Transcription
Forcing Speaker Johnson's hand on the Epstein investigation. In a major escalation tonight, the attorney general of Arizona and Congresswoman elect at the Great Hall of Arizona are suing Mike Johnson. And they're suing him because we're Hall that has not been sworn in. So what does all this have to do with Jeffrey Epstein? Because it does.
At its heart, Grijalva is the final vote needed for a bipartisan maneuver called a discharge petition that goes around Johnson, goes around Johnson because he does not want a vote to release the full Epstein files. This would go around him. Get that vote to release the files where he was elected in Arizona 28 days ago, a whole month. And Johnson has in that time used every excuse not to swear her in. Look, I will schedule it, I guess, as soon as she wants. It has nothing to do with. As soon as the Democrats open a vote to reopen the government, she deserves to have all the pomp and circumstance that everybody else does and have her family and friends in the balcony. So she flies in her family. Would you guys do all of us? She'll get the full bells and whistles. It has. We don't schedule things for pro forma. And when Grover called Johnson out on not swearing her in and doing it, she says to protect Jeffrey Epstein and his high powered clients. Johnson had this to say. Bless her heart. She's a representative elect. She doesn't know how it works around here. Well, putting the condescension aside, she does know she's supposed to be sworn in. That, of course, is democracy 101, right? You get elected by the people of your state and you get sworn in. That's democracy.
And tonight, the Arizona attorney general, Chris Mace, who might be speaking to you in just a moment. Right. And I quote in this lawsuit. Speaker Johnson has not identified any valid reason for refusing to promptly seat Miss Grijalva instead on information and believe Speaker Johnson wishes to delay seating Miss Grijalva to prevent her from signing a discharge position that would force a vote on the release of the Epstein files. And just a few moments ago, Johnson just responded, I think it's perfectly, sir. We run the house. She has no jurisdiction. We're following the precedent. She's looking for national publicity. Apparently, she's gotten some of it with. Good luck with it. Johnson on defense. And it is not just because of this specific lawsuit that was just filed. It is actually because Republicans, members of his own party in the House, are speaking out because many of them want the Epstein files released now. And they know that Grijalva vote is the key to that. It baffles me. To me, this is the easiest one, to do. This is standing up for women and children who are raped, who are victims of, sex trafficking. And this is for victims that are that are facing horrible consequences right now due to abuse. And I can't understand why this has been the seemingly the biggest fight in Washington, DC. It certainly shouldn't be. She's completely right about that.
It all comes on the same day. The memoir of the most high profile Epstein accuser, Virginia Giuffre, was published. Giuffre died by suicide after the decades of suffering she endured. She died earlier this year. But before she took her own life, she documented the unimaginable abuse that she suffered because of Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who, of course, is convicted abuse that Virginia rights from, quote, came from a multitude of powerful men. Among them were a gubernatorial candidate who was soon to win election in a western state, and a former U.S. senator. Since Epstein usually neglected to introduce me to these men by name or introduce them at all, I would only learn who some of them were. Years later, when I studied photographs of Epstein's associates and recognized the faces of those I was forced to have sex with, Giuffre even documents her abuse for prime minister. In that case, she writes that he wasn't interested in caresses. He wanted violence. He repeatedly choked me until I lost consciousness and took pleasure in seeing me in fear for my life. Horrifically, the Prime Minister laughed when he hurt me and got more aroused when I begged him to stop. I mean, this is despicable stuff. It's pretty awful to have to sit here and even read sentences like that. Never my mind to imagine there's a person who wrote them because they happened to her, because not one of those men has been held accountable. Not one. And many of them right now, as we speak, are in circles of high society. Their friends might even see this. The friends might even suspect or know, but they're just continuing along in high society and that is wrong. And they must face accountability.
Releasing the Epstein files should not be one of the biggest fights in Washington. Marjorie Taylor Greene is right about that, and perhaps Johnson is starting to feel the pressure because earlier today he was on the defense about the Epstein vote, saying to Politico, quote, the bipartisan House Oversight Committee is already accomplishing what the discharge petition, the gambit sought, and much more. It's important to just get to the bottom of this, though, when when that is said, if that argument is made to point out that that is false because the oversight committee, they are doing work, but they are releasing documents that are only a fraction of what exist, according to O'Connor on the committee, he and obviously he's a Democrat. Massie, Republican. The files are just one gigabyte, one gigabyte of what the oversight committee has. That's what they have. There are 300GB of files that are known that the FBI said exist. So that is 1/300 of the total. Right. And much of that 1/300 was already known to be public. Johnson knows all of this. So when he is claiming he is all for transparency in this incident, when it comes to Epstein saying if it comes, if it hits 218, it comes to the floor, that's how it works. If you get the signatures, it goes to a vote. Well, of course, in a sense that's talking in circles because you only get to 218 if why do we just talk about Epstein for a few minutes? Because you actually have to see congresswoman elect at Duke Hall, but she has to be sworn in. That is the 218th vote. And perhaps Grijalva herself has said it best. Here's what she told me. So this has nothing to do with the Epstein files, then? Swear me in.
Chris Mays is the Democratic attorney general of Arizona. She's out front. She, along with Congresswoman Electrical Hall, has just filed a lawsuit against the House of Representatives for refusing to see Grijalva. And this is the attorney general's first interview since filing that suit. So, Attorney General Mayes, I appreciate your time and, you know, we have this breaking news. You're filing the suit. And just moments ago, we heard from Speaker Johnson just responding to your suit. He says, and I quote him, it's patently absurd. We run the house. She has no jurisdiction. End quote. What do you say to him? What's the basis for your lawsuit? Well, what I what we're saying to him and what we're asking a court to do is, you know, declare that if Mike Johnson refuses to do his job, that Adelaide or Adelaide or Oliver can be sworn in by, a judge or any other person with the capability under the law to swear her in. And, you know, Mike Johnson, can end this tomorrow by swearing lady, that in she was duly elected by the people of Arizona, and we now have 813,000 Arizonans who are being taxed without representation in our state because Mike Johnson refuses to swear her in. So, you know, we didn't want to have to file this lawsuit, but it's been four weeks now, Aaron, since she was elected for weeks where she has not been able to do her job, serve her constituents. We've got issues here, including flooding in her district. She hasn't been able to serve veterans and and deal with other issues like Social Security. It's time. Time's up.
So how quickly you're saying a judge could do this here? Someone could get her seated right away. How quickly do you expect this lawsuit to move? I mean, essentially, is this something that could really result in her getting seated, sworn in by a judge or somebody in the next day or two? Or is this something more to make a point of precedent? And by the time this all works its way through, Johnson will have eventually done it. Well, I mean, yeah, I wish Johnson would do it right now. In fact, she I believe the congresswoman elect is in her in DC right now. He could walk over to her office right now and do it. Look, we are hoping that this lawsuit resolved quickly in Adelaide. A girl for being sworn in. And, you know, we're going to a judge, in Washington, D.C., asking that judge to declare that she is eligible to be sworn in and if Mike Johnson and the House of Representatives run by the Republicans right now refuse to refuse to do it, that someone else can do it.
So speaking, have you had any interactions with Speaker Johnson about this? I mean, I know you had initially sent a letter to him that was eight days ago and you threatened the lawsuit, and now he's responding obviously in the statement that we have. But have you had any interaction with him at all at this point? I mean, sadly, no. I mean, all we all we have heard from Speaker Johnson is basically comments on on shows like yours. And, you know, he has not responded directly to us, and he's basically thumbing his nose at 813,000 Arizonans who don't have a representative in my state is now down a representative. That's not okay. It violates the Constitution and violates the law.