Raging Moderates with Scott Galloway and Jessica Tarlov - How Democrats Take On the ‘Epstein Class’ (ft. Nancy Pelosi)

Episode Date: February 20, 2026

Jessica Tarlov sits down with Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi to discuss Trump’s corruption, safeguarding the election, rising tensions with Iran, and Congress’s constitutional role before any potential military strike. Fresh off the Munich Security Conference, Pelosi reflects on NATO, human rights, and America’s standing with its allies. They also examine the arrest of Prince Andrew and the fallout from the Epstein files, debating whether Democrats should target the “Epstein class” or keep their focus on affordability and immigration. From redistricting battles and fears of election denialism 2.0 to shutdown brinkmanship over ICE reforms and unfinished business on healthcare costs, Pelosi weighs in on the strategy ahead — plus her most iconic moments and whether she’ll attend her final State of the Union. Follow Jessica Tarlov, @JessicaTarlov.  Follow Prof G, @profgalloway. Follow Raging Moderates, @RagingModeratesPod. Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@RagingModerates  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Welcome to Raging Moderates. I'm Jessica Tarlev, and today I'm joined by Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. She's hands down one of the most, if not the most consequential lawmaker of the last half century. Madam Speaker, I'm so honored to have you. My pleasure to be with you and my honor as well. Thank you. Thank you. This is like so exciting for me. In today's episode, we're discussing President Trump escalating tensions with Iran as Congress moves to assert its war powers, the arrest of Prince Andrew in the U.K. and growing Democratic calls for the U.S. to end what they describe as an Epstein cover-up. And we go through some of the speaker's most iconic, memeable moments. There's a lot of news to get to. Just this morning, President Trump convened his inaugural Board of Peace in Washington, D.C., to announce the reconstruction efforts in Gaza. And all of this is happening as we look like we moved closer to a major clash with Iran. He was briefed last night on our military options. Some people think there could even be a strike as soon as this weekend, huge military buildup in the region, reports that China and Russia

are joining the Iranian naval exercises. What are you thinking right now about what will happen, and what do you see as an ideal outcome? Well, I hope the president would be thinking about some of these things. I just returned from Munich a couple days ago, and the Secretary Rubio in his speech went at great lengths to condemn the United Nations for not settling the Ukraine crisis and Gaza and the rest of that and other things. Condeming it really, it just, it was not even subject of discussion there. We were talking about Ukraine and the rest, but he didn't mention Ukraine except that UN did not settle that crisis.

And then during the Q&A, he did answer on Ukraine. Where in Europe, where everybody is concerned of what's happening to their neighbor and what could happen to them, and he comes in and talks about the United Nations. So as it relates to this peace notion, I wouldn't even call it an idea, that the president has charging a billion dollars to join, but I'll let some of you in free if you're my friend or something like that. This is really getting to the point of serious malfeasance as far as being a world leader is concerned. These countries have their fears of him, or to schmuse him, whether that idea is a good idea or not. He talks about peace and he bombships in the Caribbean. He threatens Iran. I mean, when we had an agreement, a nuclear agreement under President Obama, which he then canceled. So if you hear frustration in my voice, it's because of his inexperience and his threat to these countries. Frankly, I think he's in it for the money. You know, you want to buy our chips, $2 billion in my son's company, you know, that kind of thing. And that goes along with some of his capital. members as well. What's in it for him? And now, WHO, he's going to spend much more money

when he took us out of the World Health Organization to put our own plan there, which will cost billions more. So whether it's security, whether it's health, whether it's governance, whatever tests you may put him to, he is taking us down the wrong path and he's making matters worse. So connecting that to what may happen even in the next few days in Iran, and obviously you've been a great advocate for human rights the world over throughout your entire career, very concerned about the Iranian people who have been so brave. And remember just a couple of weeks ago, you said help is on the way and we didn't know what that meant. And now we're kind of sitting here still wondering what that means. But is it your expectation that we will move towards a major clash with Iran? Europe is behaving as such. Israel is behaving as such. What are you thinking? Well, let me just first say that the condition in Iran in terms of human rights is intolerable, and I'm glad to see the recognition that abuse is taking. But I was in Munich, there were over 200,000 people in the streets speaking out against violations of human rights in Iran. This is remarkable, remarkable, and that wasn't the only place, there were other places as well.

So that was very important. But just because the president strikes a country doesn't mean that he's improving human rights there, witness Venezuela. But let's hope that I believe in jaw, jaw, jaw, talk, talk, rather than war, war. And if they had the capacity to do that, I don't know, they don't send diplomats. They seem to be people looking for a business deal. But if they had the capacity to do that, it would be a far better path to be on rather than threatening with warships and bombing. Israel was very bad on the nuclear agreement. They opposed it. We had to fight them in the Congress. We're all friends of Israel, but those who were against the masterful diplomacy. It was just

virtuoso. And then this president comes along and dismisses it, I got a better idea, let's bomb them. Yeah. It seems like such a straight line between not ramping up your nuclear program and having the deal and then getting rid of it and ramping it up. But there's also the fact that they, told us that Operation Midnight Hammer got rid of their nuclear capacities, but suddenly we're worried about it again, which is just a point of little confusion. Before we move on, I wanted to ask you about your time in Munich at the Security Conference. You were talking a lot about the importance of our partnerships with our allies, especially the NATO Alliance. How was your message received? What is the mood, I guess, across Europe in terms of what's

going on now with foreign policy and maybe hope for the future? Well, when we were in Munich in the first Trump term, they were very concerned because of what he had said about Article 5 of the NATO agreement, all the kinds of things he said. But this time, it was that plus Greenland. It was almost as if a man were cheating on his wife. It went too far. It was just too far. And this is a NATO country, Denmark, Greenland part of that. They threatened a military attack, and that really kind of set it in a different place.

So they were concerned about what's happening in our elections. They were concerned about what he might do now, of course. And so I was reassuring him that we are going to win the House, hopefully the Senate too. We are going to win the House. What difference does that make? Well, the threat of it is already making a difference because he lost the fight on tariffs. In the House, I'm just talking. I can't speak for the Senate.

He lost the fight on subsidies. He lost the fight on a jobs bill that we had there. And so the threat of losing their seats is making a difference to some of the Republicans there. And as we get closer to the election, there'll be more defeats for him. But then we will win. And the reason he is taking such drastic actions now, he knows he's going to lose. So what does he do? Threaten the integrity of the election.

And that's one thing they had. are you really going to have an election? I said, well, we're not parliamentary. You're a parliamentary country where the prime minister calls an election when he wants. This is a presidential and never in the history of our country have we ever not had the election on the appointed day for our federal elections. So that was the concern that was, what is he going to do next? What can we do about that? Now, the big issue there, of course, is the Ukraine. And I was very proud of Senator Wicker, Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee in the Senate who said, we're going to take up the sanctions bill within the next two weeks. I hope that is the case. There was talk of having

eight refineries told that if they continue to refine Russian oil, they would have consequences in terms of the U.S. And he mentioned that, Senator Wickham mentioned that in his comments as well. So I'm hopeful that we can do something there because this is sinful. You know, there's a picture of me leaving a cabinet room, pointing my finger at the president. And I said in that picture, I'm leaving because with you, Mr. President, all roads lead to Putin. And that was several years ago. Yeah. What is it that Putin has on him that he will not have any concessions from Putin, but all the concessions from Zelensky?

And that's noted by it. Zelensky was there, made a powerful speech. He was fantastic. And I was recalling four years ago when he made the speech just before. the Russian invasion. Then Putin thought he was going to win in a few days and four years, and so he's a loser right away. But he has the President of the United States on his side. So we're saying to Zelensky, in my view, they're saying, we've kidnapped your children by the tens of thousands. We've raped your women in front of their parents and their children, and we've

killed their families in front of each other. Now, give us land. Come on. Yeah. So in any case, and other reasons, because the invasion of Ukraine is not just that. Its countries surrounding Ukraine who are not part of NATO who are concerned, and NATO countries who are concerned and ready to fight them should they come into their country. But all we need to do is the president to be decent, if that's possible, I'm not sure, in terms of the children of Ukraine and the families of Ukraine and say something to Putin that he's got to make some compromises and land, in my view. should not be part of it. Yeah, it is incredible that the Russian list of demands has not changed at all over the course of the four years. But we keep pretending as if they're giving something,

or at least the Republican Party does. I definitely want to get to what you were talking about in terms of our elections. But before I move, kind of the global stage, I'm sure you saw that former Prince Andrew was arrested in the UK over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, King Charles, supportive of the action, saying that the law must take its course. We've heard from Robert Garcia, the ranking member, a Democratic ranking member on oversight saying now it's time for the United States to end this White House cover up. This is another issue that Donald Trump does not want to talk about. You saw Pam Bondi last week, stonewalling, left right and center, you know, Dow 50,000 in one of the more embarrassing moments, I think. But this is really an issue about the survivors. And this is an issue about a bipartisan point, right, a class of people who don't seem to be being held responsible. for abominable crimes.

Do you think that we will see more Epstein files, that there will be any justice for these survivors at some point? Well, until the survivors are satisfied, we will continue to fight for the Epstein files. This is ridiculous. And you see the stupidity of some of these men. Oh, my gosh. And a few women to be associated with such a...

Like, who writes these things down? Yeah. That's always what I'm thinking. Why would you put it in ink? Well, how about texting it? How stupid do you have to be to text a stupid thing that you're doing or email it, so it's a matter of record? But we're very proud of Congressman Garcia, the Committee of Jurisdiction, as well as Jamie Raskin judiciary, where the Attorney General appeared so embarrassingly the other day.

But our meetings with the survivors and the lead is taken there by the Congresswoman, it's the chair of that committee, of the Women's Caucus. But we've met with them, and there is no justice until they... are satisfied that those who have abused them, wreck their lives and all the rest, are brought to some justice, even if that means they're losing their job. But as was witnessed in the UK, even being a prince, when your brother is king, no one is above the law. And there's just something strange about the half, three million,

six million, approximately six million pieces of evidence that we know of. Three million has been released. three million have not been released, and what's in there that the president is trying to hide. It is a cover-up. He's been named over five and a half thousand times in the files, but nobody's asked him to explain any of it or his wife, as they ask Hillary Clinton, what does she have to do with anything and all of this? So there's just something grossly unfair in it, and we will not rest until the survivors can rest. Is the expectation if we win the House in November that there will be more to come on this?

Because it does feel like we've hit a moment where they're just going to stonewall the release of these files, at least until elections or until they don't have control anymore. Well, they have, the Congress voted overwhelmingly, I think it was just one no for the files to be released. Not half of their files, not some of the files, but all of the files. all of them. So right now, they owe the American people the rest of the files. And what they're seeing is that there's some calls for indictment or perhaps in somebody's felt. We don't know. We'll just see. But if they're indicting or arresting Prince in UK for his behavior, you know that some here may have their own vulnerabilities or exposure, and we'll only know the

rest of it when they release the rest of the files. And I would hope. I hope this would be all over long before the election because we have to really have more of the public's attention on the issues that relate to the kitchen table. We have to save our democracy, save our system of justice, but we do so at the kitchen table. Jobs, health care, education, housing, which I consider a health issue. But that is not to diminish the necessity of us to get the rest of these files, to satisfy the concern. of the, we call them survivors, they're so strong, so articulate in making their case. They're a great asset for justice in America. And we will not stop until that job is done. Absolutely. And you just got to my next question, which was going to be about your mind as a political tactician and how we

should be campaigning for the midterms. Because Epstein class, John Alsuff's been talking about at Rokana. And then there are folks in the party who's think, you know, we've got to be focused on those kitchen table issues, more like affordability, immigration even, versus talking about the Epstein files. So I think I got your answer on that. Well, let me just say this. Let me tell this little story. Some years ago, before I was in leadership, I was asked by a school in San Francisco, the new school of law in San Francisco, to have a reception at my home, a benefit for the school. The guest of honor was going to be Anita Hill. we got such a tremendous turnout from people that I know who never came to a political event for me.

You know, they just are not involved in any of that. But they came and they came and they came to it. And what I learned was that people that I knew very well, my neighbors and friends, had been victims of some kind of abuse. And you never know it to see their success and they're this and they're that, but they had survived that. And I think that part of the public concern about this is that women can relate to it. So I would warn the Republicans not to make light of this. This is deadly serious, as we know, and we just will persist.

We will not stop until we get those files, and that justice is done as far as those files are concerned. We have some of our suspicions, which we won't go into now in light of what we've heard ourselves in conversations with some involved in this, you know, in terms of the survivors. But we want to see the evidence. Definitely need the proof when you move forward with it. But it does leave room for a lot of speculation that I don't think the folks involved are enjoying either. Let's take a quick break. Stay with us. Welcome back. You're home right now in San Francisco for the California Democratic Party Convention this weekend. You're being honored, guest of honor. I know there's going to be a lot of talk about the governor's race and midterm strategy, big wins like Prop 50 and what's going on with

redistricting. We've seen pushes all over the country, Colorado, in Maryland, though there seems to be opposition from the head of the state Senate there. Can you give us a look at where we are in the redistricting fight and how confident you feel that we're pushing hard enough to make sure we come out on top in that? Yes, and I'm very proud of California. I'm proud of our House Democrats who agreed to give up Democrats in their own district to create five new Democratic districts. First and foremost, O'Loughman and Pete Aguilore led the way on that was great. The state legislature, which overwhelmingly accepted the maps that we gave them, and our governor, Governor Newsom, who just led the campaign to win in terms of the public. So the Congress, the state legislature, the governor,

most important, the public. So we're going to win the House. How many we pick up through redistricting in light of the fact that they think they have five in Texas, probably a few. We only need a few to win. Right. But that's not what this is about. I want ten times that. I want ten times that. If we need three to win the house, I want 30.

And that's all over the country. So we came out ahead on redistricting. They should never have gone down that path. They did. We won. We're ahead of them. And it's not, you see the Supreme Court just said that Virginia could go forward with its plan. We'll see what happens in Maryland, but even without that, we're ahead

by enough to win the House from redistricting. The other part of it is, though, that in 2006, well, 2005 a year before, Harry Reid and I were new leaders. We had new rules, we had new building, we had new leaders, and we had just lost the presidential election and over. President Bush was at 58% in January of 05 in the poll, 58%. So we knew that we could not win if he's at 58%. So we had to make the distinction. So when you talk about the election, one of the things they say is,

how are you going to present the Democrats? How are you going to freshly brand the Democrats? We do what we did then accept in a new era of technology. You know, it's all different now in terms of communication and the rest. And what we did then, we won the House, two new leaders. We won the House. And it was the first time the Democrats had won since 1992 because we let the members define who they were. And that's what we are doing now.

Let the members, Hakeem Jeffries is doing a remarkable job, having the members make the priorities as to what our message will be. And most of it centers around the kitchen table. But rather than my doing any injustice to the eloquence that Hakeem has to present it, I'll just say I'm very confident about. Three things we have to do. We have to make sure that the elections happen with integrity, no interference. That's a fight, and we're fully engaged in it. I want people to know that.

The elections will take place. He will not shut them down, even though he has said he would. But anyway. Secondly, we must win the election, and we will. I guarantee people that the Democrats in the House will win, hopefully big enough to win the Senate, but they have their own initiatives and they may win as well. It's not a foregone conclusion.

Their numbers are improving. Third, we have to show what we will do when we win. A new era for the Democrats as we go forward in light of the disaster that is in the White House, the attack, assault on democracy. What is democracy? Free and fair elections. Independent judiciary. Due process, rule of law, freedom of the press, all of it at risk with this president. So we have to protect democracy, but we do it at the kitchen table. Again, with affordability, lower the cost of living, housing, health care, education for children. The rest of that, the list goes on. And that will be the message the Democrats have more eloquence. than I presented. No, I think it was pretty good.

But I, you know, you talk about the integrity of the elections and that's a major anxiety that people have, especially with Trump saying, we're going to send ice to the polls, et cetera. But I know that a lot of people are really nervous actually about that period after the election. If Democrats win and if it's close, that we could have a redux of 2020, where there's, you know, recounts. They say that there's fraud. And Mike Johnson is no Mike Pence.

So is there a plan for that? I mean, he waited, what, two months to see Congresswoman Gruhalva when she won a free and fair election? Do we have, I know, what do you say, don't agonize, organize? Do we have a plan for that scenario? Yes, we have a plan for, it's complete. When you talk about an election, you know, we talk about election day. You talk about leading up to the election. So you protect the integrity of the election in many ways, and you increase.

the participation of people in a way that does not risk them. More voting in advance and the rest of that for fear of ice being at the polls and the rest of that. So what do you do leading up to election with fully prepare for that? Then what you do on election day, the main event, and then the counting and correcting of ballots and the rest of that after. We know this stuff. I'm as former chair of the California Democratic Party. And then you have to contend with, do they seat the people? If it's, say we win four seats and they say, well, we're going to challenge at least three of those.

Would four be enough to win the House. That's why I want to win a big victory so that it's so conclusive. But insist on the truth. That's Martin Luther King. Insist on the truth. And that has to be conveyed to the American people. This is what is at stake. They are not respecting it.

Now, if they don't respect the integrity of the election, they're casting doubt on their own election. Like, what are you talking about? You're saying this isn't right? The president wasn't a good election. The president should have been elected. Well, what about you? What about you? Yeah.

So, in other words, this is warfare. And we're ready. We're ready for that. Again, the important thing is that the people know. President Lincoln said public sentiment is everything. With it, you can accomplish almost anything. Without it, you can publish nothing. But in order for public sentiment, I then add,

for public sentiment to prevail, people have to know. And that's what we're in the process of doing. In our case, we're not presidential. Presidential is the main event. House races are sort of the lounge act, except when we must win the House. So we're into each district, get out the vote. That's the most democratic thing, mobilization, whether it's about passing legislation or winning an election.

Let the people's voices be heard. message with all of that, the fuel that runs the mobilization. That's what we will have been presenting and winning in some scores. And then the third is the money to make sure that we can afford what we need to do politically. Now, they will have endless, endless money. You name it. All these billionaires who don't want to pay taxes, they don't want to have any regulation of their businesses or anything like that. They will have endless money.

And you wonder where the patriotism is in the hearts or minds of these wealthy people. But they're there. We won't have. We got a plan. Yeah. As you said, we don't agonize. We organize. And we're going to win.

Next week is the State of the Union. Yeah. Are you planning on going? A reporter asked me that the other day when we were leaving the capital. And he said, are you going? So when is it? And he said, it's one of the first. it is. And I said, I'll check my calendar. That's what I'll do. I'll probably go. I'll probably go.

But the fact is, is that I ask guests from San Francisco who are engaged civically in one issue or another, whether it's health or immigration, this or that, and everybody just laughs in my face. You want me to go there. Yeah, not the hot ticket in town. I wanted to ask you, and I'm sure you're very aware of how memeable many of your iconic moments. throughout your career have been, you know, walking out of the West Wing and the red coat, putting on your shades, ripping up the state of the union, the clap, so a lot of action in the chamber. What moment or moments feel iconic to you about your career as you, you know, think about your last year in office? Well, I think the most exciting thing for me was standing behind President Barack Obama when he signed the Affordable Care Act. That was just so remarkable.

millions of more people getting access to health care, 150 million families who already had health care getting better benefits and the rest. Being a woman no longer being a pre-existing medical condition, no pre-existing conditions preventing people from having access. The list goes on. So that, because, you know, it's so funny, because when I go places, people go, you know,

they gesture that. And I'm like, hey, what about the affordable care? And I give credit to the House members for having the courage. to take the votes. In my district, that's easy, but in their districts, not so. And the Republicans were always, always, they're going to raise taxes, it's going to increase the debt, it's going to lose jobs, precisely describing what their policies do, but projecting that on to us. So our members had courage to vote for all these things. So that, to me, was the ultimate thing because

it's one of the pillars of our economic security, it's not only health security, but financial Security for working families. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Affordable Care Act. We won the battle on subsidies in the House with 17 Republican votes. The Senate has still not done anything, but they will have a price to pay if they don't electorally. Absolutely. I mean, other things get all kinds of attention. People don't even speak English. They remember that. And overseas, if I'm going out to buy some chocolate in Belgium or whatever it is, I think, what about the substance. But anyway, people like moments. Yeah, it's hard to fit the Affordable Care Act into a gift. So I guess that's why it happened. But, you know, people come up and say,

I wouldn't be alive without the Affordable Care Act. They just make it one sentence. So that's more important to me than this, but nonetheless, this got their attention. So that's okay with me. I wanted to ask you, and this is a bit lighter, even though I already talked to you about memes. As a woman who is on camera a lot and spends time with people who are constantly in the public eye, no matter how they vote, everyone is always so complimentary about your look. So your hair, your skin, the high heels, you know, the whole shebang. How do you keep it together like that? Like what is your routine like and how do you think about your image?

which is so important, obviously for the work you do, but also for women all over the world in positions of power and, you know, who spend time on camera. I, to tell you honest truth, I don't spend too much time thinking about it. Really? You woke up like that? I don't. I don't. I just want to wear what's clean. So sometimes I think, oh, red would be great today.

And I'll go look at the red thing. Oh, that's not going to work. Put that in the bag for the laundry. I probably should have had somebody advising me. They keep thinking, oh, they have advisors. No, I don't. I just wear what's clean. I do get my hair done because I'm not good at it.

You see, I did it myself this morning. I do do that. That's one thing because then people say, I like the way your hair look, but don't count on me to make that happen. That's the one thing that I professionally engage in a couple of times a week. But other than that, I don't give it that much thought. I don't get any different thought than I would if I never went to Congress. Let me say it that way.

Being in Congress is not any motivation for me to dress differently and the rest. Although I love dressing casually, too, and that's not, that doesn't happen on too many days in Congress. But I just say to women, be yourself. Do what is comfortable for you. Don't worry about being a modeling off to somebody else. You might have mentors. That's a good thing. but the authenticity of you, who you are, nobody like you in the history of the world.

Nothing more wholesome for the political and governmental process and the increased participation of women. So you may admire this or that, but admire yourself because you are the one who will make your difference. And that's what is most important in the Congress. I take great pride as former chair of the party that when I came to Congress there were 12 Democratic women, 11 Republicans, 12. Well, can you imagine what's ridiculous out of 435?

So I made a decision that elections make a difference, and we were going to recruit, mentor, whatever it is, that people needed money as well, have more women. Now we have 96 Democratic women, but I want more, too, and we'll get more in this election. The Republicans have come up to like 30-something, and that's good, but we're three times that. It's really very, very important.

But don't worry about the clothes or any of that. just be who you are. I wanted them all, though, as much as possible, to have a security credential. Because if they're going to go further, whether there's community safety, global safety, or national safety, any of those categories, I want them to have a security credential. That's why I was so happy to see Jacobs, AOC, and the rest in Munich as well. They were very well received, and that was really good. As you know, you have to speak with some authority, some literacy on the things. They'll have 30 years of intelligence, 30 years of intelligence on different committee assignments and leadership and the rest. And so I know the value of that and I want them to have

the respect for all that they do by their knowledge of how to protect America because that's so important. Public safety, community safety, global safety, in every way. We want women to be in the forefront. So when women come, they'll say, well, there'll be education and health care. That's important because that's part of our strength too. But I want them to have that credential as well. So I'm very proud of the women in the Congress, and many people are in the fight on Epstein, but the women are playing a very important role in our communication with the survivors, and that's really important.

It is. Speaker Pelosi, I'm so thankful for your time. My pleasure to be with you. Thank you. Thank you.