, I can’t do this. I can’t go this far. And they may not come out and vote for Democrats, but they might stay home in 2026. And that is the real danger to Trump, that he takes what would be a bad election—because it’s a midterm election—because of the big awful bill, because of his abominable ratings and approval on a whole range of issues and turn it into a catastrophe for Republicans. And that’s the real danger for them. That may have to happen before we do get every scrap of paper—because only if the Democrats are in control of one or both Houses would we absolutely get both. And that, of course, would be a fight for two years that will go on and on and maybe be resolved by the time Trump leaves office and maybe not.
Sargent: Well, since you brought up House Speaker Mike Johnson’s response to this scheme involving Maxwell, let me play that for people.
Reporter (audio voiceover): Is that someone deserving of a pardon or commutation in any circumstance, Mr. Speaker?
Mike Johnson (audio voiceover): If you’re asking my opinion, I think 20 years was a pittance. I think she should have a life sentence at least. Think of all these unspeakable crimes. And as you noted earlier, probably a thousand victims. It’s hard to put into words how evil this was and that she orchestrated it and was a big part of it. At least under the criminal sanction, I think is an unforgivable thing. So again, not my decision, but I have great pause about that as any reasonable person would.
Sargent: Jen, I think that really confirms your point about the midterms. Mike Johnson going that hard at this possible scheme is effectively a warning. It’s a loud clanging alarm saying, Do not do this. It will absolutely fuck us in the battle for the House. Right?
Rubin: Absolutely. When you have something like 75 percent of Americans saying, We smell a rat.… Seventy-five percent of people you can’t get to disclaim UFOs or disclaim that Elvis is not alive. We are so divided, but on this, Americans could actually agree. This is utterly unacceptable. It’s grotesquely perverse. And it’s not a trivial matter. People tend to think, Oh, people are just raising it because it’s a political issue. This is the height of authoritarian corruption, when you use the mechanisms of the state to protect the dear leader at the expense of the most vulnerable people, that’s this. There is no better explanation of the abuse and of the authoritarian mentality that drives this entire MAGA movement.
Sargent: Just to underscore your point there, Jen, what we’re talking about here is pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell who was an accomplice of Jeffrey Epstein. And as you say all the victims are at issue here. The hue and cry that would result from Trump pardoning Maxwell would be enormous, and it would be enormously damaging. Mike Johnson himself showed that by his strong reaction. I have to think that on some level they’re just not going to go there, although you never know.
Rubin: I think they have backed themselves into a corner entirely of their own making. Whatever metaphor you want to use, they have created the politics of conspiracies and of really obscene accusations, and now it has turned back on them. And if it takes them down, well, that’s a fitting end to their entire perverse movement.
Sargent: It sure would be. And just to return to your point about Democratic oversight in the future, Senator Dick Durbin, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, just called for release of any and all recordings of Todd Blanche’s interviews with Maxwell. If the fix is in for Trump, those tapes would show that. If he’s really playing the game that we think he might be playing, the tapes would show that. I assume DOJ will ignore this request, but as you point out, DOJ is leaking like crazy already; The Wall Street Journal story seems to suggest that. And as you say, we’ve learned from the reporting that a lot of FBI agents were instructed to flag mentions of Donald Trump in the files as they were going through them. So there again, there’s a big capacity for leaks right with that element of it all. And then of course, if Democrats take back the House and maybe the Senate, although that’s an extreme long shot—whatever, just the House—they can subpoena this stuff. And if they win the White House, they can seek release of the materials. The whole scheme looks seriously problematic for Trump. There isn’t really a way for him to pardon Maxwell and get exonerated by her without it all crashing down at some point—but maybe he doesn’t care if it crashes down in two or four years? What do you think?
Rubin: Well, that’s distinctly possible. It’s like a smash and grab operation. He’s trying to smash the country and grab all the wealth that he possibly can to wring out every dime, every crypto coin he can finally make off with. And perhaps at some level, what, he owes loyalty to the Republican Party? He’s never been loyal to anybody by himself. So it’s distinctly possible that he just doesn’t give a damn and is going to leave and take his billions with him that he has corruptly come by during all this time. But I do think that there is a fundamental principle that these Republicans are going to have to live with, and that is these people confirmed the Pam Bondis, the Kash Patels. They are responsible for this mess as much as Trump is. And for them to now turn around and say, We try, we didn’t know that they weren’t going to do this stuff, is not going to cut it. And by the way, for those people who say, Well, Joe Biden could have released all of this, you know what? I am not going to defend anything that Merrick Garland did or didn’t do. And you can argue, and you may be right, that there were many opportunities for them to have done this. Listen, Joe Biden was not the perfect president—but you know what, who is the president right now is the guy who has control of them, and that’s Donald Trump. And him using the government to protect himself is beyond reprehensible. And if we still had a Supreme Court, if we still had the rule of law, offering to give someone a pardon in exchange for exoneration of heinous crimes would in the old days have been called a bride, would in the old days have been called an impeachable offense. I guess we don’t have those anymore, so we’ll just have to call it a Monday in the Trump administration.
Sargent: Exactly. So what happens now going forward? I have a little trouble seeing how this develops. Can you lay out what you think is going to happen in the next, I don’t know, weeks and months?
Rubin: We’re going to continue to see—and we haven’t even spoken about it, thank goodness—the game of distraction. Suddenly, Barack Obama is guilty of treason. Suddenly, Beyoncé is going to be prosecuted for something. We’re going to have men from Mars land on the White House lawn pretty soon. So you’re going to see an uptick in all of these ridiculous nonsensical conspiracy theories, which in and of themselves are an abdication of the rule of law. To have the president of U.S. spinning such nonsense and threatening people is wholly unacceptable. You’re going to have the continuing dialogue and Trump is going to continue to play this game of, Well, it’s up to the FBI. They have to make a decision. And I think this thing is going to go on and get dragged out and get dragged out and maybe some of the documents will come out. But you know what? Ultimately, the backstop for this and for every other horrible thing—most horrible things that have occurred up to this point—are the midterms, and it just is going to shine a giant spot on how critical that is.
Sargent: Just to close this out, what I really think the story here is is that whenever Trump opens his mouth about the Epstein files being a hoax, about the Epstein files having proof of Democratic wickedness in them, he just wrecks his own argument. You cannot escape from the fundamental logical problem here, which is: If the Epstein files say what you say they do, then you would be releasing them. And we saw Trump today speaking to reporters, wrecking his own case in front of the whole world. Am I wrong to just focus on this really fundamental point?
Rubin: No, you’re not. I must say that although we got a little questioning, I was aghast at the press conference that he held, if you can call it that, on Sunday. There has to be a much more confrontational attitude from the press themselves. They let him spew on this stuff without follow-up, without pinning him down, without pointing out exactly what you just said. And there’s really no excuse other than cowardness and access journalism for this passivity in his presence. And it does great harm to the Republic. It erodes further what’s left of the credibility of many of these legacy media operations. And if they wanted to reestablish their credibility, what’s the matter with getting into it with the president of the U.S., claiming he has no control over this or perpetuating this giant cover-up? My God, isn’t this time for them to wake up?
Sargent: Sure seems that way. And I can just lay out the question that they should ask him? They should say, Mr. President, if what you’re saying is true, then why aren’t you releasing the Epstein files?
Rubin: Exactly. Exactly. And there is no answer to that, and you’ll get a discourse on the golf course, on windmills, on the greatest golf course ever built, and a host of other things. But once again, the media should be able at this point to bring it back to the question, re-ask it, and re-ask it until they get an answer.
Sargent: Jennifer Rubin, I sure hope reporters are listening to this. Thanks so much for coming on. Thanks for the decoding.
Rubin: Absolutely. My pleasure. Take care.