Transcription
>> STAYING. For the rest of her life. For the rest of her life.
Well, I'll be interested to hear what Dave Aronberg has to say about this. The House Oversight Committee has issued subpoenas for several former government officials, including attorneys general, FBI directors, former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to discuss matters related to Jeffrey Epstein.
But as Joe detailed, the committee has not subpoenaed Alex Acosta, the former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, behind the secret non-prosecution agreement that was reached with Epstein in 2008. Acosta also served as President Trump's Labor Secretary during his first term, but left the role in 2019 after he faced scrutiny over the Epstein plea agreement.
Under that deal, Epstein pleaded guilty to procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and felony solicitation of prostitution, which required him to register as a sex offender and serve about a year in a Florida county jail. He was then able to leave the jail almost daily for work, and was allowed to have his own private security detail behind bars.
NBC News asked an Oversight Committee spokesperson why Acosta was not included in the subpoenas, and was told via text message that members of the Federal Law Enforcement Subcommittee approved the list of those subpoenaed with a voice vote in July. It's not really an answer.
>> Joining us.
>> Now, former State Attorney for Palm Beach County, Florida, Dave Aronberg. Dave, so many questions. I'll let you take it where you think it should go. And what stands out to you here?
But I also wonder how much control can the Oversight Committee or Pam Bondi's office or Todd Blanche have over the information surrounding Jeffrey Epstein? It seems to me that if you subpoena some people, they certainly can make comments that are very interesting to the Oversight Committee.
>> Good to be with you, Mika.
>> Joe made a good point that he said that this list came from the legal advisor called Arnold Pig. I don't think that anyone gave legal advice. I think this list was developed by political advisors. It just looks like Comer threw darts at a list of Trump's enemies. From both sides of the aisle. Like, why is Hillary Clinton on the list? What does she have to do with this? Bob Mueller, Bob Mueller who Trump hates. It was the FBI director at the time, but he had nothing to do with the non-prosecution agreement. You know who did? Alex Acosta. But he's not on the list, as you correctly noted. Of course, Trump's not on the list either.
And as far as what kind of effect it could have upon testimony and evidence. Well, I don't think this list has any effect at all, because I wouldn't expect Bill Clinton or anyone else to testify anytime soon. They're going to fight it out in court or ignore the subpoenas altogether. Like Jim Jordan ignored his subpoena from the January 6th committee and got away with it. A strategy of delay, working things through the court would probably work, because Democrats are expected to take over the House next November, and that would shut this whole thing down. So it all seems like political theater here by politicians who badly want to change the subject.
>> Yeah. Dave, I was just going to ask you. It seems almost impossible to imagine Bill Clinton sitting for a subpoena in this situation. I mean, there is zero upside, and there's probably zero that Congress can do to compel him to do so. So what is the objective here? Just really to run out the clock? Because that seems foolish too, right? I mean, at some point you do need to produce something tangible to satiate the people who say, hey, there's this boatload of records that you promised. Where are they?
>> Right. And this base is not going to be satisfied by just hearing testimony or getting redacted grand jury records. And that's where the administration is going. The administration is trying to placate their base, which is up in arms, because the base had been promised the Epstein list, and there is no Epstein list, but there is an Epstein file. And now the administration is saying we're not going to release the Epstein file. And as far as the grand jury records, those are unlikely to get released as well. Trump's strategy may be to win by losing. His strategy may be to deflect the blame onto the judiciary. Because if there's one group that the MAGA base hates as much as the media, it's the group of unelected federal judges who wear the black robes and get lifetime appointment. And so he's going to try to redirect the energy of the base towards them. I don't think it's going to work because this base has been promised things that the administration is refusing to deliver. And even if the judges grant the motion to release the grand jury transcripts, they're only going to release the redacted version in the government's motion. And I read it. It says that they promised to redact the identifying information of third parties who have not been charged. So the MAGA world, who already feels betrayed is not going to stand for this. So either way, they're going to lose. And these are people who feasted on conspiracy theories, and Epstein has been the main course. So if they think that the grand jury records will tide them over will be the latest miscalculation in this unending controversy.
>> It has seemed that there's been one miscalculation after another, miscalculation after another, miscalculation. And Dave Drucker.
>> Let's talk about the MAGA base for a second.
>> They are the base that has been driving this story more than any other division in American politics.
>> And it just seems to me if you listen to what Joe Rogan saying, if you listen to what so many MAGA influencers are saying on their podcast, it just seems to me that the House decides to subpoena Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and Comey and all of these other people when it was Donald Trump's former labor secretary, and it was Donald Trump's Justice Department that arrested him the second time that that arrested Epstein, the second time that he died in prison. And a lot of questions continuing to be asked about the security footage and what happened that night. All of that happened under the Trump administration as well. It seems to me the MAGA base has been willing to blindly follow Donald Trump over the cliff time and time again. It doesn't seem like they're willing to sort of follow this, this very clumsy head fake by Comer. What? What are you hearing?
>> Well, look, I wouldn't think the issue here is Trump versus Comer in this way. Right? As we've discussed before, the president's base is going to give him a lot of deference and often redirects their frustration to other members of the Republican Party. Right? I mean, you know, issues that we would think or that have really their genesis with an action Trump has taken or not taken, instead of getting upset with him, they'll blame it on Republican members of Congress. They're they're acutely aware of this. And I think the Comer subpoenas are an effort to try and mitigate that frustration. You know, I think the issue here is, is where they're going to give the president a lot of leash. I don't think they're going to give House Republicans or Senate Republicans the same deference.
>> And so if they're going to tackle this at all, if they're going to issue subpoenas at all, I'm sure the president will be happy to see his political adversaries subpoenaed. That will make him feel good, especially after what he believes he went through while he was out of office. But it's not going to make voters who are fixated on this happy. It's not going to satiate them. They're going to say, what about this one? And why didn't you subpoena that one? So if they want to clear the decks and get this off the table, Joe, all this does is stretch it out and elongate it, and they're going to come back from their August recess, and they're going to be stuck in the same place, except they're not going to be able to disband for another recess.
>> Right.
>> I think I completely agree. This is a terrible, terrible idea. I mean, all it does is draw more attention back. And when you put Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and Comey and all of these other people's names on this list, it immediately begs the question, why not Donald Trump? Why not Alex Acosta? Why not the why not Barr? Why not Donald Trump's attorneys general that charged him? Why not? I mean, they've created a list that raises so many questions that it actually draws more attention to this, not only from the media, but also the base. Senior writer for Dispatch, David Drucker. Thank you so much. His new piece is available to read online right now. And Dave Aronberg, I mean, just just again, let's talk about that list very briefly one more time. Everybody who is relevant to the second prosecution and the imprisonment of Jeffrey Epstein is excluded from this list. Everyone. Oh, they do have Barr on there. They have Barr and Sessions. But outside of that, no Alex Acosta here. Even the administration says that was the original sin. The plea deal that Acosta did was the original sin that allowed all of this to happen. That allowed him to destroy, possibly destroy video of the most powerful men in the world abusing young women. I mean, and they're not on the list. Because it's all political. Joe, this is an attempt by Congress to help Trump deflect onto others saying, look, we are for transparency. We're going to pursue grand jury records, and we're going to subpoena the people who the base wants to hear from Bill Clinton. Remember, this is all about a democratic cabal like Pizzagate, where Bill and Hillary Clinton lead a group of Democrats and worldwide elites in a child sex trafficking ring. Let's just say what it is. And that's why Bill Clinton and Hillary are on the list. But this is not going to work because the base wants either the Epstein list or they want the Epstein files, and they're going to get neither. And as far as the grand jury files, you know, Ghislaine Maxwell is opposing the release of the grand jury records. And I think her argument is going to sway the court because her case is pending. Her case is before the Supreme Court right now. So this affects her. And if those records are released, then her interest down the road, if she wins, her appeal could be undermined. So don't expect even a redacted grand jury record to be released there. So this is all just going to lead to an implosion with the base. The base is not going to be happy unless they get the grand excuse me, unless they get the Epstein files, which they're not going to.
>> I think Dave, that you're exactly right, talking about something tangible having to be produced here. But I think the other open question around why Congress hasn't yet subpoenaed Alex Acosta is over the non-prosecution agreement, also including the ability to not prosecute potential coconspirators that would very much include Maxwell and Secretary Johnson. That is what she is leaning on in some of her appeals here as they try to get her either a lesser or no sentence. And that, I think, is really important as well. The other thing that I see in these subpoenas, and you've testified before Congress so many times, so I'm interested in.
>> I've had that pleasure.
>> Yes. You've had that pleasure. The thing that I see in this list of subpoenas, as someone who knows this committee, is Republicans needed Democrats to get on board in order to actually issue these subpoenas. And so I imagine the fact that they knew they would have needed to subpoena Republicans like Sessions, like Barr, but then also that they have these Democratic names on there in some way to placate Trump, even as they do exactly the opposite of what he wants them to do, which is continue talking about this story.
>> Yeah, this is this is how our Congress is conducting the people's business these days with everything that's going on.