logo
Trump's pre-election comments about ‘Epstein files' resurface in edited Fox News interview

Trump's pre-election comments about ‘Epstein files' resurface in edited Fox News interview

Yahooa day ago
Last summer, roughly five months before Election Day 2024, Donald Trump sat down for one of his many 'Fox and Friends' interviews, which didn't generate a ton of headlines at the time. (One of the hosts asking the Republican questions at the time was, oddly enough, future Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.)
But the interview resurfaced this week because of Trump's comments about the so-called Epstein files.
At the time, Fox News' Rachel Campos-Duffy (wife of Trump's current transportation secretary, Sean Duffy) began by asking the then-candidate whether he would declassify government files related to 9/11, and Trump said he would. She then asked about declassifying John F. Kennedy assassination files, and he again said he would. The co-host went on to ask, 'Would you declassify the Epstein files?' referring to the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, the late millionaire pedophile who was arrested during Trump's first term.
What viewers saw at the time was Trump replying, 'Yeah, I would.'
But what those who tuned into the interview didn't see was the rest of his answer.
In a video that resurfaced in light of the ongoing controversy surrounding his team's handling of Epstein-related documents, Trump, after saying he supported access to the files, quickly added, 'I guess I would. I think that less so because, you don't know, you don't want to affect people's lives if it's phony stuff in there, because it's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world. But I think I would.'
Asked if such a move would help restore public trust, he added, 'Yeah. I don't know about Epstein so much as I do the others. Certainly about the way he died. It'd be interesting to find out what happened there, because that was a weird situation and the cameras didn't happen to be working, etc., etc. But yeah, I'd go a long way toward that one.'
To be sure, this isn't altogether new information. In fact, Semafor had a good report on this last summer. (Fox News did not respond to the outlet's request for comment at the time.)
But it's returned to the fore for a couple of reasons. First, the comments Trump made last summer are newly relevant given his administration's efforts to make this ongoing fiasco go away.
In fact, it seems likely that many who want the White House to follow through on its earlier commitments will take a keen interest in this year-old appearance.
Second, the fact that Fox News edited the interview this way also seems newly significant given that the president has been quite hysterical for months about CBS News' '60 Minutes' including some benign edits in a pre-election interview with Kamala Harris.
Indeed, the Republican was so outraged — or at least pretended to be outraged — by the edits that he recently accused the news magazine of 'fraud,' airing 'defamatory' segments, 'illegally' intervening in the last presidential election, 'corruptly changing major answers to Interview questions' and being a 'Political Operative' that has engaged in 'unlawful and illegal behavior.' He added that CBS 'should lose' its broadcast license and 'pay a big price,' while calling on the FCC to 'impose the maximum fines and punishment.'
Whether the president would expect Fox News to face similar penalties — or endorse Harris filing a $20 billion lawsuit against the network, which was the amount of the since-settled civil suit he filed against CBS and its corporate parent — remains unclear.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

House breaks record for longest-ever vote — again
House breaks record for longest-ever vote — again

Axios

timea few seconds ago

  • Axios

House breaks record for longest-ever vote — again

House Republicans broke the record Wednesday for the lower chamber's longest vote in history — for the second time in as many weeks. Why it matters: It's the latest example of Johnson's strategy for dealing with his razor-thin majority — holding votes open for hours as he tries to sway opponents in his own party. Wednesday's record-setting vote was on a resolution setting the terms of debate on several measures, including the GENIUS Act, which would establishing a regulatory framework for stablecoin issuers. That broke the previous record, set two weeks ago to the day amid grueling negotiations over President Trump's " big, beautiful bill." The big picture; Before two weeks ago, the previous record was set in 2021, when the House took seven hours and six minutes on a procedural vote related to then-President Biden's Build Back Better legislation. This was Speaker Mike Johnson's (R-La) second attempt after the House floor ground to a halt Tuesday when the chamber rejected the procedural vote on the first try. Johnson is facing demands from hardliners to combine the GENIUS Act with two other crypto bills the chamber is considering this week. That would force the Senate to reconsider the legislation, likely leading to significant delays. Between the lines: Wednesday's revote follows a meeting Trump said he held late Tuesday in the Oval Office with opponents — after which he declared victory, apparently prematurely.

Gov. Newsom criticizes Trump's use of National Guard after removal of some troops
Gov. Newsom criticizes Trump's use of National Guard after removal of some troops

Los Angeles Times

timea few seconds ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Gov. Newsom criticizes Trump's use of National Guard after removal of some troops

A day after the Pentagon ordered the withdrawal of half of the National Guard troops deployed in Los Angeles, Gov. Gavin Newsom criticized President Trump for wasting hundreds of millions of dollars to appear 'tough' by punishing immigrants. Newsom also accused the president of trying to preserve Republican power in Washington by pressuring Texas to redraw congressional districts to elect GOP representatives. The governor repeated a threat to launch a similar effort in California to favor Democrats. 'Everything has changed, and it's changing in real time,' Newsom told reporters Wednesday. 'I'm not going to be the guy that said I could have, would have, should have. I'm not going to be passive at this moment. I'm not going to look at my kids in the eyes and say I was a little timid.' The comments came at a news conference outside Downey Memorial Christian Church, where Newsom met with the Rev. Tanya Lopez, the senior pastor, to discuss an incident in June where she watched as plainclothes federal agents swarmed and detained a constituent in the parking lot of her church. Newsom criticized the administration's immigration crackdown, saying its only goal was to terrorize families and communities — not to pursue violent criminals, which Newsom said he would support. Newsom said the crackdown was also harming family-owned businesses as immigrants who work and shop at stores stay home out of fear. The governor called the president's decision to deploy about 4,000 National Guardsmen part of Trump's 'rule of cruelty' and said the decision to remove half the troops came after the Pentagon realized the absurdity of its deployment. The government wasted of hundreds of millions of dollars on the deployment, Newsom said. He added that the 'utilization rate' of the National Guard troops was only about 5%, meaning only that percentage was actively engaged with duties while the rest were held in reserve. 'They're a solution right now in search of a problem,' he said of the National Guard. The move to send home some of the troops comes after a legal battle over whether the administration could deploy the troops. A federal appeals court ruled that the president had broad — though not 'unreviewable' — authority to deploy the military in American cities. State and local leaders said the National Guard was not needed to deal with protests over immigration raids that have led to around 3,000 arrests. On a separate issue, Newsom repeated the threat that California could redraw its electoral maps to help Democrats pick up more congressional seats in response to Trump's call for Texas and other states to redistrict to benefit Republicans in the 2026 midterm elections. Republicans currently hold power in both the Senate and House of Representatives, which have been instrumental in enacting the president's policy agenda, including cuts to healthcare and food assistance for Americans in need. 'They can't win by the traditional games, so they want to change the game,' Newsom said. 'We can act holier-than-thou. We can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be, or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment.' California voters in 2010 gave an independent Citizens Redistricting Commission the power to determine the boundaries of state voting districts for the U.S. House of Representatives instead of leaving that authority with the state Legislature. Newsom said the California Legislature could pass a bill in the regular session or in a special session that places a proposed constitutional amendment before voters to change state redistricting laws through a special election held in a tight window before the 2026 primaries. The governor said he's also exploring a potential legal loophole that could allow the California Legislature to redraw the congressional maps themselves now with a two-thirds vote and avoid going to the ballot. 'That is an option that is also being considered and both of those are being advanced in real time, not only with members of the Legislature, but others that are interested, because they feel the same pressures I do about the existential threat of what Donald Trump and some of these Republican states are trying to do,' Newsom said.

Here are the 3rd-countries where the Trump admin is deporting migrants
Here are the 3rd-countries where the Trump admin is deporting migrants

Axios

timea few seconds ago

  • Axios

Here are the 3rd-countries where the Trump admin is deporting migrants

Expelling migrants to third-countries that are not their place of origin is becoming a cornerstone of President Trump's deportation strategy. The big picture: The administration's increasing number of third-country deportation agreements showcases a dogged desire to pursue every possible avenue to fulfill Trump's promise to deport record numbers of noncitizens. Catch up quick: The Trump administration restarted deportation flights after the Supreme Court ruled last month that the Department of Homeland Security could resume sending migrants to countries that were not their place of origin. The decision put a lower court order that required the government to give immigrants adequate time to challenge their deportations on hold. State of play: Border czar Tom Homan said the U.S. aims to sign third-country deportation agreements with "many countries" to support the administration's deportation plans. The administration has either approached or plans to approach roughly 51 countries to accept non-citizen deportations from the U.S., per a June report New York Times report. At least two of those countries, Eswatini and South Sudan in Africa, have accepted flights from the U.S. since the report came out. The DHS did not immediately respond to Axios' Wednesday evening request for comment on how many of the countries have been approached. Thought bubble via Axios' Dave Lawler: The administration has reportedly discussed safe third-country agreements with many countries for which the "safe" description is very much in question. Take Libya or South Sudan, both of which have been wracked by instability and violence for years. Several other countries involved in these deals are among the poorest in the world. The prospect of deporting migrants thousands of miles away to unfamiliar and often unstable countries has raised alarm among human rights groups, but the idea has strong support within the administration. Here are the countries that have already accepted deportees who are not their citizens: Eswatini Five migrants from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen were deported to the tiny African nation of Eswatini on Tuesday, the DHS announced. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin wrote on X that the flight was carrying individuals who had been convicted of a range of crimes that included murder, homicide, and child rape. El Salvador The Trump administration sent at least 238 Venezuelan migrants to a notorious El Salvadorian maximum security prison under the Alien Enemies Act in March, claiming that they were terrorists and members of a violent gang. By the numbers: An April CBS News report found 75% of the migrants sent to the prison had no criminal record. Mexico Mexico has received roughly 6,000 non-Mexicans from the U.S. as of late April, per Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. Sheinbaum said the non-Mexicans her country was accepting for "humanitarian reasons" comprise a small number of the nearly 39,000 migrants the U.S. has deported to Mexico since Jan. 20. Guatemala Guatemalan President Bernardo Arevalo announced in February that his country had agreed to accept third-country nationals from the United States and would be ramping up deportation flights from the U.S. by 40%. Arevalo told NBC News that the agreement was not supposed to provide a pathway for people to seek asylum in Guatemala. Rather, the country would serve as a pit stop in the process of sending people back to their home countries. Costa Rica Costa Rica accepted roughly 200 third-country nationals from two different U.S. flights through the end of February, per a May Human Rights Watch report. On the planes were at least 81 children and two pregnant women. What they're saying: After announcing the expulsion agreement, Costa Rican President Rodrigo Chaves said his country was helping its "economically powerful brother to the north." Costa Rican officials have said the U.S. will cover the costs of the deported people's stay in the country, and that the arrangement was expected to be a temporary stop in the repatriation process. Panama The U.S. has deported hundreds of people to Panama since February as part of a deal for the country serve as a "bridge" while the U.S. bears the financial costs, per AP. The migrants are from countries including Iran, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Afghanistan and China. Rwanda The U.S. paid the Rwandan government $100,000 to accept an Iraqi citizen in April and agreed to take 10 more deportees, the New York Times reported. Negotiations reached over the Iraqi citizen "proved the concept for a new removal program, according to the report. South Sudan The U.S. deported eight men to South Sudan in July, after a legal battle diverted their deportation flight to Djibouti for several weeks. Some of the men deported were from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar and Vietnam. Kosovo This landlocked Balkan nation in Europe agreed to host 50 noncitizen deportees from the U.S. in June. The deal would allow noncitizens to be "temporarily relocated" before being sent back to their home country. The intrigue: Kosovo reportedly agreed to accept the noncitizens from the U.S. in the hope that the administration will continue to lobby other nations to recognize the small country's independence.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store