MSNBC Highlights - Sept. 1

Trump is not a perfect person. I did not vote for a perfect person. You did not vote when you voted for Joe Biden. I truly believe, though,

that Trump has the best interest of Putin. Putin and all the other dictators. That's who he wants.

He doesn't care about us.

He cares about his dictator friends. Hey there again, everyone. It is five o'clock on the East Coast.

I'm Stephanie Ruhle in for Nicole Wallace on this Labor Day. And it may have been summertime, but constituents were not taking it easy. Numerous Republican lawmakers were on the receiving end of the call for Nicole Wallace on this Labor Day. And it may have been summertime, but constituents were not taking it easy. Numerous Republican lawmakers were on the receiving end of serious frustration and straight up anger from those they represent at recent in-person town halls.

And many of these lawmakers were in states that voted overwhelmingly for Donald John Trump. I'm talking about Alabama and Ohio, where constituents slammed Trump's agenda items. Things like cuts to Medicaid and the so-called Big Beautiful Bill, his harsh immigration crackdown,

the federal takeover of Washington, D.C., and Donald Trump cozying up to dictators. Bottom line, the attendees were loud and clear, saying, we do not want this.

Take a listen at a little more of that anger just from this past week.

I'm going to stand up for what I said.

Answer the question, you coward.

Trump is doing a great job of securing our vote.

You guys are just going to fall.

Well, the big beautiful deal was actually the Trump tax cut.

And I would also say that Trump is not a dictator. He's not going to be a dictator.

You may think that.

You may have joked about that, quipped about that. That is his personality.

I'm not a psychologist.

But I'm not going to try to...

...we have to stay. Believe it.

You're not helping me. Believe me, you're not helping me. You need to take your head out of Trump's ass and start doing your, your representation of us.

One of the representatives who held a town hall last week, Barry Moore of Alabama, left the event he held in his home district last week through the back door. Moore denied that he had to slip out saying, quote, "'We left like any other event.

I think we tried to engage and answer questions, but unfortunately it got hijacked. But you don't have to take his word for it. Judge for yourself.

Why are people not getting due process? Why are any prison not getting due process? Due process for a citizen and a non-citizen are different.

False. False. Lies. false, false lies. The 5th and 14th amendments allow for this. The green court has backed Today, on Labor Day, that same anger we heard at town halls is being taken to the streets. More than a thousand workers over billionaires events are planned nationwide protesting against the ultra wealthy and corruption, looking instead to unify working class people. Today's protests are organized by the same group

that led the massive protests on May 1st, and they write the following, quote, just like any bad boss, the way we stop the takeover is with collective action. We are Mayday strong, working people rising up to stop the billionaire takeover, not just through the ballot box or the courts, but through building a bigger and stronger movement.

The movement against Trump and his party's anti-democratic ways is where we start this hour with three of my all time favorite gentlemen, the host of the Bulwark podcast, MSNBC political analyst Tim Miller, plus MSNBC senior political analyst and Texas resident Matt Dowd, and Princeton University professor

and MSNBC political analyst Eddie Glaude. Mr. Miller, you get the first crack at this. Your reaction to Republican lawmakers, getting it handed it to them at a whole bunch of town halls.

Hey girl, well, it's good to be with you. They deserve it, getting it handed to them. They're doing so few of these. I do think it's making it easy for people who are really engaged and really upset right now to organize and get out to those events. And that's what you're seeing, right? Like, you know, we don't, obviously,

Alabama is a red state, you know, that's, you know, overwhelmingly voting for Republicans. It doesn't mean that there aren't any Democrats in Alabama. There are Democrats, there are people, there are independents, there are people that are Republicans who are unhappy with what's happening in the administration.

And those are the folks that are motivated to turn out right now. I think that the thing that is probably the most meaningful about this is, you know, that's what really drives midterm elections, energy, engagement, like which side is more motivated to act. Like, you're seeing these things that opponents of this administration, broadly defined, are the ones that are the most engaged right now. I think that is a good sign for opposition

as we head into, I guess there'll be a couple elections this November and then mostly next November. So I think that's like the biggest takeaway. I'm not sure that you're gonna see much change in behavior from these Republicans. They didn't, very few of them actually did town halls

and you can kind of see why.

Eddie, what do you think? I completely agree.

First of all, it's great to see you, Stephanie. I completely agree with Tim. I think this is a sign of, among a particular portion of the electorate, of deep disagreement with Trump's policies. I think that's only going to intensify

as the tariffs begin to impact that grocery bill and the efforts to purchase goods for families and for children and the efforts to purchase goods for families and for children and the like. I think that's only going to intensify. But I've yet to see whether or not this is going to translate

in terms of a spying for some of these Republicans. As they see much more disagreement among the electorate with regards to Trump's policies, will that embo in them to disagree with donald trump i don't think so will it give them uh... you know some cover to took

you know to create some distance between themselves and donald trump's policies i don't think so so uh... it's it's good for the midterms i think but in terms of uh... their relationship to donald trump i don't think anything will change

doctor down let's go to Chicago, because that is a city where Donald Trump may be deploying troops next. It was also one of the sites of the protests today. And I want to share a bit of sound from a couple of people who are there.

Are you concerned about the presence of possibly seen tanks and National Guard

members on our streets? Absolutely. Absolutely. It's important to show up.

I mean it's the only thing we have right now because Congress is just not doing the job to stop him. So he has no checks and balances except us. The people.

That's it.

The people are the ultimate check on leadership. I'm pretty sure you agree with that, Matthew.

Yeah, I'm just, as I listen to that and watch this over the course of the last few days, I just can't help but think how far afield Donald Trump and the Republican Party has moved from conservative principles. It used to be local control and states' rights was a huge plank of the conservatives. Not only that, it was rule of law, global trade, balanced budgets, all of those things. They've thrown every conservative principle out, including this last one, which is local control

in the midst of this. In my view, Donald Trump is only using this to try to distract from all of his horrible situation he is in. Not only if you just take the Epstein situation, which still has so many unanswered questions,

he's underwater on every major issue in the country right now. He's underwater on the economy, he's underwater on inflation, He's underwater on the economy. He's underwater on inflation. He's underwater on immigration. He's underwater on health care.

He's underwater on education, which is why his approval numbers are lower today than they were in 2018 when the Republican Party was defeated across the country. And we saw some of this energy in advance of that today that we saw then that we see today in this.

But this is his sort of, I'm gonna go to the urban areas, which is like, I'm gonna go find black and brown people to blame for somebody else's problem in this. The American public just isn't accepting this because until you deal with the fundamental issues that they're facing, which is not what he,

what Donald Trump is trying to act like it is in Washington, DC or Chicago or any other major city. It's that the prices that they have, it's the economy, it's they can't sell their homes, it's the cost of health care. And I think until Donald Trump addresses those, which I don't think he wants to, which is why he's distracting in this, he continues to throw these things out to try to do that

because he's deeply underwater.

Tim, Iowa is certainly the reddest of red states, but now we've learned in the last couple of days that Iowa Senator Joni Ernst, obviously Republican, is not going to seek re-election. We do not know why, but I think we all remember that town hall that she held in May when she responded to questions about Medicaid cuts saying everyone will die. That did not go over well and despite your feelings for this president I know you still have a lot of Republicans on speed dial. What do you know about her recent decision not to seek re-election?

Sure and especially in Iowa I've done a couple of campaigns have a lot of friends that are working there. Look I I think this actually goes back to the Hegseth confirmation, really, more than the town hall. At the time, you know, we might all roll our eyes at this because the Republicans always seem to fold in the Senate. But that doesn't mean that at least some of them weren't like really seriously contemplating their political choices. You know, in the fallout from Trump's second election, he's nominating all these people

that are clearly unqualified. For Ernst, I think she was hoping she might have been on the Secretary of Defense list. She gets passed over for a weekend Fox and Friends anchor. She has deep concerns, personal concerns about sexual assault in the military. He has allegations of sexual assault against him. obviously isn't going to take that very seriously, has shown disrespect to women in service, and so there was a lot of pressure on her then

to vote for him and I think that she didn't really want to, just projecting a little bit from what I've heard from friends, and she ends up voting for him and you know here she is now in like this situation in the Senate where you just got to do whatever Donald Trump says, you have no independence, you know, here she is now in, like, this situation in the Senate where you just got to do whatever Donald Trump says. You have no independence. You're getting shouted down at town halls.

It's not a fun job. So, I don't have any sympathy for her. It's a job that she signed up for. But I think if you think of it in that context, it makes sense she's not going to run.

Adrian, first to you. what J.B. Pritzker and the mayor of Chicago's pushback is specifically. What exactly do they say would be better help would be more

effective in combating crime period in Chicago. So I'll start with your first question Katie. Over the weekend we heard from Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker as well as Mayor Brandon Johnson. Both of them saying yes, they will welcome help, just not this type of help. They're saying they do not need troops to help combat crime. Instead, pointing to funding that has been cut. Mayor Brandon Johnson has said multiple times, restore the funding that was in place to help with projects like crime prevention. That is one thing both the mayor and the governor agree on and just

moments ago this block was shut off we're in downtown Chicago, you can even walk along the street or up and down the sidewalk because there are so many people here taking part in a rally they dubbed as workers over billionaires I spoke with the organizers and many just everyday people who showed up here who say they do not want billionaires to determine the path of this country.

Here's some more of my conversation with two people who were here for that rally. Take a listen. Are you concerned about the presence of possibly seeing tanks and National Guard

members on our streets? Absolutely. It's important to show up.

I mean it's the only thing we have right now because Congress is just not doing the job to stop him. So he has no checks and balances except us. The people. That's it.

So that couple pretty concerned, as well as hundreds of others who were here who are now marching. I do want to underscore, you mentioned it in the intro to this story, that violent crime overall here in Chicago is down. That is against the backdrop of what has

happened this holiday weekend. Since Friday, the city of Chicago has been tracking shootings. And there have been more than 50 people shot in the city, including seven people killed. Among the victims, we're talking about a 14-year-old

who was injured, as well as a 17-year-old who was injured. The latest mass shooting happened in the one o'clock hour this morning. So people here that we spoke with say yes they want to see crime reduced but they say the best way to fight that is by restoring the funding. And I will point out Katie I spoke with an organizer of a nonprofit on the city's south side who works with violence prevention. When there are tense situations in the city's south side who works with violence prevention. When there are tense

situations in the city, his crew will go out. But because of those budget cuts, he had to cut a third of his staff, saying he lost more than $500,000. Overall, people want to see that money restored. It's something they can't say enough.

Let me ask you this. The Republicans and Donald Trump specifically are trying to argue, Adrian, that the Democrats are saying crime is okay, that they don't really want to fight crime, and that that's what people believe as well, that they believe the president wants to restore order. Do you get any sense of that on the street? Are people blaming Democrats for disorder and looking to Republicans to help restore it? Are they looking at both parties and saying neither one is very serious about this? They're both just playing politics.

Are you hearing anything aimed at anyone beyond Donald Trump in the city of Chicago?

I can tell you about a conversation I had with a woman here just moments ago. I asked her, what is your message for President Trump? She said, point blank, I don't have a message for the president. My message is for Congress. She said she wants Congress to do their job and others have said Congress can take a stand and stop what they believe is an overarch of government. They're basically saying the president is misusing his, what they say, executive power.

And folks here are not opposed to fighting crime. Nobody wants to see or be on the map for shootings in their city. They do want the crime to continue to go down, but they're saying that there are other ways to fight it. Katie.

All right, so Vaughn, that again is the argument from the president that the Democrats don't want to fight crime. Does he believe that he's got a winning hand on this issue. Maybe not in the city of Chicago but is he looking to a national

audience for this. What's the motivation. Right. And he found a partner a quasi partner you could say, in Mayor Mary L. Bowser here of Washington, D.C., whose hands were effectively tied in terms of her cooperation, but just last week suggesting publicly that the federal law enforcement did help address crime here locally,

but of course that does not negate the other concerns that the D.C. mayor raised publicly, including that was the mere presence of National Guard figures and military vehicles on the streets of Washington D.C. masked individuals including from ICE and other law enforcement federal law enforcement agencies that were not quite clear on the streets of Washington D.C. and what impact that has at a city community level. And that is where you saw strong pushback in real time

here among others in DC, as well as in Los Angeles. But that is where the president here this weekend in multiple social media posts said that if Pritzker does not address crime in his city, that quote, we're coming, setting up the fact that he could very well

send the National Guard and the other federal law enforcement into the streets of Chicago imminently. And I think that hits at the heart of the question as to exactly what is the goal and what is the purpose. You know Christy Noem over this weekend Katie suggested that Los Angeles would be gone if it were not for the National Guard and Donald Trump. Of course that is so far from reality. We're talking about a couple block radius where the demonstrations and where the protests were actually taking place in Los Angeles. And when you're looking at what the end game here is the administration hasn't quite laid that out unless you're

leaving the National Guard in long term or the federal law enforcement. Pritzker suggested he would be eager to continue working with the FBI and ATF on specific cases for example. But asked Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff here at the White House on Friday, whether he had talked to President Trump and had a conversation with him about potentially invoking the Insurrection Act at some point, which would allow the military to be used for domestic law enforcement purposes. And despite trying to ask him that question three different times, he didn't answer.

And I think that is hitting at the heart of the concern of a great many in the city of Chicago, for example, is if a stone is thrown, if there is an escalation between civilians and law enforcement, then what happens? on our screen a list of the most violent U.S. cities, and a number of them are in red states. St. Louis, Missouri, red state. Detroit,

Michigan, red recently, you know. Louisiana, Monroe, Louisiana, red. New Orleans, Louisiana, red. Alexandria, Louisiana, red. Memphis, Tennessee, red. Cleveland, Ohio, red. And a lot of these have Democratic mayors, so it's a mixed control. But we're not seeing Donald Trump use the military or threaten the military in any one of these places. Vaughn, should we expect that to change,

or are there other considerations involved here?

I don't think we have any reason to believe that it's going to change in short order. We don't know where this presidency is going to head over the next three and a half years. Instead, we have seen him take on Baltimore and calling it a hellhole effectively. And of course, the crime stats in Baltimore and that city's journey over the last three decades doesn't reflect that either. But look, I think that Nancy Mace is a good example. She's now running for governor of South Carolina. And while there's not a South Carolina city specifically

on that top 10 list, she was asked about sending in the National Guard. And she hedged on her commitment to an openness to sending in troops into the streets of some of these more Republican cities. The same thing with Speaker Mike Johnson,

who hails from Louisiana. And so I think that that is where you have seen a great many Republican lawmakers who have stepped back and not been as vocal on the federalizing of local law enforcement here in D.C. But also what their plans are for this administration moving forward. Because as you said at some point facts are going to run in the way and hit an intersection that runs perpendicular to that of the distorted presentation of American cities that this administration, now for months, has been trying to portray.

So Barbara, what about the legal issue here? I mean, in talking about Los Angeles, Kristi Noem claiming falsely that LA wouldn't be standing. I think anybody who knows LA knows that that couldn't possibly be farther from the truth. Even if you don't think LA is a great place to be right now, the idea that those riots were anything consuming in that city is laughable,

especially when you think back to bigger riots in LA. Even those were relatively contained. I'm thinking about the LA riots specifically or even the Watts riots. Legally speaking, though, Donald Trump ran into some issues in California, in Los Angeles. Is he going to run into those same issues in Chicago or anywhere else?

Yes, Katie, I think it is likely that he will. You'll note that he hasn't actually done anything just yet in Chicago and these other cities. And it may be that his lawyers are searching for some authority to allow him to do that. He can't simply send the National

Guard into various cities. In Los Angeles, he relied on an authority that allows him to quell a rebellion. And even there, he got some pushback from the courts that said, questioned his authority and whether there was a rebellion taking place in LA

or whether it was simply protesters that could be handled by the local police. In Washington, DC, he used a different authority that creates a very special and unique situation with the city that serves as the seat of our federal government.

And so that gave him some authority to act there. But in other cities, in the absence of some sort of rebellion or insurrection, he can't simply call up the National Guard to enforce ordinary criminal laws. That's a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act,

which says that we leave law enforcement to local police departments and not to the military. So I don't think he can go into these cities unless there is some sort of insurrection. Now, of course, by baiting the public, by sending a strong show of force by ICE agents

who do have the right to be anywhere, they might be able to enforce immigration laws. They might ignite and escalate tensions such that there is some sort of rebellion or insurrection that can justify the use of force. So I worry that he's baiting cities

into creating some sort of social unrest so that he can send troops in to affect them. But make no mistake, this is gamesmanship by Donald Trump. I worked as US attorney in Detroit and Flint and other cities that have violent crime challenges. And I learned that surges of police

might have a short-term successful effect or zero tolerance programs, but to really change and make the meaningful changes that we're seeing today in a number of American cities, you have to attack the root causes of violent crime. That's poverty. If Donald Trump really wanted to do that, he would not have canceled the grants that were going out to community groups to reduce crime in April.

And so this, to me, is a show of force. It is a political tactic designed to show that he's tough on crime and debate Democrats into opposing him so that he can portray them as

soft on crime.

Joining us now, NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Mel Zinona, senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health, Dr. Amish Dalja, and former Republican Congressman Charlie Dent, who represented the state of Pennsylvania. Dr. Dalja, first to you, there is a lot of confusion,

as Marissa Parra was reporting around the COVID vaccine. As a doctor please

straighten it out for us. And this is the absolute worst case scenario because no one knows who should get a vaccine. No one knows who to trust. What I would say is that if anybody has any high risk condition they should be getting the new vaccine when it's available. If you are a parent of a child and that child is less than two years of age and they have no risk factors for severe disease, even without any risk factors for severe disease, as you just heard,

there is a high rate of hospitalizations. Those children should get vaccinated. And lastly, I would say pregnant women all need to be vaccinated with each pregnancy. There will be better guidance coming out from the professional societies, but the CDC guidance is likely to be very, very muddled and more confusing, leading to what's going on with

these drug stores not actually offering vaccines.

So we're going to see RFK Jr. Mel in front of Congress this week, and he's going to be sitting in front of a Senate panel that approved him, including Bill Cassidy, who said yes to his nomination and said yes to installing him as HHS director, but was very critical of him on vaccines and believed that he got an assurance from him on vaccines. Do we have an idea of how Bill Cassidy feels

about the HHS director right now and whether he will have any interesting or tough questions for him later this week?

Yeah, I mean, I'm sure it's going to be a testy hearing. It's going to be a timely hearing. We should point out that it had already been in the works prior to the CDC shakeup. Supposedly, the Secretary is going to come in and testify on Trump's health agenda.

But no doubt, the senators are going to use this as an opportunity to grill him, the secretary, on the firings of the CDC, the resignations, what precipitated that, as well as his own views on vaccines. And I am particularly interested in what Republicans like Cassidy have to say, whether they self-confidence in the secretary and whether they regret voting for him, because Kennedy did renege on a number of promises that he specifically made to Cassidy in order

to get that vote, that critical vote from Cassidy for his nomination. Our Kristen Welker did press another senator on that committee, James Lankford, a Republican from Oklahoma, about that very question. Here's what he had to say.

Do you have 100 percent confidence in Secretary Kennedy, Senator?

I could go through several of those things. I don't think he's limiting access to the COVID vaccine. It's still widely accepted that the challenge is, is it right for children to be able to have the COVID vaccine? Do you have a hundred percent confidence in Secretary Kennedy? I believe he is who the president has picked. I don't think he's gone a wrong direction in this. And so I think what

you heard a little bit there was that Lankford, like many other Republicans, is really wary of getting on Trump's bad side. And Cassidy is in a difficult position because he is facing a primary challenge from the right. He's up for re-election next year. But over the last week, he has said that he's going to use his committee, another committee

that he sits on, to conduct aggressive oversight. He's also been on social media pushing back on the secretary, pushing back on some of this anti-vaccine rhetoric. So he's going to be definitely one to watch as Congress comes back this week, Katie.

Let me, Charlie, show you what Bill Cassidy reposted on social media. He was reposting a Caroline Leavitt post discussing Trump and RFK Jr.'s commitment to restoring trust and transparency and credibility to the CDC. Then he added this, the president and secretary are right, we need radical transparency, we need to protect the health of our children. The two go together.

I'm committed to the president's vision, which is why the HELP committee will conduct oversight. So are you what is your expectation for not the Democrats? I know where the Democrats are going to go, but where the Republicans are going to go, given that tweet and given what you just heard from James Lankford?

Well, it's it strikes me that most Republicans, if you were to talk to them privately, would tell you that RFK Jr. is a disaster. Most Republicans that I know support vaccines for polio, for measles, for COVID, and for the flu. And we have an HHS secretary who doesn't seem to support those things or is very half-hearted in his support,

which is troubling because, you know, American people want to trust what they're hearing from the CDC and HHS, which has been the gold standard for a very long time. It's not just people in the United States who look to us for guidance on matters of health.

It's people throughout the world who don't have CDCs, who need this type of expertise. And the fact that there's this assault on all these folks at the CDC who have doctor behind their names suggests that we are moving away from science

and data and evidence and towards something

that's much more troubling and unscientific.

So-

Help me understand the motivation. When you're talking about not just this COVID vaccine, you're talking more broadly about vaccines. Vaccines that have saved people's kids' lives. Vaccines that have saved kids from horrible, not deformities, horrible,

uh, uh, uh, uh, uh, what's the word I'm looking for, Dr. John? Not diseases, et cetera, from, from horrible, horribly painful lives. From horrible, horribly painful lives. Polio, etc. What is the thinking of Republicans who will tell you privately they think this is a bad idea, but publicly they'll say okay to it and then keep, continue to put

these kids' lives in danger? I don't understand that. Well, I think a lot of them would love to see RFK Jr. fired. I just have to believe that. I mean, and by the way, just talk to me.

Why wouldn't they not come out and grill him

on Capitol Hill and demand that?

I hope they do this week. Kennedy has certainly provided them an opening. But talk to Mitch McConnell about polio vaccinations. He experienced polio as a child. He's been, I think, pretty outspoken. And there have been some others. I mean, George Washington, for heaven's sake,

was trying to immunize his soldiers during the Revolutionary War from smallpox. I mean, so this is, you know, the science of vaccinations, I thought, was settled. And I'm saying this as a non-scientist. My daughter's a physician, I am just disturbed that we are somehow ignoring experts

and we are ignoring real data and science in exchange for a guy who's been a Democrat his whole life and who's been pushing quackery and frankly a trial lawyer agenda.

It's not just, as I said, Dr. Adalja, the COVID vaccine, it's vaccines more broadly. What are we seeing across the spectrum. Well basically

this is a wholesale assault on vaccines. Secretary Kennedy doesn't even believe in the germ theory of disease. So he does not believe that there's any value to vaccines. And what he's doing is basically dismantling the entire vaccine ecosystem with the tremendous power he has as HHS secretary. And he's doing it very deliberately and tactically. He's taking it apart piece by piece to make it really hostile for vaccine developers or anybody that wants to get a vaccine. And I think what we're going to see is this coming back to haunt us.

We already have record-breaking measles cases already, with three deaths in the United States. We will see increases in other vaccine-preventable diseases as people don't get vaccines or turn away from vaccines. And he's dismantling the CDC and making it probably what will be an organ for anti-vaccine disinformation when he installs his cronies there. So this is a really, really horrible time

when it comes to infectious disease preparedness. If we are to get another infectious disease outbreak, epidemic, pandemic, we're not going to see anything like Operation Warp Speed. It's going to be a

disaster with RFK Jr. at the helm. And it's amazing because Operation Warp Speed was spearheaded by President Trump. It was a signature achievement by him. And instead of you know touting it and saying look what I did I got this vaccine out there. I rushed it through and it was it was it saved lives. It was effective. He's now done a complete 180 on it and and claims that it's dangerous and wants to see the data that again everyone has already seen Mel's Anona dr. Adalja and Charlie Dent

thank you Charlie don't go anywhere. Joining us now ranking member of the House Oversight Committee California Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia congressman thanks for being with us on a holiday. Members of your committee will meet privately tomorrow with victims of Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what Chair Comer said about that.

The Trump administration is cooperating with us. We're bringing in the families and the attorneys of the victims Tuesday afternoon to talk to the House Oversight Committee. This will be Republicans and Democrats because we're gonna make this information public.

That's what the American people want. When we travel around all of our districts, that's one of the things that people ask, when are we going to see the Epstein files? But it's very complicated because there are victims of the Epstein files and we want to listen to those victims and their families and their attorneys to see how best can we present this information.

So Comer there seems to suggest that this will be a bipartisan approach in speaking with the victims, trying to figure out how to best handle their information. Do Democrats and Republicans agree about what it means to be transparent in this situation? Do you see a bipartisan effort here?

I mean, look, there has been some bipartisanship when Democrats forced the release of the Epstein files. And we actually got a few Republicans to vote with us because they really weren't interested and have not been interested in transparency. I will be there with Chairman Comer, there'll be other Democrats and Republicans as we listen to the victims. I've said

from day one, they have to be centered in what is happening right now. There have been horrific crimes, sexual abuse, trafficking that has happened to these women, in some cases children. And so we are very focused on transparency for the American public. We don't understand why Attorney General Bondi, why the White House continue to stonewall the full release of the documents. We have sent the subpoena out.

Those documents should be in our hand. Now this week, we're gonna hear from a lot of the actual victims. We look forward to that. It's also very important that people remember the horrific tragedy and violence that they all endured.

It is important. And to that point, Ro Khanna, they're teasing that explosive press conference that we may see on Wednesday. How do you make sure that these victims are not being essentially exploited for political gain by either party.

I'm look I think that's obviously really important. We have been the oversight Oversight Committee, certainly those of us Democrats have been working very carefully with the families, with the representatives of any victims. Ro Khanna, of course, is a member of our committee. And so we're all working at the end of the day to ensure that we get justice for the victims and that, most importantly, they are protected in the ways that they need to be protected. And so that has been our focus, and we've been fighting for transparency. We don't understand why the White House continues to cover this up, and why Donald Trump, after campaigning years on this topic, has now flip-flopped.

And so I hope that the work that happens this week, that the stories that everyone's going to hear from the victims at the press conference, at the roundtable that we're having tomorrow. I hope that motivates not just the White House but our Republican colleagues to fully support bipartisan

transparency as it relates to the files. The Oversight Committee has also now requested suspicious activity reports from the Treasury Department related to Jeffrey Epstein. These S.A.R. as they're called have to do with red flags that may have been missed in Epstein's financial transactions. What do you hope maybe learn from them. And is this just another

continuation of the drip drip drip of information that we are getting as opposed to just the full dump of the files.

At the end of the day I think that what we want are the full files, and that clearly continues to be stonewalled. I appreciate any additional efforts that we can achieve in the release of transparency. The more that we can get, the more documents. If there are concerns, and certainly I share those, around the way this case has been handled, and certainly there's concerns the way Alex Acosta, Trump's former Labor Secretary, who

put together Jeffrey Epstein's original sweetheart deal, how that all came to be, what the government has known, what we have in our possession as relates to documents, all of that information should be available to the public. When I have been home the last few days, and I'm talking to folks here in the community,

everyone is asking me, when are the full files gonna be released? They don't care who's on the list. They don't care how powerful those people are or what political party that they're in. They just want justice for the victims and they

want the truth. All right. And I know that you've been pushing to get that so-called birthday book published in your hands. What are you hoping to glean from that. President Trump has said that those alleged drawings that he may or may not have sent to Jeffrey Epstein were fake, that he didn't do that. So what do you hope is in that birthday book that you may glean some more information from?

Well, I mean, to be clear, the president has said that, you know, the drawing and note that he wrote to Epstein doesn't exist. We know it exists. It's been reported on. It is apparently in this book and other documents. And so from what we understand, we'll be receiving that birthday book and note as well as other documents within about a week. And so around September 8th is the date that we have been told. And so we're glad the Epstein estate is moving forward and producing these documents. And I think that Donald Trump clearly is being caught in another lie. If he, we're going to, a book is going to be produced, we're going to release it to the public that he's saying doesn't exist. And so we're all

kind of anticipating that release here within the week. As I'm sure you know, Politico is reporting

that FBI director Kash Patel and attorney general Pam Bondi are expected to testify before a House Judiciary Committee in the coming weeks. What do you

hope your colleagues are going to ask them?

I'm glad to see it. And everyone should be asking, particularly Pam Bondi, the same question is Attorney General, you said you had the Epstein files on your desk, that they had been reviewed. Why the huge turnaround? Why the cover-up? Why completely just change your position on the release? And I think that the FBI director, in the same fashion, has been someone that's been calling for the release of the files for years, before he was in the government. And so they should align with their position that they've had for years, that had been

Donald Trump's, which is a full release of the Epstein files. That is what the American public are demanding, And that's certainly what those of us on the oversight committee are demanding as well.

Congressman, why do you think the files haven't been released yet?

Well, obviously someone's trying to hide something. I mean, the White House clearly doesn't want the files released because there's information in there that they don't want out to the American public. What that is, who that involves, I think are the questions. And I think that the American public deserves the answers. Why all of this coverup is what a lot of us are asking ourselves, we don't understand.

And so it's time to release the files. Pam Bondi has them. I hope she's asked those questions when she appears in front of the Senate.

And certainly this week we'll hear from all the victims

and of course uplift whatever they have to say. What do you say to the critics who want you and your colleagues to focus on those bread and butter issues that Americans are dealing with, higher prices for things, not being able to afford the cost of living and housing prices? What do you say to them and they feel like this may be somewhat of a distraction to score political points on both sides.

We look I think it's what's really important is that the American public knows this. The single most important issue right now of course is lowering the cost for the American public. It's ensuring that people have access to health care. I mean those are the things that people talk about and that matter. The same time this issue is about trust and it's about the president of the United States betraying the trust of the American public. And if Donald Trump is going to betray you on a key campaign promise as related to the Epstein files, he's going to betray you by taking away your health care. And he's done that for 17 million Americans on Medicaid. He's going to betray you by not

actually lowering costs, by costs continuing to skyrocket. And so I think all of these issues matter. And certainly when I'm not talking to the public they're asking not just about health care but they're asking about trust in government and the Epstein file. So I think it's

all important. And one of the other issues that's clearly in front and center here before you go is DHS Secretary Christie Nome is now previewing what likely may what it may look like when we see a federal intervention in cities like Chicago.

Let's listen to her, and I want your reaction. There's a lot of cities that are dealing with crime and violence right now. And so we haven't taken anything off the table. We've been making sure that we have the resources and the equipment to go in.

I won't speak to the specifics of the operations that are planned in other cities, but I do know that LA wouldn't be standing today if President Trump hadn't taken action,

then that city would have burned down if left to the devices of the mayor and the governor of that

state. Your reaction, I see you smirking there. I mean, it's hard not to. I mean, is that a joke? I mean, it's just completely outrageous and out of touch. I mean, obviously that a joke? I mean, it just completely outrageous and out of touch. I mean, obviously in Los Angeles, besides having seen decreases over the last 10, 20, 30 years overall in crime, the fact that LA wouldn't have been standing

had Donald Trump not intervened, it's just a fabrication. All they do is they look at the TV and they lie. And I think people know across here and across the country that the National Guard and the military shouldn't be sent into cities. What cities want is support. They want additional support to hire more police officers, for

more park space, for libraries. And certainly at this moment right now when these ICE raids are happening across cities across the country, everyone agrees that yes, we don't want, of course, criminals, if you're here and you're a criminal, you shouldn't be in this country, we understand that. But that's not what's happening. Most of the people being right now,

detained or abducted, don't have criminal histories. They are people that are working at our car washes, at our restaurants, at our hotels. These are hard working people, and what's happening right now is shameful.

Congressman Robert Garcia, Congressman Robert Garcia,

thank you again for spending some time with us.