This week, Epstein, Epstein, Epstein, a scandal that even President Trump can't manage or contain.

Just 6 months into the president's second term, lingering questions about his relationship with the deceased sex trafficker are consuming his White House and paralyzing Congress with no end in sight.

Next Good evening and welcome to Washington Week.

I'm Franklin Foer in tonight for Jeffrey Goldberg.

It wasn't that long ago when Elon Musk, who was on his way out of Doge, posted what he called a really big bomb.

The President Trump's name was in the files of the government's Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

Musk deleted that post, but a report from the Wall Street Journal this week confirmed his extraordinary claim and revealed that the president was briefed about it by Attorney General Pam Bondi in May.

Joining me tonight to discuss this, Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times.

Eugene Daniels is a senior Washington correspondent and co-host of the Weekend on MSNBC.

Susan Glasser is a staff writer at The New Yorker, and Jonathan Carl is the chief Washington correspondent at ABC News.

Before we tumble down this sordid rabbit hole.

Trump landed in Scotland today and took questions from the press.

I want to listen to this exchange.

I'm files No, I was never, never.

Eugene, The Wall Street Journal reported that he was in these files and he was briefed about it.

The New York Times confirmed it.

Why in the world is he denying this?

Donald Trump denied something that everyone else says is true.

I'm shocked by that, um, because he knows, he feels like it's a bad, it's a terrible thing, even though everyone who you would talk to who's an expert will tell you that just because someone's name is in these files, doesn't mean they did anything bad, right?

We know that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein were friends.

We know that Donald Trump and him hung out a lot, right?

We know these.

We know he was on the plane at some point.

And so we, but what for what Donald Trump has clearly made the calculation that he can't be connected to Jeffrey Epstein in any way, shape or form.

And because for years he and a lot of the people that are in the administration stoked the files so much and talked about how bad they were and all these pedophiles were in these files, he knows he cannot cop to, knowing that he was in these files.

But you know, here's the thing when Pam Bondi put out what she called phase one of the Epstein files in those binders to those right wing.

Uh, influencers, those documents, which were mostly stuff that had already been out, uh, 300 or some pages.

Donald Trump's names name was in those documents.

Those documents included Epstein's address book, which had Donald Trump, and had his brother Robert, it had Ivanka, it has his ex wife Ivana had, uh, you know, whole several Trumps and also had the flight logs from some of Epstein's flights between, uh, West Palm Beach and Teterboro in New York and one to DC I think his appeared 4 or 5 times already in what we're in the so called Epstein files that were released by DOJ.

could you just talk about the bizarre, um, paradox here, I guess is what you might call it, is that at the same time that they really are desperate to escape this scandal.

They keep burrowing deeper into it.

I think Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche just spent two days in Florida with with Maxwell.

What's, what's the calculus?

I mean, if you thought this was an insignificant.

and didn't want to pay any attention to it.

They're making it impossible to ignore it.

Having the Deputy Attorney general, go down to Tallahassee, uh, for, for 2 full days, uh, to meet with Glaine Maxwell, who obviously is in prison for, for, for sex trafficking, um, is an extraordinary development and when, uh, what other case do you see like that?

And it's not just that, uh, Frank, when you think about it, there were, the Times had a great story about all the resources.

gone into this reviewing these files, saying hundreds.

I'm told it's actually about 1000 personnel from the FBI and the DOJ,000,000 people at the FBI and DOJ have been, uh, working to review these files for a matter of months.

Now, what were those people doing before they were tasked to this assignment, working on national security cases, terrorism cases, they are now, you know, they, they.

I mean, a significant part of the, of, of the manpower of our national security division has been spent looking at these files.

Peter, you, you guys have written a biography of Trump.

Can you help me understand why, I mean, there's no evidence that there's anything revelatory in these files about Trump.

Why if he's innocent, does he act so guilty all the time.

Well, we've seen that on other occasions too, right?

The, uh, Robert Mueller investigation found no provable in court conspiracy with Russia, and yet he seemed to act like there was one, right?

He seems to act very close to Russia, very admiring of Putin.

Why do you do that if in fact you don't have something wrong and by firing people like Jim Comey back in his first term.

You act like you've done something wrong, you're trying to cover it up.

And so yeah, he is his own worst enemy in this way.

He brings this on himself by looking like he's trying to hide something by denying the obvious right there as John says already out there.

It's not a mystery that his name was in these files, nor should it be because again, we already knew he was a friend of, of Epstein's.

And yet, um, he, he is acting that way, but I think it's part of his, you know, his habit is to deny, deny, deny, uh, even provable truths.

It's just never in his DNA to admit much less acknowledge or apologize.

Where does that impulse come from?

Well, I think it's from his father.

I think his upbringing to some extent.

He was taught you never ever give in, never give an inch ever.

You're a killer.

His dad would say to him, Well, killer doesn't give in.

It doesn't apologize, doesn't acknowledge, doesn't say they did anything wrong, doesn't acknowledge that there's some, uh, you know, that he made a mistake in being friends with Jeffrey Epstein.

Uh, Susan, you wrote an excellent column in The New Yorker about this scandal, and I want to quote from it.

This scandal then is not the revelation that Trump was friends with the sexual monster who exploited underage women since it is not a revelation, nor is it that the president lied to the American people, something he does with remarkable frequency.

No, the novelty here is that millions of Americans who knew that Trump was friends with such a horrid man and voted for him anyway.

now appeared to have decided that in choice between Trump and a favorite conspiracy theory, they may just stick with the conspiracy theory.

Of all the many Trump scandals, why is this one that seems to be the one that has gained traction and gripped the media and apparently tormented his base in the way that this has.

Yeah, I think that's a really important question for us to be asking, Frank, uh, you know, if you think about it, in, in an administration where every day there's some new outrage or controversy where you could argue that the scandals get to the core of who we are as a country.

OK, we're talking about uh uh a convicted sexual offender who has been dead for 6 years, uh, who was prosecuted, arrested, prosecuted, sent to jail.

We're talking about the Deputy Attorney general spending two days of his valuable time, uh, going to interview the also convicted accomplice of that long dead sexual offender, right?

So on some level, it's just, it's a perversion of our politics that we are talking about this and it reflects, of course, very poorly.

on the man in the White House who was friends with uh such a person, but I just think it tells us something about the nature of Trump's alliance with the MAGA movement that he's both a leader but also a follower of them.

He's unleashed so many lies, conspiracy theories, diversions, untruths, and that this particular one resonated so deeply with a portion of his base that they are willing, at least for now, to even do what they're not willing to do on any of the other many lies and conspiracy theories that he is foisted upon them.

I think it's quite interesting to wonder whether this is a breach that could widen over time or it's a one-off.

And I think we don't know the answer to that yet, but it's notable that some members of Congress who stick with Donald Trump through the most outrageous untruths are demanding answers from him that he doesn't want to give right now.

And part of it is this scandal, the Epstein.

Trump of it all is goes at the heart of kind of what the Magaba is about, which is powerful people doing things behind closed doors, um, and the rest of us being screwed out of it, right?

And usually Donald Trump is on the side of the people that are getting screwed, right?

Usually, Donald Trump is talking about how, you know, the, the lowly man and woman are losing out to these um these interests in Washington DC and people are defending and protecting them, we have to stop those people.

But now, they are seeing Donald Trump seemingly being one of the people doing the defending and the protecting of the powerful people and him being one of the powerful people themselves.

That's why I think he can't shake it, because, and at the end of the day, this is, they, they love a conspiracy theory, right?

Over and over and over again.

This is one that you, when you talk to people, um, the, the pedophile rings of alleged pedophile rings in.

It's a basic and also remember the pizzeria let's be clear here that, you know, we act as though these poor people were misled, and now they're shocked.

find out like that Donald Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein.

They've known that for years.

OK. How many times have you know, we inflicted upon our viewers or our readers' images of Donald Trump and Jeffrey, the video of him partying, that's from the megaba though is upset now, not because they think Trump was friends with Epstein.

They're, they're upset because they thought that the Epstein files would tell them something about other people, about other rings.

They didn't want to actually target Trump per se.

That's sort of collateral damage in a way.

They thought it would be.

Telling about Bill Clinton would be telling him about other famous and, and, you know, raised the expectations.

But look, there's a fundamental question that I'm amazed is not really been directly addressed in so much of, of how the story has unfolded.

Why is Todd Blanche in talent.

Why?

What is the purpose?

Just a basic question.

The White House hasn't answered, so I, I think that, I mean, my understanding is there's really, there's really only one explanation, and then that is, He's trying to go and produce what all those FBI agents couldn't produce when they're looking through the files, trying to get some dirt on the president's.

enemies.

So it's a desperate save the conspiracy.

Glas there.

What, what do you have?

Do you have, you know, give me, give me the evidence on Bill Clinton and the island.

Give me the, you know, I mean, what else could it be?

Well, I think it's important to note just quickly on this that Donald Trump has already Dangled publicly the prospect of a pardon, and I think that's very significant.

I mean, I can't think of some, you know, uh, someone who has more incentive to lie or to to tell Todd Blanche what he wants to hear than someone who's in jail for a very long sentence, who Trump has said he was asked directly about it.

He said, I can't, you know, I'm not doing anything right now, but I have the power to do it and I think he repeated that.

Peter, let me ask you a question that goes to what Susan was saying earlier about this whole constellation of things that could potentially be scandalous.

Yes.

Is there any part of Donald Trump that actually enjoys this being the scandal as opposed to any of the other number of things that could be even more devastating perhaps and directed his way.

I don't know if he enjoys it.

I think that, but it is true that this has obscured to some extent other stories that might be in other times, pretty big controversies.

Let's just talk about this week.

Just yesterday, the FCC appointed by Donald Trump approved $8 billion merger with Paramount.

that just 23 days after Paramount agreed to give Trump $16 million for his presidential library.

That's extraordinary.

Just think about that.

The president filed a private lawsuit against uh Paramount, which owns CBS because he was upset about the interview that 60 Minutes did with Kamala Harris.

That by itself, by the way, the idea that he gets to decide how an interview gets edited.

It's pretty extraordinary for anybody who cares about the first minute, but put that aside for a second.

Paramount settled this lawsuit with him, gave him $16 million which he gets to use as he wants.

For this library.

And then strangely enough, 23 days later, his appointees approved their $8 billion merger and reporting has shown that the Paramount people were concerned that the government wouldn't, that is the Trump administration, wouldn't approve their merger unless they gave him the money.

And the SEC chairman approves it.

Basically suggesting they got assurances on what the editorial policies would be by CBS going forward.

The president using in effect what it appears to be the power of government, right?

To tell a media company how it should be reporting A and B, pocketing a little bit of money at the same time for his library.

And among the other very scandalous things that have come out this week is his response to the scandal itself, Susan, what one of the time tested methods that he uses is distraction, and the form of Distraction that he's deployed this week is not just forcing Coke to reintroduce sugar into its drinks is that he had Tulsi Gabbard come out and essentially declare a coup that took place in 2016.

I want to listen to uh Gabard from earlier this week.

When you look at the intent behind creating a fake manufactured intelligence document that directly contradicts multiple assessments that were created by the intelligence community.

The expressed intent and what followed afterward can only be described as a year long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people, our republic, and an attempt to undermine President Trump's administration.

I'm old enough to remember when Russia, Russia, Russia was a hoax, but now it's apparently what they want to talk about all the time.

Could you just parse and explain the sleight of hand that she was engaged in.

Well, let's stipulate on the front end that none of this is true, OK?

So I think that's important to state for people, not only that, but we have the really shocking in any other context, uh.

Image of the director of National Intelligence, not only going and and spreading lies, she, she's directly called the former president of the United States, Barack Obama, essentially guilty of treason, referred him to the Justice Department for a criminal prosecution again on the basis of a fantasy, a fiction, uh, a lie, and In that clip that you played, for example, she says it is the basis of a years long coup, OK?

That is an allegation that's ongoing that not only at base, she says that what Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, the former leaders of the intelligence community, all of them implicated in her view in basically putting out an intelligence finding that she says wasn't true that Russia intervened in the 2016 election on Donald Trump's behalf.

Now, that the investigation by Robert Mueller, the conclusions of the US intelligence community.

It even ignores the years-long bipartisan investigation of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time led by Republicans who was a senior member of that committee, Marco Rubio, the current of the activist as well as national security adviser and Secretary of State.

So not only is there no basis to this, but, but Imagine the recklessness of saying that the former president is guilty of treason.

The years-long coup is, is, is a new aspect to this conspiracy theory that I think is really quite remarkable.

It it speaks again to the hunger of this political movement in our society for grand unification conspiracy theories because the allegation here is that the original SIM, quote unquote coup in 2016 of saying that Russia was trying to elect Trump when it wasn't.

actually was the precursor event, according to Tulsi Gabbard, for efforts to rig the 2020 and 2024 elections as well, and that is the ongoing coup.

She even in an appearance with Charlie Cook, uh sorry, Charlie Kirk, uh, a well-known MAGA figure claimed that it was actually this.

False statement about the 2016 campaign was the reason for the FBI raid on Mar a Lago to recover the illegally taken classified documents that Donald Trump brought with him from the White House.

I mean, again, it's, it's lies upon absurdities upon lies.

What's being unleashed here, John, but I mean you use the right phrase, sleight of hand, because if you actually look at what she said.

She did present some documents, and it was that the intelligence community secret assessment was that Russia did not manipulate voting machines in America and change the vote and and rig the election.

Um, well, guess what?

That was never alleged.

Barack Obama actually said at a press conference it might have been his last press conference in December December of, of, of, of 2016 that there is no evidence whatsoever of vote rigging and that was actually part of the very assessment the CIA assessment that Gabbard was saying was a scandal.

It said no, there were no votes were.

changed, Russia tried to manipulate a public opinion in America by hacking into Hillary Clinton's emails and through a series of other steps, but it was never the allegation.

So it was a very strange thing because you have the director of national intelligence, acting like she was presenting this smoking gun and what she was actually Presenting was nothing of the kind.

Eugene is such a patently obvious, uh, ploy to distract.

Does the distraction actually work with his base?

No, because they still want the files, right?

When you talk to the, the folks who are part of the base, they still want the files.

They don't see these things as connected.

They also already believe that Barack Obama was some evil mastermind, right?

So you're not presenting them with anything new to distract them.

That's the problem with this.

And I think, you know, it is really important.

to, like, it's very serious to accuse anyone of treason.

It is very serious to accuse the former president and his team of treason and trying to steal the election from Donald Trump, because it's not, it is, it is the government saying that that's happening, but also the people who are crazy and will may act on those kinds of conspiracy theories and they see that it's not it's worth remembering the video that the president posted and artificially intelligence fake video of Barack Obama being Handcuffed in the Oval Office and taken into prison.

This is something we've now just kind of brushed off because we're so used to this kind of wild and crazy kind of kind of politics, but no president ever would have done that in the past, and I, it's, it's, it's, it would have been another time but a shocking breach of etiquette and, and, and I think, uh, you know, a corruption of the judicial system to have a president of the United States say that his predecessor should be locked up and put a video out there to celebrate the idea of it and manipulated video.

video, which goes to what you were talking about at the beginning that we're in, we're trapped in this prison of conspiracy and manipulation in those two things are deeply connected.

Can I just admit that I actually was shocked and horrified even to be living in this news cycle that we were.

I, I actually, I, I found that, uh, video that Donald Trump circulated on social media of Barack Obama being debased and humiliated in the Oval Office to to to really make me feel nauseous.

again, you know, this is something that all Americans should be condemning, and I think it also speaks to our debasement as a political culture.

I went back and I looked, you know, in, in, in the first Trump administration you would get at least the bleats of concern from Republican members of his party from people around the country, not a word, not one word.

You know, these are people who've lost their souls, and, you know, Ultimately, it's for a political power that may or may not last more than, you know, 2 or 4 years, and you got to ask, uh, you know, was it really worth it for them?

And Peter, I want to just pause further on the accusation of treason, because it is so extreme and I think also it's something that is, you know, in terms of its magnitude outweighs anything having to do with the Epstein case and it wasn't something that was necessarily leading the news story leading the news or on the front page of newspapers.

And it is not an isolated incident.

It's reflective of a trend in his rhetoric, and you wrote about this the other week, and I want to quote from it.

Uh, you wrote, evil is a word getting a lot of airtime in the 2nd Trump turn.

Anyone viewed as critical of the president or insufficiently deferential is wicked.

The Trump administration's efforts to achieve its policy goals are not just an exercise in governance, but a holy mission against forces of darkness.

Yeah, yeah, and it's so much easier if you're at your arrival, your competitor isn't just somebody you disagree with, isn't just somebody who has bad policy ideas maybe, but it's somebody who is wicked or evil because then you justify all kinds of things that come up, right?

And the reason why I wrote that article was because the president was asked at one point about Ali Mayara, who is the Secretary of Homeland Security under Biden and somebody said, should he be locked up because the border was so bad.

And he says, yeah, that's something we should look at.

Christian Nomi says to his own Secretary of Homeland Security, you should look at that.

So we put Morins in prison because of the border.

That's not accusing him of a criminal act.

He's simply saying I, I don't like his policy.

Therefore, I would go ahead and prison.

Guess what?

No way paid attention to that because in fact, we hear him say things like this so much and I know a lot of Republicans, a lot of Trump people say, well, you know, the Biden people weaponized government by going after Donald Trump.

OK, I understand that concerned by a lot of people.

He was pursued by prosecutors.

You never heard President Biden say, hey, this guy is guilty of treason.

He never put a video on there showing Trump being locked up.

He recognized it was his job as president to stand back and let the justice system.

handle this as the justice system should.

It wasn't his job to try to demonize or vilify his enemies.

Now he said a lot of bad things about Donald Trump.

Fair enough.

I've heard that from Trump people since I wrote that article, but, um, but it just doesn't come close to what, what Donald Trump does.

It's a departure, right?

This is, this is not, I'm not just from past precedent, but this is actually a different version of Donald Trump.

I think that Susan hit on one of the, the biggest difference here is, is that he now has total command of the Republican Party.

So there's nobody, and he also has a, a, a, an administration and a staff that is based entirely on loyalty.

So you don't hear any dissent either within the administration or within the Republican.

Uh, rank and file or leadership in Congress.

You heard some of that whether it mattered in the first term, maybe it didn't at the end, um, but, but, but that's gone.

I will say one thing in terms of the question to Eugene about will this ultimately really hurt his base, him with his base.

I think that the way Democrats have jumped onto the Epstein story, uh, I, I think you now have a little bit of a rallying rallying around, uh, Trump on this.

We're going to have to leave it there for now thanks to our guests for joining me and thank you to you at home for watching us.

I'm Franklin Foer.

Goodnight from Washington.