The Weeknight 5/28/26 | 🅼🆂🅽🅱️🅲 Breaking News Today May 28, 2026

Added: 2026-05-31

[00:00:00]Good evening and welcome to the week night. I'm Alicia Mendez with Simone Sanders Townsen and Michael Steele.

[00:00:05]Breaking tonight, new reporting from MS Now. The Trump Justice Department's investigation into Eene Carol appears to be much broader than we initially understood. Now targeting one of the top Democratic donors in the country. We have the details in a moment. Also ahead, Donald Trump is trying to make America's 250th anniversary all about himself with a new illegal plan to put his face on our money. Angela Corsone is here.

[00:00:31]>> And later, the House Oversight Committee is set to grill Pam Bondi over her mishandling of the Epstein files.

[00:00:38]Congressman James Walenshaw, who will be questioning the former attorney general tomorrow, joins us in our conversation.

[00:00:46]So let's begin with investigation involving Trump accuser Eugene Carol.

[00:00:52]Now folks go with us because this gets a little bit complicated. New tonight, the Washington Post reports that the federal probe based out of Chicago is actually focused on a nonprofit funded by Democratic mega donor Reed Hoffman. MS Now has confirmed parts of that reporting. That nonprofit covered some of Eugene Carol's legal bills in her successful court battle against Trump.

[00:01:19]And apparently the Trump Justice Department is eyeing Carol as prosecutors try to build a case against the nonprofit. In other words, using her to get to the nonprofit. That's according to two people familiar with the matter. Now, specifically, a source tells MS Now investigation is focused on whether Carol lied under oath about the nonprofit's involvement in covering her legal bills. Public documents showed Donald Trump's lawyers already raised that issue. And guess what? An appeals court rejected it. So, what are we doing? Moments ago, the US attorney overseeing this case says it's quote categorically false that Eugene Carol is under investigation.

[00:02:06]Really?

[00:02:07]Yeah. See, the problem is we just categorically cannot take um the administration at their word on this because maybe for that US attorney, they that is not a feature of their particular investigation. But who's to say that the Department of Justice at Maine Justice as you know uh the streets would say um Mary McCord and whatnot would tell us main justice that's not something they're focus focused on. My chief concern here and the questions that I have about this are all centered around um the retribution piece of it all.

[00:02:41]>> It's centered around the retribution.

[00:02:43]Reed Hoffman is not the first time he has been named. He is not just someone that gave um to to this fund essentially. He is a big Democratic donor. The administration has previously put a target on the back of foundations in this country that have supported what they would call small D democratic efforts. This is not, in my opinion, disconnected from that. And I have questions about how deep the rabbit hole goes.

[00:03:06]>> Well, I I I think Alicia, for me, this this really boils down to one very simple thing. And I really want folks to understand what uh they're looking at.

[00:03:16]This is what weaponization of our government looks like. This is exactly what it looks like when an appeal court dismisses charges, allegations, whatever in aa in a matter, and then the administration through its Department of Justice wants to come and do a wraparound pulling her in uh Eugene Carol into uh a legal effort to go after uh a a nonprofit uh that as Simone noted they want to target as they've targeted others in the past. Folks, this is what it looks like. So all the BS you hear from this administration, particularly coming out of this president's mouth about how he's been owed such a victim and so much put upon, well, it's because of your own behavior. Eene Carol took you behind the court. Why? Because of something you did and you were found guilty of. So you know, here we are now because you have the power in the position doing a wraparound because you lost. You wouldn't be doing this, trust me, if you didn't hadn't lost. right now. You're doing a wraparound, Alicia, to try to pull her into a matter to go after a bigger fish, a nonprofit, because that nonprofit helped her in her defense against Donald Trump.

[00:04:30]>> These are big substantive questions. I do though, Mike, I don't think we can whistle past the fact that Simone referenced Mary McCord as the streets, which is giving true new definition um to what to what the streets are. But to your point, and to I think a point Simone made, this is asked and answered, right? This is already the the the questions about Agent Carol have already been litigated. You had this decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Cir Circuit that was decided back in December of 24. The court's decision read Miss Carol's prior statement on the litigation funding was not sufficiently probitative of her credibility.

[00:05:03]Why are we going back to this? And what is the opportunity cost of the fact, Simone, that they continue to be laser focused on people they perceive as their critics and their enemies instead of actually tackling, you know, real crimes here in this country?

[00:05:18]>> You know, first of all, Michael is right. Trump was found um civily liable not >> in this Eugene Carol case. And I I I do think you have hit the nail on the head here, Alicia. Retribution, as we've often talked about here at this table, has become it's not a it's not a bug. It is a feature of this administration. It has become a governing principle. And every everything they um say other people are doing, they are actually doing it. And when they say that the government has been weaponized against Donald Trump over the x amount of years, th this is what weaponization actually looks like. This is what it is. They are showing you right out in the open what it looks like when the government puts a bull's eyee on the back of insert name here. This week it's Reed Hoffman and maybe Eugene Carol. A couple weeks ago it was James Comey. A couple weeks before it was Tish Tish James. How deep does the rabbit hole go here and who is going to step up and stop this administration?

[00:06:16]>> Well, let's bring in MS Now legal analyst Christa Greenberg. she can help us sort through some of this because she's a former federal prosecutor who served as deputy chief of the Southern District of New York's criminal division and can clarify for all of us the difference between civil liability and being guilty. She's host uh uh Courtside with Christa Greenberg uh on YouTube.

[00:06:37]Also with us, Angelo Corusan, president and chair of Media Matters who has his finger on so many pulses. He also can give us a beat on all of this. Christie, is it your sense that he's actually go they're going after Eugene Carol here or is it your sense that they're going after Reed Hoffman?

[00:06:54]>> Well, the reporting initially said it was Egene Carol. Now the reporting is shifting to say it is Reed Hoffman. But I think the message is clear to anyone that if you accuse somebody in this country of sexual abuse, civil, criminal, whatever it may be, um you know, and it is somebody who is rich, who is powerful, who is connected, you know, you wonder why survivors don't come forward. It's because of this. It's because they can find themselves not only dealing with potential civil lawsuits but now potential criminal investigations and anybody who helps them. That's the Reed Hoffman's who say, "Hey, we think it's a good thing that you came forward against somebody who is rich and powerful. We want to help you out in that lawsuit. We think your voice should be heard." Yeah, we're going to come after you too now and criminally investigate you, too. I mean, the message cannot be more clear here to survivors of sexual abuse, to people who have been defamed that when you do so, there could be a cost to you. It is the the goal here is to silence them, to silence them and anybody who may want to help them. And that is so dangerous.

[00:08:08]That is certainly part of the retribution, but a very, very troubling part. These are the people whose voices we want to make sure are heard, and they are trying everything they can to make sure we don't hear them.

[00:08:20]you know, this administration, um, Angelo, your organization, Media Matters, has been a a a has been a target and has tussled with, um, different factions, if you will, of of Trump 2.0. Um, but it's not just specifically foundations or just specifically you, they have really taken a blanket um, targeting, if you will, to organizations that they say have funded um, what they would call DEI efforts.

[00:08:48]Right? and I'm using air quotes for the people who are listening or folks that have supported again small d democracy efforts. Let's not forget the Southern Poverty Law Center again has also recently been in the crosshairs of this Department of Justice. I have spoken to um uh some former colleagues of mine who are now advising some of these philanthropic organizations and it's my understanding that they got together a couple months ago to start talking about how they can combat and be ready for things like this from the administration.

[00:09:17]>> Yeah. And I think there's a reason why they they started to talk about it is because of that one of the things that got mentioned already which is that conspiracy charge and it's you know part of what we're dealing with here and you noted it in the intro is that the line between personal grievance and government power is now gone right ever since Todd Blanch and this was there was already a plenty of revenge and retaliation as a hallmark of this government but ever since Todd Blanch took over the the Department of Justice he has really synced up the the the the DOJ and all of its power with the right-wing media, the media machine, the MAGA media machine behind it. The story lines that were being pushed there uh in those landscapes are now generating the investigations. They really synced up and that then gets to the so what when you can kind of understand what they're doing here because for Trump there's this larger, you know, immediate tactical revenge, very personal side of it. But we shouldn't lose sight of the people around him. When Steve before Trump got back into office, Steven Miller had an entire operation that was designed to think about how to deploy resources in this in this type of way to take out the democratic institutions, liberal institutions, the funding bases behind them. And that's where it all comes together because they're able to do two things at the same time. satisfy Trump's personal animus while also deploying government power in such a way where it has a potential meaningful chilling effect and and and undermining the ability for people to fight back against these attacks. You need people like Reed Hoffman and others. You need civil society. You need foundations and funders that are willing to put it to put money and resources in into these fights into things they care about.

[00:10:56]That's why donor protections have always been upheld so long and so thoroughly. I mean, there was just a Supreme Court case about this. So there is sort of a few things happening here at the same time, but at the end of the day, the line is gone. The DOJ and the right-wing media are basically now one and the same.

[00:11:11]>> Clock it. That's all I have to say on that one. You know, this is a clip for for those of you are trying to keep track. What Angelo just put on the table is is the through line that I think a lot of people really need to understand how how this weaponization is occurring, Christie, and what this weaponization is doing. You have, for example, um uh an opportunity to push back. We talked about pushing back. Jordan uh Rubin uh talked about the potential v uh vindictive prosecution argument that could be made uh by uh Eugene Carol noting vindictive prosecution motions are rarely won but Trump's revenge themed second term as we just heard laid out by Angelo uh has spawned a series of such motions brought by highprofile targets of the administration. Um, that for me says to the point that Simone mentioned before about foundations and nonprofits deciding to begin to link arms and figure out how we going to create our own wall of of defense and offense here. um this type of approach um calling out and and showing before the court that what this really is. Not only is it, you know, the retribution thing, which is kind of the political piece, but here here's the legal piece.

[00:12:31]It's called vindictive prosecution. Is that something that is in uh Eugene Carol's quiver along with um what we now see as Reed Hoffman's um argument as well potentially >> if they end up bringing a prosecution against Eugene Carol absolutely that is going to be a defense because there any you know first year law student looking at this would say of course she didn't perjure herself in order for a statement under oath to be uh you For somebody to be committing perjury, it doesn't just have to be false. It has to be knowingly and intentionally false. And it has to be material. And as you already read, the courts already looked at this and said, "Hey, this issue of whether there was any outside funding to her lawsuits.

[00:13:20]Totally not relevant to her legal claims. We're not even going to let her be cross-examined on it because it's not probitative of anything. And so if it's not material, if it didn't affect the outcome, even if it was false and even if she knew it was false, it's still not perjury. So this is kind of very basic analysis. They don't have a case here.

[00:13:39]And the fact that they may look to pursue it anyway, despite the fact that she's not only won in a defamation suit against the president once, she won twice to the tune of over $80 million in a judgment against him. I mean, the fact that they are pursuing her of all people, somebody who fought Donald Trump and won twice. I I mean, that is yeah, textbook case for vindictive prosecution if they choose to go down that road. So, I I would expect absolutely that her lawyers would would bring that case. And Reed Hoffman has been named dropped by the president before on truth social and you know he is somebody who has been mentioned specifically and so I I would expect he would have a similar claim.

[00:14:24]Again I don't even understand >> what potential claim there would be that he committed a crime. So he funded a successful civil lawsuit that that's not a crime. Um I mean he didn't conceal it.

[00:14:36]He was open about the fact that that's where the money was going. Um you know where where is the crime there? Uh, so yes, he would also potentially have a claim, too.

[00:14:45]>> Angelo, your your organization, Media Matters, has pointed out that Fox has ignored the Carol probe. Um, I want to ask about how they're treating a different story. You had a bunch of former judges come out yesterday slamming Trump's IRS slushfund deal. Um, writing, "The court was deceived." The 24-page motion reads, adding that the settlement commandeers the contrived sum of $ 1.776 billion from the United States Treasury to be handed out to recipients chosen by a commission effectively controlled by the president.

[00:15:17]I should note these judges, they were appointed by Democratic presidents, Republican presidents. How is this playing on conservative media?

[00:15:25]>> They're doing so the similar thing.

[00:15:26]They're not a lot of them are not going to carry a ton of water for it. you know, there's not a huge amount of enthusiasm in in sort of the the large part of conservative media. There are pieces out there that are, you know, a little bit enthusiastic, but that's not the defining characteristic. It's what you said at the intro is that when they have a really bad thing that they don't know how to polish up, they ignore it.

[00:15:44]Uh, and that's largely how they're dealing with that fund. Um, they're just letting it sort of be sort of an online troll thing and not something they're trying to carry a ton of water for. And that tells you how toxic it is, right?

[00:15:54]which we're seeing play out in sort of the larger Republican circles where there's some real anxiety and panic. I don't want to give them too much credit there cuz they're willing to tolerate that for all kinds of things, but that's that's how they're dealing with it.

[00:16:05]>> All right, Christy Breamberg, thank you so much for getting us started. Angela, you're going to stick with us. We want to discuss Donald Trump's making America's 250th birthday celebration all about himself. And later, Congressman James Wenshaw joins us on set as he prepares to question former AG Pam Bondi over her handling of the Epstein investigation. You're watching the week night.

[00:16:26]>> Who was president of the United States on the 250th anniversary bill?

[00:16:30]>> As if that were not tacky enough, Trump officials are also focused on turning the people's property into a sporting event with a UFC cage match planned on the White House lawn for Trump's birthday. And later this summer, a Freedom 250 Grand Prix will have race cars speeding over the National Mall.

[00:16:49]Angela Corusone is back with us. Simone, Michael, that sounded like an SNL read.

[00:16:54]>> It did. And you know, um I I'll just be rather blunt about it. These people make me ill at this point. Um I was reflecting today as I was sitting there listening to Bessant. Uh and particularly in that last clip, I don't see anything wrong with having the president's face on a $250 bill. Okay, so let me let me riddle y'all and imagine this. um President Kla Harris coming before the American people on the 250th anniversary or birthday of this nation saying, "You know what? Uh I've decided that uh I want my face on a $250 bill. Uh particularly given uh the the you know the history of African-Americans in this country. At least she'd have a nexus, right? A reason to make that kind of request or to make that kind of claim. There is no universe, people, none. None in which Donald Trump's face will be put on any currency, dead or alive.

[00:17:56]So, help me understand, Angelo, what this really is about. Um, I mean to the point that you have, you know, the director of the printing bureau >> resigning, noting that, you know, she and her staff repeatedly explained that there were legal and procedural obstacles to producing the note and that it would take years longer than they envisioned, right? And so she abruptly resigns Miss Sullivan resigns her post uh on April 27 because this is unconscionable because it's inconsistent and this is not what our 250th birthday should be about. It should be a party of by and for the people not some individual who thinks he's a king.

[00:18:45]>> So it's about self I mean what he's basically doing is self- mythologizing.

[00:18:50]I mean, and and you know, he's wants to be sort of a modern-day Paul Bunan, but instead of a lumberjack, he's basically a grifter who does vanity projects that are stupid or sickening um or silly, and then he makes other people pay for them.

[00:19:04]And I mean, when Scott Bessant was making that comment, I couldn't help Miller that the thing sitting behind him was Trump accounts, another Trump brand thing. He's already got a dollar coin coming out. His name is being put on currency. They're already the first time a living president's name is on things.

[00:19:17]I mean, we can go through the list.

[00:19:18]Everybody knows how silly this is. So, but that's what this is about. It's about self- mythologizing. Um, and this is just one small piece of that story.

[00:19:26]And to tie it in to this larger 250 anniversary is is ultimately, you know, obviously going to give him the greatest marketing synergy that you can h happen to have. And parallel to this, we shouldn't ignore the corruption side of this because people get to pay for access. You know, Dana White was a big booster for Trump and a good friend and now he gets to have this thing on the White House lawn, right? I mean, that's the kind of that's sort of what's happening here. It's that it's not just the rank sort of like, you know, you know, money side of the corruption. It's also all the access and the benefits and the opportunities that people get, you know, that are tied into this big event.

[00:19:57]>> Maybe we should put Harriet Tubman Simone on the $250 bill.

[00:20:01]>> I'm still waiting on my Tubman 20s that apparently are now delayed until after Trump leaves office. Here's the first of all, I do think it's important to just start from the place of like it is a uh it is illegal to have a living person's um likeness on our currency because there is a law that says that. So while there have been people out there debating like oh well is this it's illegal and maybe that's where we should start and end. It is illegal. the piece about America's 250th birthday. Um, you know, I was checking the day and you know, when America celebrated our bsentennial way back when, it was um also a time of you were at that. I know you were because we were coming out of Vietnam and people were talking about Watergate, right?

[00:20:44]>> And it was was that not a time of like also where people were struggling with like what the government was doing?

[00:20:50]People didn't trust the government. Um it was a time where we were talking about what kind of country we wanted to be. Similarly, we are having that same conversation right now. And I think the story of the Trump administration is a story about who gets to be American, who gets to define what American is. And what Donald Trump is attempting to do with America 250, which is different than Freedom 250. America 250 is the nonpartisan group that is that was established to celebrate America's 250th birthday. Freedom 250 is Trump's grift, okay? And branding situation.

[00:21:24]>> Know the difference, folks.

[00:21:25]>> Know the difference. Um, and I think that matters because now any association with the 250th anniversary of our country is now being deemed as a way in which someone is either are they standing with the president, the it's now become about one man instead of the constant push and pull and the questions that America should be asking itself.

[00:21:46]And I don't think that that's an they've done that by accident. And I think they've done that on purpose.

[00:21:50]>> Yeah, they really confused it. And the truth is to some extent we should be thinking about Trump in this moment because it is it's not just it it is going to really define how we deal with Trump now and and Trumpism is going to define the future of America. I mean that is just that is the reality of it.

[00:22:05]And know one of the things that President Biden said during the campaign and you know maybe not wasn't the best political thing but when he talked about this as a battle for the soul of the country he wasn't wrong. I mean this really is truly about what who we are and what we are going to be. Um and so he they are conflating it on purpose. Uh I I don't think we should ignore that to a degree. We have to start doing a little soulsearching and asking ourselves who do we want to be as a country and then act accordingly. And I think that that's the reality. We're not going to get through this and we're going to let Trump control the terms and define the trajectory um unless we're collectively able to answer some of those questions.

[00:22:37]>> At least we got to also be honest about who we are in this moment before we can talk about who we want to be.

[00:22:42]>> Go indeed. Indeed, this is a moment for reflection before we can move forward.

[00:22:46]Simone, my my pop culture queen, I don't know if you saw this headline that came from MS Now about how artists are now dropping out of the Trump backed event for America's 250th birthday. Let me read you just a little bit. Morris Day in the Times said in a post on Instagram that contrary to rumor, the group will not perform at the event. Rapper Young MC also announced on Facebook that he would not perform. from Freedom Williams of the CNC Music Factory said in a video Wednesday on Instagram that he was not told that the show was affiliated with President Donald Trump and may reconsider the group's participation.

[00:23:17]You can see people Simone just backing away from this thing because they also again to the point I just made the administration has intentionally conflated um their separate Trump 250 which is freedom 250 with America 250.

[00:23:32]And so these artists signed up for what I believe, given the comments that they've made, were an America 250 celebration, like Fourth of July, yes, of course, 250th anniversary, and then quickly found out that they actually signed up to be a part of specifically a Trump thing. I think the problem I I think this is for all of us. I mean, Michael, this look, I think the people who have uh I I love America, but because I love America, I get to criticize America, right? um Jayce Baldwin um made this made this point. I think that this is a this is a time for celebration. It's a time for introspection and Donald Trump is trying to hijack this moment to be about him which is so uniquely authoritarian.

[00:24:14]Literally, the script writes itself. So, we have to interrogate what is going on here and ask the questions. And frankly, I think the artists, they have some more responsibility. Y'all got to check.

[00:24:24]>> Y'all just can't be signing up for any Tom, Dick, and Harry event and then being like, "Oh my god, we didn't know."

[00:24:28]But I think I think yeah that's a very good point. Uh I and I think and Angela I'll just jump in at any point here because I think it's I I think what Simone says is very very important and I think a lot of it is leads to the confusion that we see the American people have right now about the difference between America 250 versus Freedom 250 and what that stands for and how they should proceed. I think people with the more they know and see Donald Trump's buttprint on everything.

[00:24:56]>> Yep.

[00:24:57]>> Uh they're going to not want to participate.

[00:24:59]>> Yep. And I that's it. They people to that point we we they're going to flood the zone. That's part of their strategy, right? And so we all everybody has to do a little better, especially the artists and knowing the distinction, helping reinforce that line. Just like the line between Trump's grievances and and and government, you know, have have collapsed, the lines everywhere are collapsing. And you we have to all hold the line. We all have our part. And so these artists have have a role in that, too. and sort of helping reinforce the the difference between the two.

[00:25:22]>> Everybody's got a part to play. Angelo Corusone, you play yours very well, my friend. We appreciate your time here as always. After the break, House Oversight Democrat James Walkenshaw will join us at the table. And this is as the committee is set to grill Pam Bondi tomorrow over her botched Epstein investigation. That's coming up only on the Weeknet. ARO. Former Attorney General Pam Bondi, after months of evading a subpoena, will sit down for a transcribed interview with the House Oversight Committee to discuss her handling of the Epstein investigation.

[00:25:53]Now, transcript a transcript of tomorrow's interview will eventually be released, but it will not be recorded and Bondi will not be under oath. House Oversight Ranking member Robert Garcia tells MS Now there might be more opportunities to question her in the future.

[00:26:10]This is not uh the only conversation that we can have with her and I think certainly and certainly if we win the majority I think the former attorney general can expect more questions from us. There are going to be other parts of this investigation that start coming together in the months ahead. We may want to speak to her again.

[00:26:28]>> Joining us at the table is Democratic Congressman James Walenshaw of Virginia.

[00:26:32]He is a member of the House Oversight Committee and he will be in tomorrow's interview.

[00:26:36]>> Welcome back to the table, Congressman.

[00:26:38]And and so um I just want to set at least my little part of this conversation this way. I'd like you to listen to uh Miss Bondi uh in her uh appearance before uh committee on uh February 11th of this year.

[00:26:56]>> I will chairman the gentle lady. I'm >> not going to get in the gutter for her theatrics. You know why? Because Donald Trump, the Dow, the Dow right now is over, The Dow is over $50,000. I don't know why you're laughing. This guy has Trump derangement syndrome. He needs to get You're a failed politician. I find it interesting that she keeps going after President Trump, the greatest president in American history.

[00:27:24]>> Uh I hope so. you're not expecting anything different from that tomorrow because I don't think you will get anything different from that uh tomorrow. Um whether as the attorney general of this country or as a private citizen that is Pam Bondi. That is all Pam Bondi can do. That is all she is worth in this conversation for Donald Trump is to do that. So what is your expectation when you get her there? We were talking a little bit about already the rumbling of, you know, maybe limiting her time in the room. They're already Republicans don't want this conversation to begin with for a whole host of reason given how the elections are looking and in the politics generally right now for them. Um, so get put her in, get her out quickly. Her attitude will carry them in the moment she's there. What are you expecting?

[00:28:15]Yeah, look, I think first Pam Bondi is a central figure, maybe the central figure in this cover up of the Epstein files, right? And we saw there her motus operande when she's asked difficult questions, it's to be combative, to be aggressive. It'll be interesting tomorrow to see whether when the cameras aren't on. I think what we saw there, she was performing for her boss at the time, Donald Trump. That boss fired her anyway. Maybe he didn't like the performance. I'm not sure. It'll be interesting to see what she does. Look, there is a subpoena in effect. Chairman Comr has allowed her to kind of slide around that and have a behind the scenes, not videotaped transcribed interview tomorrow. But if we don't get answers to the questions we asked, as the ranking member said, we'll bring her back in the future.

[00:29:02]>> When you have the gavl, you'll have to.

[00:29:03]I think >> one one of the elements of tomorrow that I find particularly interesting, Congressman, is that Pam Bondi is being represented at her interview by Assistant Attorney General Hermit Dylan.

[00:29:13]Um, you have legal experts who say that raises the prospects that the DOJ could direct Bondi to not answer some questions posed by the committee. DOJ said it routinely provides staff to assist with congressional engagement involving past department staff actions.

[00:29:28]I mean, I think the hope was that when she was outside the building, there would be a different level of cander or transparency that, as Michael said, like is advertised as not being the case.

[00:29:41]>> Yeah. Look, I think Pam Bondi wants to remain in the good graces of Donald Trump. We learned this week that she's appointed to this AI committee despite having literally no experience on that subject. And I think Harit Dylan's presence there is to make sure Pam Bondi stays in line tomorrow. I think that's why she's there and the rest of the DA DOJ attorneys who who will be there tomorrow. There's no question about that.

[00:30:07]>> It it also feels like honestly Har Dylan uh ironically is also somebody that y'all might want to speak to if Democrats take back uh the House because Harit Dylan is at the heart of a lot of what's going on when it comes to this um elections, this oversight. I'm using air of course for the folks at home that the government is trying to um exert over our electoral infrastructure. She is carrying out a lot of that.

[00:30:31]>> Yeah, she's a key figure in the weaponization of the Trump DOJ. There's no question about that. She's also all but auditioning to be the permanent attorney general. So, there's an interesting little soap opera taking place between Todd Blanch and Har Dylan.

[00:30:44]think we'll see Harme Dylan come out before the Fox News cameras tomorrow to make a little performance to make her case to Donald Trump that she should be the attorney general. Can Michael, it's just crazy to me. I I know why they're not recording it, right? I know why um the your Republican colleagues, congressmen are making sure she's not under oath. It's it's just still so frustrating for me. I know why they're doing it, but can the people at home understand that they are doing this because they know the video would be damaging to them?

[00:31:15]>> Yeah. Yeah, you know, right? It's like >> you don't want the camera on you when you're saying the words, >> right?

[00:31:21]>> It's all part of the coverup. I'll give you a little bit more detail on it. So, chairman of our committee, James Comr, might remember uh in 2020 after the election, he was one of the minority of House Republicans who voted to certify the elections.

[00:31:36]>> I don't know if one deserves credit for doing the obvious right thing, but he did the right thing in that moment.

[00:31:41]Since then, and especially during his chairmanship of this committee, he has been working desperately to bend the knee to Donald Trump because >> he's running for governor of Kentucky.

[00:31:52]And the only thing that could stop him is a MAGA candidate endorsed by Donald Trump. So James Comr has to do Trump's bidding tomorrow. Not being videotaped for the American people. That's Trump's bidding. That's what James Comer congressional Republicans are doing.

[00:32:07]>> I I just want to say uh for the record, we we really need to get over this uh inside the Republican party. This idea that we're going to, you know, cowtow the way they're cowtowing. You are not leading when you're doing that. You're bending over when you do that. And if that is comfortable for you as a politician, then the people that you are asking to vote for you should know that.

[00:32:35]And they the thing they do about it is not vote for your dumb behind because that's the best you can do. Mr. CR is exactly cowttow this way or anybody else. We've seen good good Republicans, Alicia, get kicked out of office for just doing the right thing in their job.

[00:32:54]As the congressman noted just now, comr voted to certify the election, did the right thing, didn't want to overturn, knew the process, and now is doing the whole backstroke because he wants another office, a higher office, and doesn't want a MAGA candidate running against him. That's not leadership.

[00:33:11]That's pathetic.

[00:33:12]>> Well, that's me. And well, no, and I keep going back, Michael, congressman, to what is at stake here, which is in one sense, um, these survivors who have fought so long for justice and accountability and in a bigger sense creating a world in an environment where these type of improprieties are not allowed and power is not abused. I want to connect two dots though because I do think the DOJ potentially going after Eugene Carol or as it is now being reported going after Reed Hoffman. That doesn't just send a message to Reed Hoffman or to Eugene Carol. It sends a message to every survivor out there who would consider coming forward about the long tale of retribution. I mean, I wonder if you've talked about this with the survivors as you're watching what's unfolding coming out of DOJ. Um the message that you think it sends, especially in contrast to an administration that ran on release of the Epstein files and has failed to live up to their own promise. In conversations that I and others have had with survivors over the last year, time after time after time, they have shared the fears they have about coming forward and speaking out against all of these wealthy and powerful men, Epstein, Les Wexner, Donald Trump, and others. And when I heard the news about this attack, I don't know how else to describe it, on Eugene Carol, another courageous survivor, I immediately thought of the Epstein survivors and how they must be feeling in this moment. This is their fear realized. Not just a wealthy individual coming after them, the president of the United States using the power, the full power of the United States government to attack a survivor of sexual abuse. That's what's happening >> and that's what I think the American people want you and your fellow members of Congress to do something about because the voice of those women cannot be silenced uh the way that we're seeing Eugene Carol's voice trying to be silenced by this president. But anyway, Congressman James Walkenshaw, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. In just a moment, folks, Congressman James Klyber sits down for an exclusive 101 with MS Now. We're going.