No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen - Trump drops clue on next steps amid Epstein fallout

Episode Date: July 13, 2025

The disastrous Epstein scandal tears the MAGA base apart, and Trump leaves an easter egg that suggests what he’s going to do next. Brian interviews Jamie Raskin about what the Judiciary Committee is going to do to compel the Epstein files; Kara Swisher about Epstein, Elon and the America Party; and attorney Norm Eisen about his big win over Trump in the birthright citizenship case in court.Shop merch: https://briantylercohen.com/shopYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/briantylercohenTwitter: https://twitter.com/briantylercohenFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/briantylercohenInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/briantylercohenPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/briantylercohenNewsletter: https://www.briantylercohen.com/sign-upWritten by Brian Tyler CohenProduced by Sam GraberRecorded in Los Angeles, CASee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Today we're going to talk about the disastrous Epstein scandal that's tearing the Maga base apart and the Easter egg put forward by Trump that suggests what he's going to do next. And I've got three interviews this week. I speak with Jamie Raskin about what the Judiciary Committee is going to do to compel the Epstein files. Karriswisher about Epstein, Elon, and the America Party and attorney Norm Eisen about his big win over Trump in the birthright citizenship case in court. I'm Brian Taylor Cohen and you're listening to No Lie. All right. So I'm not even going to lie here.

a skeptic when the Epstein stuff first started bubbling to the surface. Like, I'm probably the farthest from a conspiracy theory guy that you'll ever find. And, you know, the Epstein stuff always felt very online. And that's coming from me, who is very online. I wasn't convinced about whether or not he killed himself, nor did I think it really mattered. But my interest was piqued when Trump lashed out at the beginning of this past week in his cabinet meeting when he yelled a reporter for talking about Epstein, which I found so weird because half of Trump's cabinet literally built their brands on this exact thing. Bongino, Patel, Bondi, Haba, not to mention a ton of right-wing influencers, this was their

issue. And now all of a sudden Trump doesn't want to talk about it? But then Saturday rolled along. The Epstein thing still hasn't died. Trump posts that he's going to denaturalize Rosie O'Donnell, which is such an obvious distraction effort that I started to think, okay, this guy is very clearly grasping at straws here, clearly trying to deflect our attention away from something here. And then came the truth social posts, heard round the world, a long, rambling screed,

but there were two lines that I think we're especially telling. Quote, for years, it's Epstein over and over again. Why are we giving publicity to files written by Obama, crooked Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the losers and criminals of the Biden administration who conned the world with Russia, Russia, Russia, 51 intelligence agents, the laptop from hell, and more. and after I read that, I was sold that clearly this guy is hell-bent on hiding something. There is no world where enduring the pain and humiliation and backlash that I'm going to describe in a moment is worth just not releasing what you've got, which tells me that whatever

the Trump administration has must be even worse. And that backlash that I mentioned was swift and severe and all-encompassing. Trump was hit with an absolute deluge from the left and the right, of people decidedly not buying into his demands that we all just look away. For the first time ever, he was ratioed on truth social, his own social media platform. Right-wing influencers were either completely fed up or, I guess, at best, visibly unconvinced. Here's Benny Johnson's reaction, which I think pretty effectively sums up the response from the entire MAGA base. So President Trump has acknowledged that the Epstein files exist here.

President Trump has acknowledged that the files were written. and that there is something there. He says that they were written, however, by his enemies and therefore will not be released. What? Uh, that's new. And look, I get why Benny Johnson is exasperated. At first, these files were supposedly on Pambondi's desk

and would be released imminently. Then the files didn't exist and the case was closed. And then the files did exist, but they were fakes written by Obama, Clinton, Comey, and Brennan? Yeah, all very, very plausible stuff. It's super weird how no one seems to be buying it. But there's also a morsel in here that suggests what Trump is going to do in the future. So think about the lengths that Trump goes to in order to convince people of his lies.

He said the 2020 election was stolen and he went so far as to incite an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol to prove it. And then he brought on Pam Bondi as his attorney general to prosecute anybody who tried to suggest otherwise. So when he tells a lie, he commits to it 100% because he knows. knows that's what it takes to con his base. And he also knows that his base is susceptible to being conned. So when Trump says in this Saturday afternoon screed that the Epstein file was written by, quote, Obama, Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the losers and criminals of the Biden administration, he may very well be previewing who he's going to go after as part of his effort to convince his base that the clearly incriminating Epstein file is somehow a democratic

plot to take him down. This is what it looks like when Trump lays the groundwork. And look, this isn't to say that he's definitely going to do it, but if he is going to do it, this is how he would do it. So look, I obviously don't know what Trump is going to do next, but it's worth keeping an eye on this base because two things are true. First, Trump is clearly backed into a corner and given the unprecedented reaction from his base, he's only going to get more desperate as time goes on. And second, we've seen this strategy play itself out before, where he picks a scapegoat and then goes all in on those people or that person to deflect responsibility off of himself.

So watch this space because Trump bats a thousand at catching Democrats flat-footed and we're not about to let it happen again. Next up are my interviews with Jamie Raskin, Kara Swisher, and Norm Eisen. No Lie is brought to you by Everyday Dose. Now, a major problem is that everybody wants to get

all the supplements they need, but they're expensive and they're hard to keep up with. Everyday dose is affordable and covers all of your bases just in a cup of coffee. It takes 30 seconds to make, and you get a cup of coffee plus a bunch of supplements with vitamins, minerals, and amino acids. Everyday dose is coffee plus benefits. It combines 100% arabica coffee with powerful ingredients like Lions Main and Chaga, collagen protein, and neutropics to fuel your brain, boost focus,

and give you clean, sustained energy all day long. No crash, no jitters, just clean, sustained energy. Two products to highlight. Coffee Plus and Coffee Plus bold. Coffee Plus is a mild roast, light and smooth, low acidity, which is easy on sensitive stomachs, and it has men. mellow energy. Coffee plus bold is a rich blend of medium roast 100% arabica coffee, robust and full-bodied yet smooth. Extra boost of energy. Both are 100% arabica coffee, have functional benefits, and are mold-free. Everyday dose does do third-party testing. Get 45% off your first subscription order of 30 servings of coffee plus or bold plus. You'll also receive a starter kit with over $100 in free gifts, including a rechargeable frother and gunmetal serving spoon by going to

everyday dose.com slash BTC or entering BTC at checkout. You'll also get free gifts throughout the year. That's everyday dose.com slash BTC for 45% off your first order. I'm joined now by Congressman Jamie Rask and thanks so much for joining me. Great to be with you, Brian. So, Congressman, the Epstein scandal has kind of poured into the spotlight in a way that we haven't seen happen before. What are you able to do in your role on judiciary to try and compel some of the information that clearly it seems like Donald Trump has a vested interest in hiding. Well, look, every Republican that I've spoken to, whether it's somebody in Congress or just like out in the street, who wants this information to be released.

And Donald Trump promised it. J.D. Vance promised it. The whole Republican establishment was behind it, including Attorney General Bondi, including Dan Bongino, including Cash Patel. And so they want it released. And what I'm trying to explain to them is they don't need to convince Donald Trump. They just need to convince the Republicans in Congress. Jim Jordan and the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have the subpoena power.

So we can have a hearing and just subpoena the Attorney General, subpoenaed Cash Patel to come in, tell us everything they know, and turn over the client list and turn over the information that not only Republicans, but Democrats. have been demanding since the Biden administration. I called for this several years ago. You know, Epstein is a convicted sex offender who is running a child sex ring. He's gone, so his prosecution's over. So there can be no prejudice there. And then meantime, you've got the president of the United States

and all these other officials saying that there's a client list and that there's evidence of this sex ring taking place. And rather than have the whole country divided in an uproar about it, let's just come clean and they should show us what they've got. Pam Bondi said it was on her desk, take it off of her desk, and bring it over to Congress. So I'm sending a letter on Monday to Chairman Jordan saying, let's just have a hearing and let us disclose whatever the government has to the people of the United States. So is Jim Jordan the only impediment then to being able to subpoena whatever?

information exists? Well, I don't know that he is an impediment. I mean, we haven't spoken about it yet. I think everybody assumed the administration was going to release his information because they said they would. And of course... What with it being the thing that they had predicated their entire brand on? Well, and Pam Bondi had that first horrible, big press conference release situation where it was just a bunch of recycled flotsam and jetsam. But people want to know what is really in there. And look, we don't want doctored evidence. We don't want fabricated evidence.

If all of it was made up, then the public's got a right to know. If it wasn't made up, if it's real, we've got a right to know what names are on there. And now with Donald Trump going out on a limb and saying, oh, just, you know, leave me alone. Let's just, you know, pretend the whole thing didn't happen. People are asking the question why. Well, it looks like you're taking a multi-pronged approach here because this letter will go out to Jim Jordan. on Monday. You've also reached out to Pam Bondi herself. Can you explain what you said in your correspondence with her? Well, we want the Jack Smith's second report released on Donald Trump's

retention, illegal retention of classified documents, hundreds of them at Mar-a-Lago. We want that report released the way the first report was released the way Bondi, predecessor, Attorney General Merrick Garland, released the report on Hunter Biden, released the special counsel report by special counsel Robert Hur about Joe Biden's retention of a handful of classified documents. All that should be public. Okay, release that and release the Epstein file. At the very least, you've got to release what's in there that references Donald Trump.

But go ahead and just release the whole thing. So that's what we said. We have not heard back from Pan Bondi. And unfortunately, that's a pattern with this administration. I mean, unlike prior administrations except for Trump, they basically don't answer questions and letters that have been sent in by the minority party. Congressman, what do you make of the whiplash back and forth between Trump and his team initially coming out and saying that this file, this, this client? client list is going to be released imminently.

Pam Bondi suggested that it was on her desk waiting for her to just review it and then she would be able to send it out. Then suddenly on Monday of this past week, Trump said, not only is there no client list, doesn't exist, but the case is closed. And now you have this newest post by Trump where he logged on to choose social and said that, okay, it does exist, but it's a fake Epstein list that was written by Obama, crooked Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the losers and criminals in the Biden administration. Yeah. So the stories are constantly changing. First, the client list was on Pam Bondi's desk. Several people said that they saw it and they wanted it released. Then it didn't exist. And now, oh, it exists, but it's a fabrication of the Biden administration, which is odd since they never released anything. And there were still criminal prosecutions and potential criminal prosecutions taking place because it wasn't just Epstein, but it was.

his partner in crime, Maxwell, and then they had a French Confederate as well. I think his name was Jean-Luc Godard. And in any event, it was never released. So they should just release the law enforcement files that exist from all of the prosecutions and all of the prosecutors in police, whether in Florida or New York or Europe or anywhere else. What do you make of this new kind of talking point that's kind of emerged on the right where a lot of folks are really upset at Pam Bondi. Do you think that in an administration where, I mean, we've seen these cabinet meetings

where they go around the table and take turns, genuflecting at the altar of Trump, do you really believe that the buck here stops with Pam Bondi? Or do you think that anything that's going to happen is going to happen at the behest and command of Donald Trump himself? Well, of course, that's what Pam Bondi has said. I mean, they've taken the Justice Department, which traditionally has been, a huge force of lawyers that represent the rule of law, the Department of Justice, the government of the United States, and the interests of American people in the Constitution, and they turned

it into the personal law firm of Donald Trump. They don't pretend it's anything else. So obviously, they're acting in Donald Trump's own interests. They don't pretend to be doing anything else. So it means either Donald Trump is himself implicated. And we know that he knew Epstein well. We know that Elon Musk has said that he's in the files in the files. And we know that there's lots of photographs of them together. And we know that Donald Trump himself has spoken openly about his friendship of Epstein and how Epstein admired women as much as he did, but he liked younger ones. I mean, so he clearly knew what was going on. They have, for some reason, been able to make political hay out of this whole thing for so long,

for whatever reason, enough. Let's put it to rest. Release everything. Let's come clean. We don't need to generate more paranoia in the country. We need to just set the record clear. And Epstein is gone, and there's no reason that we shouldn't be able to release this list. So either Donald Trump is protecting himself because he's on it and or, he's protecting other people who are on it and or there are people that he wants to have leverage over you know Donald Trump as we've seen over the last half year is all about leverage leverage over the law firms I'm going to hold executive orders against you I'm going to prevent you from going into federal government buildings or getting federal security clearance unless you do

X Y or Z I'm going to lord it over Harvard University and Columbia University and all of the colleges unless you do X Y or Z and so you know, if he's not on there, or maybe he is, but in any event, if there's other people on there and he thinks he can use this against them, that's another possibility. But in any event, there is a very compelling public interest now in just coming clean and releasing these documents to the public. You know, Megan Kelly is one of probably the biggest voices that's decided that Pam Bondi should be the scapegoat for all of this. Do you think that in a scenario where Pam Bondi either resigned or was fired, that some

subsequent attorney general would suddenly be the one to release the files that Pam Bondi wouldn't under Trump? Well, again, it all goes back to Trump and what Trump wants to do. I'm sure Bondi will follow him. For some reason, they've done a complete 180-degree U-turn on this, and now they don't want anything to come out. And look, you know, this is a situation where there are entire forces on the right with QAnon that have built, you know, not just intense interest in this case, but kind of a whole political theory around satanic child sex abuse rings. And, you know, when all that first started, you remember they went to Comet Pizza, they were blaming everything

on Democrats. And Democrats just look at them like they're from outer space. Like this is just deranged stuff. But we've got a case with Epstein where this is real, where there is a real child sexual abuser and he had parties and he had a whole social network around it. And they should release what's there so we can dispel the paranoid part of it and get to the facts of what actually happened. You know, one one element of the long winding screed that Trump posted and this was the part that I read before was his blame of Obama, Clinton, Comey, Brennan, And we've seen instances in the past where Trump will make up a lie, but then go to the ends of the earth to substantiate that lie. He said, for example, that he won the 2020 election.

He went so far as to incite an insurrection of the U.S. Capitol to try and substantiate that. He wanted to take voting machines out of Georgia. I mean, the crimes were just endless in his effort to manifest into reality, to try and prove his lies. All of these things to basically just prop up his ego. this is kind of a similar situation where he has a major issue that he's contending with that could determine whether or not, you know, people are going to continue to support him moving forward or not. And he's already laid the groundwork with a bunch of people who he's decided are going

to be the scapegoats here. And so do you have any concern as it relates to Comey or Brennan or Clinton or Obama that he might go to the mat with this lie in very much the same way that he did with the rigged 2020 election lie? Well, certainly he will, and he will try to get, you know, his followers to believe in another concoction. I mean, at a certain point, he just piles lie on lie on lie, and then you have to accept an alternate universe. You know, Voltaire said, anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. And we saw that on January 6th, 2021.

Joe Biden beat him by more than 7 million votes. And just to give you some contextual contrast there, Trump beat Kamala by 2 million votes. And they call that a landslide. But in any event, Biden in 2020 beat Trump by a landslide three times as big. And they denied it. And he incited a violent insurrection. They tried to organize a political coup to overthrow. the election. All of his alleged evidence was rejected by more than 60 federal in courts,

including by seven judges he had himself named to the bench. And they've never been able to prove anything. His own homeland security person in charge of cybersecurity and election security said it was the most secure election in American history. And yet he continued to propound that lie to incite an insurrection against the Constitutional Union. And then continues to promote that falsehood to this day. In fact, it's in the truth social missive that you just cited. It was in the one he sent out saying that he's going to get the attorney general to work on that. So, you know, I hope that people will see Donald Trump's absolutely convenient relationship to the truth.

If he happens to bump into the truth and it's to his benefit, he'll embrace it. but otherwise he's going to lie all the way to the heavens about it and, you know, and drag everybody else into hell around it. And that's what happened on January 6th. And let's finish off with this. This does feel like the first moment. I mean, there have been a lot of lies. And we've seen that Trump's base is exceptionally willing or uniquely willing to believe a lot of the bullshit that he peddles.

But this seems to be an instance where even his most devoted followers don't seem to be. taking the bait here. Benny Johnson kind of was offered up some speechless response to what Trump was saying. The rest of his mouthpieces don't seem particularly convinced by his rambling screed. And so in this moment where there does seem to be at least a degree of openness that we haven't seen before to the truth about what this is, which very much looks like a con job by Trump, what would your message to folks who had previously believed everything that Trump had been peddling? What would your message to those folks be in light of this new development now? Well, what I want to say is Donald Trump did not campaign on throwing 14 million

Americans off of their Medicaid health insurance, but that's what he's in the middle of doing. He did campaign on releasing the Epstein files in their entirety, including the client list. And suddenly he wants to do this 180 degree you turn on that and, you know, abandon this pledge that he made to the people who voted for him into the whole country. And of course, we support transparency in government. And he said he wants to be the most transparent administration in history. It now seems to be scrambling to cover this thing up for some reason. Look, our politics are different. Like on our side, we don't try to think in. in terms of conspiracy theories, we try to think in terms of who government is going to help

and who they're going to hurt. But the government right now is hurting working people and working families in a really bad way while building up a huge militarized bureaucracy with ice while cutting a huge tax break for the wealthiest people in the country. And so we would prefer to get back on course where the government is an instrument for the common good of everybody. But he has convinced a lot of people to think in terms of conspiracy theories, and he's invested a lot into the conspiracy theory about Jeffrey Epstein. He should release all of those files. Nobody should be afraid of the truth. Now, we should be afraid of them concocting things and altering documents and making things up, because we've seen them do

that before. You know, we can look at the integrity of the evidence when it's released, but released the evidence that was produced by law enforcement agencies as it was produced and let the people judge. So we're not caught up in, you know, all of the theatrics and the hysteria around this. Let's just deliver the facts to the people. Child sex abuse has obviously been a huge problem in a lot of institutions in our society and abuse of even college students and college athletes has been a huge problem, both female and male college athletes.

And there is a problem with institutionalized sexual abuse. And so we should come clean with those things that we know about whoever is participating in that. And we should be able to separate the fact from the fiction. Well, perfectly put. And thank you for putting the pressure that you're going to put on Jim Jordan. to get whatever the files that exist to be brought into the light of day. And thank you also for the time today. I appreciate it very much.

It's great for being with you, Brian. No Lie is brought to you by Shopify. So when I started my show, my YouTube channel, and my podcast, it seemed like there were a million things to figure out. I had to figure out the scripts and the setup and the filming, the schedule. I had to do my branding. All of it was very overwhelming. And each thing I figured out seemed to lead to,

more problems to have to figure out. And so in that way, the to-do list keeps on growing. And that's the same thing that takes place no matter what business you're starting. There's always a to do list that keeps growing every single day with new tasks, and that list can easily begin to overrun your life. And so finding the right tool not only helps you out, but simplifies everything, and that could be a game changer. And for millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world, including my own website, and 10% of all e-commerce platforms, in the United States, from household names like Mattel and Jim Shark to smaller brands like

Brian Tyler Cohen.com. So get started with your own design studio. With hundreds of ready-to-use templates, Shopify helps you build a beautiful online store to match your brand style. You can accelerate your content creation. Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions, page headlines, and even enhance your product photography. You can get the word out like you have a marketing team behind you even when you don't. You can easily create email and social media campaigns, wherever your customers are scrolling or strolling. And best yet, Shopify is your commerce expert with world-class expertise in everything from managing inventory to international shipping to processing returns and everything in

between. So if you're ready to sell, you are ready for Shopify. Turn your big business idea into with Shopify on your side. Sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at Shopify.com slash BTC. Go to Shopify.com slash BTC. I'm joined now by the co-host of the Pivot podcast, Kara Swisher. Kara, thanks so much for joining me.

Thanks a lot. We have watched as this Epstein situation is kind of bubbled over into the surface. I think that in large part, Trump probably took for granted how seriously a giant faction of his base, especially the online base, took this. And so now I think he thought he could like kind of skate through and just kind of avoid dealing with this whole situation altogether, to what extent do you think that this is going to have a lasting impact on his popularity with those people versus, you know, the usual thing I think we expect from Republicans, which is maybe a few days of some consternation, but ultimately

everybody comes back home. That's exactly what's going to happen. I mean, the regular Republicans who are just being quizzlings, who don't really like what he's doing or don't like a lot of things, but they're fearful of him. Never believe this. So it doesn't, it wasn't really their animating factor. So they'll just stay the same. They'll stay cowardly and acquiescent forever as long as it takes until he doesn't have power and then you'll see some differences, which will come. The other ones, the Roseanne Barr's, the Alex Jones, the Laura Loomers, that gang, is angry.

And they expected a lot more from Cash Patel, especially and Dan Bongino, who would go on and on about this conspiracy theory. So these are the people that put these people on this almost sugar high of consistent. theories. And now, when they're like, oh, actually, they can't come off of it. Like, they're, deep in the hole. And so I can see why they're disappointed. It's crazy as they may be. They're also disappointed. That said, they never seem to blame Trump for this. They're aiming at Ben Gino and Bondi. As if Pam Bondi has shown herself to be like some, some neutral or independent figure. I mean, all of these people are completely under the thumb of Donald Trump. Right. Exactly.

I mean, and also she's just been inept. I mean, the ineptitude away from everything by putting these binders out and everything in them and then saying she had a list because she's such a thirsty person on Fox News, she's got to say something. She needs to shut up for a lawyer. She talks too much. One of the things she should have been doing was managing expectations here and saying less. And in this case, you know, they just kind of come out with it in a kind of random haphazard way, right, rather than really preparing their group for, look, we looked into it, this is what it is,

let us show you, let us walk through this. So it's kind of a ham-handed version of it. I mean, ultimately, I suspect they'll go along with Trump, and the crazy ones will nurse anger quietly, and it will manifest later in a sort of a giant open sore. And they'll not know where to go, because where are they going to go? Once Trump's gone, the Republicans, if they ever maintain, get. that control of themselves will not have this group in there. They don't want them. So we'll see. I feel badly for Roseanne Barr today.

What do you think it says more broadly about like the griftery nature of somebody like Dan Bongino and Cash Patel who really predicated their identities on serving this slop to their audiences? And now they are in these unique positions to be able to substantiate the very things that they were saying for years and years and years and they've come up short. I mean, there was a clip on, of Cash Patel talking to somebody who works at the blaze. I can't remember who it was. But this was in December of 2023. And he was saying that Epstein's black book was in the hands of the FBI director.

That he's like this is, this goes right up to the FBI director. That's the person who has all the power here. Dude is the FBI director right now. That's their problem. They always do that. They're like, if only someone was in power to do this, like Trump yesterday, you know, I would have done Doge differently. I was like, if you were in charge

and he was in charge. Like that's, this is one of their playbook things. I mean, they've got to be hurting because this is the gang that first of all, they couldn't shoot straight essentially, but they also train these people to believe in this deep state mentality. And then when it gets out of control, it gets out of control.

I mean, they seem like clods and charlatans. I mean, Dan Bongino's a charlatan, really, in so many ways. He's probably going to have to be arrested next week for that, but he is. We could share a gulag somewhere. Whatever. I don't know. Good luck, Dan. But, you know, I think this is the problem, is they predicated their success, online success.

Now, if they can spin up another, once they leave here, they'll come up with another nonsensical story, you know, alligators in the toilets and Alcatraz. I don't know. They just, you have to constantly be telling lies and coming up with new lies to leave behind the old lies. And so that's the problem. The thing is, this group, it's. It's like soap opera. They'll take any lie and they'll move on to the next one. We'll see how much they split from Trump. I mean, they're just terrible people. So they will continue to be hypocritical. And calling them out is kind of like saying, oh, look, the sky is blue. Building on this idea of these people splintering away from Trump, one avenue that they might have is that Elon Musk put forward this idea of starting a third party and that is the America party. And so how much political capital do you think Elon has. And I guess the more serious question is his goal is not to like launch the third major political party in America. He has come out and said that he wants to just maybe pick off a few

house seats. He wants to be a spoiler. He doesn't want to create a party. He wants to be a spoiler and he's just using that, his money and the name, whatever to do so. I think the problem is what does it stand for, right? Like if it's sort of libertarian-like kind of thing, there's not much call for that. It's a very small group. If you look at any of the cutting up of the of the, of the electorate. This is a very small group of people want what he wants, but I don't know what he wants. They haven't articulated there's no person it's built around except

for him. So what are his stances? Like, I don't know, pro-mechanazi and against I think the hard part for me to reconcile is he did come in. He had full reign of government. He could have done anything. Trump isn't looking into the weeds of what he's doing. So Elon had

full control. And so he came in saying that he wants to cut waste, fraud, and abuse. You have the Pentagon, which just failed seven audits staring you right in the face, but you avoid that to go after USAID, which is one half of 1% of the budget and delivers soft power without shooting a single bullet. You've got the CFPB, which helps Americans who've been defrauded by banks. You go after all of these agencies that regulate Elon or have enforcement action over

Elon, and you ignore the giant elephant in the room. And it goes to show that at the end of the day, this was never about waste, fraud, and abuse. This was about helping Elon's bottom line. Yeah. Well, you just said it. That's it. He was going after things that helped him. He was very irritated over regulators, especially during COVID when we were speaking

a little too much. It was a little dramatic and it was a little over the top. But, you know, he definitely thought that there was no need for regulators. And when he tangled before that with the SEC over some of the statements he made like 420, it's 420 or whatever. So he's always been sort of like that. And in a lot of ways, he has a point about some of it. Like some of it is onerous.

If you've ever opened a small business, you know. know what it takes to like get all these silly placards you have to put up and you know even even zohran mandani did a whole thing of eight dollar halal and a lot of it was about permitting right that was what that so there is some argument to be made about making government smoother and services better and cheaper and there is a lot of um i would say more waste than fraud i suspect um and not just waste it's just inefficient but at the same time a lot of government things can't be made efficient the way companies can. And by the way, not every one of his companies as efficient as could be. They're always seeking more efficiency. Everyone is so surprised by the hypocrisy. All of these

people just want to make money. They're there for the shareholders, which is largely themselves in a lot of ways, or their increasing power or their ability to push back from regulation, which is why you see Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos there. You think they like Trump? They mean, they can say that he's kind of funnier than Biden, but that's, that's a lot. low bar. He is. But, you know. Do you think, uh, do you think that Musk and Trump reconcile, given the fact that they're, that their fates are so intertwined and their, and the monetary incentives for them to do so are so high? What's the monom? Trump's doing just fine. Grifton all the way away. I suppose he's doubled his network in the last like two months. The only thing,

look, Trump could do more harm to Musk than vice versa, clearly around Starlink, around X around everything about where AI spoils are going, TikTok, like lots of things. That said, he's got a limited time period here. If he loses the midterms, it's over for Trump, right? So he could do, but he could do a lot of harm to Musk in so many, NASA, lots of things. Musk has also an ability to make a mess. What if he's keeping score on the crypto stuff? He could really, you know, he has means to make the Trump's family especially be very,

uncomfortable. Who knows if he bought the Epstein files? I don't know. Like, I don't know. Maybe there are files. Maybe there are videos. I'd be surprised if there weren't given Jeffrey Epstein's behavior, right? I mean, that's natural. I don't know if there are, but if there are, he could buy them, right? So I, the only thing about the Epstein thing is, like, they would have come out by now, wouldn't they have? But maybe not. I don't know. Maybe, who knows? So I think, you know, Musk is crazy enough to do something crazy, right? And he has the means to do so. And so that's a little different than a Michael Cohn or any of the people that have tangled with Trump.

This guy is ready, willing, and able to blow up rockets. And so that's where you go. And, you know, when he was fighting with Trump initially, I predicted he would. And then afterwards, he apologized. Everyone's like, oh, he's apologized. The first thing I said is, is not sticking. This guy is like friggin' vesuvius. Only because I listened to him talk about deficits for years.

And so I'm like, no, no, this is right at the heart of his problem with the government is the deficits. But again, like he had the opportunity to actually do something. Of course he did. Well, did he have the – he was also in the middle of like a knife fight with all the Trump people. Susie Wiles really did a number. I mean, I'm sorry. They always – that's clearly who took them down, took them out. But all of them did, like all of them did because they're all, you know, those kind of

swamp creatures. But they, I think, sure, he could have done something, but it was in his interest, not too then, and now it's in his interest to do so. So Elon will do whatever's in his interest to do so. And so he is right about EV credits. He is right about we should be promoting EVs versus fossil fuels. There's a number of things where he's 100% correct in terms of fiscal responsibility. And, you know, it's interesting because he did oppose it, even though it benefits him as a billionaire. So there is a modicum of he actually believes this. Well, I think he, I mean, he opposed that provision. If he could do what he did back before Trump even took office in December, December of 2024, where he was able to extract that China provision from the, the budget

bill that was working its way through before Trump was even, before Trump was even sworn in, he was able to, you know, put so much pressure on Republicans that they took that provision out. So it's not that he that he's looking to sink the entire bill because he doesn't want a tax cut for himself he just wants he wants he wants to have his cake and eat it too he wants every single provision to benefit him speaking of cake the problem with the bill and i think it'll be a problem for democrats messaging as i just did it really had christin sultes anderson on his republican pollster is that it's a cheesecake factory of a bill which part do you want to hit it's like it's a it's a it's a dessert topping it's a floor wax it's a it's a it's a medicate reform bill it's a medicate cut bill like so

there's so much in there and they pulled a lot out by the way the the the the the land they were going to sell and this and that they'll get back to that by the way yeah um but you know it'll be the problem is it how to attack it what's the proper what it's such a ridiculous cheesegate factory of a of a of a of a bill as christian calls it um you had mentioned you know the zuckerbergs of the world and how they'll say whatever they need to say and we've seen that to a broader degree with regard to how these media outlets are capitulating to Trump. The latest to do so was CBS and Paramount for editing for time and interview on television, which has been standard practice forever. And yet they used any opportunity they could to settle because they have this

skydance merger that's pending. And so can I have your reaction just more broadly to this kind of capitulation? I'm with the whole 60 Minutes team. I mean, Steve Croft was just on John Stewart. It's a shakedown. It's a shakedown. It's all it is. And they wanted to do the deal. Trump said, I'll hold it up. What are you going to do? I mean, they just sit there and they go, huh, we settle now. In some cases, cases are settled as a nuisance.

It's a nuisance lawsuit. And the nuisance is between Sherry Redstone and her $2.4 billion or whatever she's getting. The thing is the price of this thing has gone down a lot. She's lost quite a few billion by just waiting to do this. She should have done it during the Biden administration, by the way, because it would have been a higher price. and she wouldn't have this situation going on. So she's stuck and she's stuck in having it pass.

If it doesn't, it's a disaster for Paramount, if it doesn't happen. So she gets, you know, it'll go from $2 billion to $1 billion to keep going down and it'll be sold for parts. And so- What do you make more broadly of this idea, though, that like these are the, these are these purported defenders of democracy. Like you've got Washington Post, democracy dies in darkness, you've got all of these news networks, the esteemed fourth estate. And when they have the opportunity, like, they can, they can, you know, stand behind these flashy slogans when none of them are challenged.

But the moment they're actually challenged, the fact that they are folding one by one, we've seen ABC News, we've seen CBS and Paramount in this scenario. We've seen the LA Times. We've seen the Washington Post. And so, like, I mean, isn't there some major, how did none of these people who work in the news business recognize the damage of their doing? The news business people don't have control over this. Let's be clear. I mean, the only thing they can do is quit, right? And two of them did at CBS, two, big jobs.

They quit big jobs. And longtime jobs, by the way, Wendy McMahon and the other guy, Bill, whatever his name is. So they quit. Like, there's no power by the journalists. They can get all angry and stamp their feet. But, you know, you're talking about Sherry Redstone and Jeff Bezos and all of them. They don't care. This is something I've told you a million.

They don't care. They care about money. They care about getting theirs. and they don't like media in particular. You know, whenever one of them would say that to me, I'm like, get the fuck out of here. Get the fuck out of here. Like, they don't.

Like, there's a very few of them. Right now, I would say, Lorraine Powell Jobs at the Atlantic. She's getting a lot of incoming over the work that Jeff Goldberg is helming. She's sticking to it, it looks like. We'll see. I mean, if she gets enough pressure, I suppose,

but they can't pressure her as much, right? She's super rich, and she doesn't have a lot of pressure points. But if they did, they would push them, push on them. But, you know, there's certain owners that are better than others, right? And there's owners that are okay. That's been the history of media. And then there's owners like Catherine Graham of the Washington Post who was, you know, she was wealthy. She was in society.

She could have gone a totally different direction because she's a baller. She did the right thing because she cared. But she certainly could have gone in a very different direction than she did. And the only thing to do for the media people is quit, right? And that's why I own all my stuff. I'm like, ooh, let me consult my CEO, Kara Swisher. Oh, yes, I feel like, you know, like, you know, whatever. You just say these people, these people want, Sherry Redstone wants her.

I know Sherry. I'm so disappointed in her. Not that I thought that she was going to be that a firm of supporter anyway. But I think she wants hers, I guess, just like Jeff Bezos. I mean, Jeff Bezos is the perfect example. He was very much supportive of the Washington Post for many years or just didn't do anything. And he got attacked in the first Trump administration. And he said, I'm not having that happen again.

And meanwhile, he has a new relationship. And he's sort of changed or not, whatever. He's changed. And so now he has a different attitude towards this stuff. Do you think that that, okay, so you look at a situation like CBS where, of course, they edited this interview for time. Trump did the same thing. I mean, we're talking about the Epstein stuff.

Fox literally edited the question. the line of questioning for television that they gave him where they were like, are you going to release the JFK files? Are you going to release? I forgot the whatever the other one. They didn't make a mistake. And then they said, are you going to release the Epstein files? And he goes, yeah, yeah, maybe not so much that one.

But they edited that out. And so do you think that there's a world in which Democrats should, you know, sack up, start to grow a spine and say, okay, if you're going to, if you're going to sue over that, why don't we have anybody coming out and suing for the same thing under the Trump rule, the Trump precedent? Well, I don't, I think that this is a quick ride to nowhere, right? And this kind of stuff. And, you know, I think if Democrats engage in it, we're going to get it for bribery, they're not. They're just not. Look, they may, but for what? For what? What purpose is just because you win? The same thing with actually, if they win the midterms, I just had a good interview with Robert Garcia, who will be the head of the oversight committee. And it's very clear they've got to look at the crypto scams that the Trump family is doing. That's very front and center. And that means a lot for all of the next. president's family, the next president's family. And so that's important. But the plain must we, like, I know a lot of liberals want to go, let's get them for that. It's like, let's, that's win.

Let's not, let's, like, there's no, what is, what will be the benefit from doing that? The best case scenario is the crypto stuff, which is really problematic and corrupt. And so be very careful about, you know, I hate to tell it to all your liberal watchers is, you may not get Donald Trump. He may die, with all this money and not retribution, and you're going to have to live with it and hope that somewhere he will, right? And so, you know, everyone was like, now he's going to jail.

He didn't, right? It's Mueller time? Yeah, just, you may have to accept the fact that this guy has squirreled out of all manner of corruption and illegal behavior, including, was it sexual abuse? I want to say that correctly, right? Whatever he, you may have to accept.

that. I know you're all going to, no, we can. It's like, what do you want to do? Do you want to win or do you want to what? Try to seek retribution against this guy who's, you know, hopefully. Nelson Mandela could move along. The rest of us can in a lot of ways. And I'm not suggesting that because some of it, like, especially the crypto stuff, absolutely should be investigated. It's really squirrely and it allows foreign entities to bribe our presidents. You know, that, that we really do need to deal with that, no matter who the president is. I mean, even as Donald Trump sits down with the leaders of a few African nations. They know exactly, I mean, it's so pathetic. They know exactly how to give him what he, how to give him the pats on the head that

he's looking for. They're all offering them the Nobel Peace Prize. I mean, it's so sad, the extent to which it's so easy to game the President of the United States. And if the tables returned, if somebody was like, if somebody, if all it took to manipulate Joe Biden was like, here's an ice cream cone. And Joe Biden be like, oh, this is great. We're going to have to have to strike up some great deals with your country with Liberia. I mean, the right would lose its collective mind. Yes, but you have to stop doing that. You know, I know Obama did that.

Like, what if I did? Like, who cares? Yeah, I know. They're terrible. Like, they're terrible people. Like, what do you want? You won't do it because you're not a terrible person. And so the issue is, do you want to be right or do you want to be effective, right?

And you're right, but it doesn't really matter. Like, do you want to be indignant or do you want to be effective? You can be indignant, but what do you want? And I think that's what Democrats have to start thinking about. What do we want? like and what which is power obviously and getting bills that they like that the democrats like better and they spent all their time um i did a really interesting interview with someone i really admire sarah mcbride who gets like so much incoming from those terrible nancy mace and marjor's the

two harpies as only carried herself with class and class it says nothing says almost nothing about it because you know what she was elected by all the people of delaware and therefore that's how she behaves. If she centered everything on her trans identity, and I know a lot of trans people think she should, she's not doing the job she was voted in for. And so one of the things she said, she wasn't being a, she wasn't like compromising. What she was saying is we're going to have to have imperfect allies and you're going to have to accept that, right? You're going to have to forgive that, you know, I get a lot of incoming because I used to like Elon Musk. Well, too fucking bad. He was pretty fantastic

back then and now isn't. So we're going to have to like really abandon the indignance although it definitely can power you to get to things and and be more I would I'm really fascinated by Mandan maybe because he's a very jolly

fella. He doesn't feel retribution. It felt like the beginning of the first days of Kamala's campaign. Right. Right. And the entirety of Obama's campaign to be honest. Right. And I think it's what if you If you're going to start a war, you should dig two graves. It just is, unfortunately, that's the situation.

And then later, history will judge these people and badly from Elon Musk or Donald Trump. And we will know that. And I think we've got to figure out what's effective to win the midterm elections. And then what are we going to do for the American people? Like that, to me, is what we have to talk about, $25 minimum wage. I met with a senator last night. And I was like, you got to stop. Like, stop. Just like, what do you want to do? Let me hear what you want to do. And so I, for it, he was not, I would say he was not a Mundani. He's a Democrat, but not a Mundani fan. And I said, why don't you watch these? And I gave him 10 videos. And I was like, you need to see what he's doing here, which is much more effective than, you know, wringing your hands all the time.

Well, to that point, and we'll finish off with this. Who are you looking at? I mean, we have, we have a deep bench on the left. And we need a deep bench on the left because, because, you know, as we engage in what I very much hope will be. an entire cycle of generational change and moving out the old guard, hopefully eliminating the gerentocracy that has completely enveloped the Democratic Party. Who's caught your eye, especially as we head toward 2020. Let's keep in mind, 70 people in Congress are over 70 years older, 80s. I mean, most of them are Democrats. Like, let's be clear. 100%.

Yeah. So one of the things I think is important is people start to look at people who are, they don't have to be young necessarily, by the way. They just have to be effective. And I think the question is, what's really a problem is like, are we going to be left? Are we going to be right? Well, you know what? Abby Spanberger should be what's right for Virginia to be governor.

I say all the time. He's not like Maddie. Jared Golden is not going to win in AOC's district and she's not going to win in his. Correct. So be who you are, where you are, and then come together and try to find common ground for the things you want to pass. But there's no way the Democrats look over in the right. There's the beginning for the beginning. There's the crazy conspiracy series.

There's the America First. the racist, then there's the them, you know, and then there's Marco Ruby who is standing there looking like he's having an aneurysm at any moment. So, and, you know, and willing to be a quisling. So, which he wants, because he wants to be president. Like, again, why? Everyone's like, why is Mario doing this? I'm like, he wants to be president. And they're like, but why? And I'm like, because he wants to be president. Like, just, it's so simple if you just look at what they want. And in the case of Musk, he wants power. And in the case of Trump, he wants money and power. And so, you know.

So going back, who are you, who are you looking at? What names interest do you? You know, obviously, Westmore gets a lot of attention. I'm very impressed with him. I did a recent interview with him. You know, typical ones, among politicians, Josh Shapiro, I suppose, Pritzker. I suppose, I doubt Gretchen Whitmer will be as big a factor. I suspect Amy Klobuchar will wander around into because she really wants to run the country,

I think pretty much, which is fine. Newsom, clearly. You know, I like, you know, everyone's looking at Andy Bashir, but I was so impressed by Laura Kelly from Kansas. I don't know why. I just really liked her whole thing. And then there's all kinds of interests. I mean, AOC, you can't count her out.

She's one of the most gifted politicians in very similar similarities with Trump, not in terms of policy, but in charisma. Charisma-styled communication skills. Mandani definitely has that. Of course, he's early. He's a little early. Any non-political? Any like Mark Cuban?

Well, Mark Cuban. I always bug him. I always like, are you running yet? No. He would tell me if he was. He would hedge it, but he hasn't hedged it once with me. So, I mean, he'd be a really interesting candidate. We were joking he should run as a Republican and see just to drive them fucking crazy.

Yeah. Kara, where can folks who are watching and listening, see and hear more from you? Oh, pivot. Pivot with Scott Galloway, who is very wise to. and on with Kara Swisher. Excellent. Well, I would highly recommend it. I just listened to your latest episode of Pivot Last Night with Scott,

and it's always wonderful. So highly recommend for anybody who's watching and listening right now. God's in Ibiza. I am not. Yeah. Yeah. Well, you're here with us. We appreciate it.

Kara, thank you so much for taking the time. Thanks. I'm joined now by the founder of Democracy Defenders Fund, Norm Eisen. Norm, you have just proven yourself a major thorn in Donald Trump's blowing a huge hole in a plan that he had since day one of his administration. Can you explain what you just did in court? We just secured the certification of a nationwide class of plaintiffs and a preliminary injunction that Donald Trump's denial of the Constitution, which says that all persons born in the United

States are citizen, is unconstitutional from the beginning of his administration. In that very first day, he signed an executive order saying, no, the 14th Amendment, all persons born here are citizens. That only applied to the children of slaves back when it was passed after the Civil War. No, that's not what it says at all. It says all persons born in the United States, a cornerstone of his administration and his hatred is the scapegoating. We see that with authoritarian's everywhere in the world. they always pick a scapegoat. Donald Trump is targeting migrants. And together with our partners in this case, the ACLU, the nation's oldest and largest Latino civil rights group, LULAC,

the NAACP, LDF, Legal Defense Fund, and so many other wonderful partners, we have secured this injunction and we've put Donald Trump back in his corner. He thought the Supreme Court let him off two weeks ago, we've shown him that still no one is above the law. So basically this was a situation where Trump thought that he had carte blanche to be able to move forward with his unlawful plans, his unconstitutional plans, because he watched the Supreme Court say, in deference to him, that there can be no nationwide injunction. So one court somewhere can't look at a blatantly unlawful order handed down by the Trump administration and say, no, you can't do that.

and this injunction applies to the whole country. And so he thought he got a win. But now your lawsuit basically pushed back on that and said, okay, if we can't have nationwide injunctions, we can still have class action lawsuits. And so let's find everybody impacted by birthright citizenship and say that they are part of the same class of protected people, which effectively has the exact same result as what a nationwide injunction would be.

Is that correct? That's right, Brian. About two weeks ago in the castle, the case um the supreme court closed one door and said just plain old nationwide injunctions where judge says you violated the 14th amendment i'm going to issue an injunction covering the country no but they opened another door they said the way to do that is to go to court have a class that means a similarly situated representative groups group of plaintiffs who stand for people across the country get your class

certified. The court says, yes, that is a class. I'm accepting it. And then get a preliminary injunction that way. Well, within two hours of that Supreme Court decision, ourselves and the ACLU and LULAC and the LDF and our other wonderful partners and our wonderful clients, the children who have been born since February 20th or who are the parents of the children who are going to be born. Those are the clients here. And with our wonderful clients, we were back in court a little over two hours later, two hours later. We asked the judge to go fast. He did. And here we are with this certification of our class and this injunction, just like the Supreme Court invited. Right. And it's also worthwhile to move quickly because otherwise you have babies born who

are literally stateless. And that is not a tenable position here. So is this retroactive to, are there any babies that were born before this court ruling was handed down that are effectively stateless who were born to undocumented immigrants that were still like under the, I guess, temporary jurisdiction of Trump's executive order? Well, there's issues about the timing of the executive order. Trump claims it doesn't kick in for 30 days after the Supreme Court decision. But the court was leaving nothing to chance. It did issue a retroactive injunction that goes back to the end of that original 30-day period, which is February 20th.

So the injunction is for all children born after February 20th, 2025, coast to coast, who are born of where one parent was an undocumented migrant. the other parent might have citizenship, but perhaps not permanent citizenship. Any child where there could be a question, do they have birthright citizenship? They are protected by this injunction. Now we're going to have to continue to fight appeals. But as you know, we can't have a crazy quilt that a baby in one county is protected because a judge there happened to issue an injunction. And then next door, a baby is born that's not protected. did we need a uniform plan? Brian, I certainly haven't agreed with everything this Robertsport has done,

but there's a consistent pattern where they closed one door and they open another one. They make it a little tougher, but with hard work, you're able to deliver for the Constitution, for the clients. For example, remember the Abrago Garcia case. Lower court judge said the government must facilitate and effectuate the return of Abrago. No, the Supreme Court said you must facilitate, effectuate that's too much. They compromised. Well, guess what? Abregos lawyers had to work a little hard.

The Trump administration said, oh, we're never bringing him back today. Abrago is back on U.S. oil and fighting, utilizing the courts, utilizing his due process rights. So same thing here. The court made it a little tougher. Roberts Court made it a little tougher, but they did open that door. We walked through it. In fact, two hours after the Supreme Court's ruling, we ran through that door to protect the rights of these babies. All babies born in the United States are citizens of the United States. My parents were migrants. Every person here comes of migrant stock except for the Native Americans. And so, this is the idea of America in action, and we're very proud that we secured that first injunction. No, Norm, it's worth asking here that normally when you have a federal district court,

their rulings don't establish any precedent. But isn't it true that now that we have a, now that this is a class action lawsuit, the only people impacted are not those who are in this specific case. This is class action. And so this is the entire country. Everybody who falls into this class across the, the entirety of the United States is protected by this ruling. Is that correct? That's exactly right, Brian. Normally, when a federal district court, the trial court rules,

that binds that individual judge and other judges in that district may or may not agree with that first opinion, it's not until the appellate courts and ultimately the Supreme Court get involved, that precedent is more broadly binding. But this is following what the Supreme Court said less than two weeks ago making such news in the Cossack case that the way to get a nationwide injunction and bind everyone in the country, every baby born here in the period the judge applied this to after February 20th, is through class action. And that's what we did. We got the class certified. That means the judge said, yes, it's a proper class. It represents all the babies. And we got the injunction based on that class certification. Now we'll have appeals here.

But we think we're on firm footing. We did what the Supreme Court asked. Donald Trump's reading of the Constitution on birthright citizenship is ridiculous. He says it only applies to the children of slaves. It says very clearly all persons. This is an originalist court. They say, follow the words and the original meaning. That is clearly the meaning. The court has held as much for the entire history of this 14th Amendment. And we're confident that we're going to succeed on appeal. Well, look, I will always give, happy to give a platform to the people who are fighting, especially those who are fighting on the front lines. And you and your team at Democracy Defenders Fund and all of the other groups and other co-counsel that were involved in this case

are chief among them. So highly recommend for anybody watching if you're looking to support the work that Democracy Defenders Fund is doing, which is fighting this battle on the front lines. I'll put the link to that right here on the screen and also in the post description of this video. If you're listening on the podcast, it'll be in the show notes. Norm, appreciate the work that you're doing in the time that you have today. Brian, it's been so meaningful to me as you and I have traveled on this journey of Trump's autocratic overreach. But the pushback. including in the courts and by the rule of law. We've had so many of these conversations

with your wonderful viewers and listeners. And we're on this journey together. We're going to protect the Constitution. We're going to protect all the American babies. And we're going to end this autocratic nightmare together. Norm, thanks again. Thanks again to Jamie Raskin, Kara Swisher, and Norm Eisen. That's it for this episode.

Talk to you next week. You've been listening to No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen, produced by Sam Graber, music by Wellesie, and interviews edited for YouTube by Nicholas Nicotera. If you want to support the show, please subscribe on your preferred podcast app and leave a five-star rating in a review. And as always, you can find me at Brian Tyler Cohen on all of my other channels, or you can go to Brian Tyler Cohen.com to learn more.