Joe Rogan Draws 'Line in the Sand' Against Donald Trump Over Epstein
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Podcaster Joe Rogan has said that he is drawing a "line in the sand," with President Donald Trump over Jeffrey Epstein.
Rogan, who previously endorsed Trump in the 2024 presidential election has recently joined the cacophony of angry voices who have spoken out against Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Justice Department's handling of findings from the investigation into sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
"This one's a line in the sand," Rogan said during a recent episode of his podcast with former CIA Officer Mike Baker. "We thought Trump was going to come in and a lot of things are going to be resolved. We're going to drain the swamp, we're going to figure everything out."
"And when you have this one hardcore line in the sand that everybody has been talking about forever, and then they're trying to gaslight you on that," Rogan said.
Joe Rogan looks on during UFC 316 at the Prudential Center on June 07, 2025 in Newark, New Jersey.
Joe Rogan looks on during UFC 316 at the Prudential Center on June 07, 2025 in Newark, New Jersey.
Elsa/Getty Images
Newsweek has reached out to a representative for Rogan outside of regular working hours via email for comment.
This is a developing story and it will be updated.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
Kevin O'Leary Rips Donald Trump for 'Whacking' Labor Bureau Chief
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Shark Tank investor Kevin O'Leary ripped President Donald Trump over his firing of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Commissioner Dr. Erika McEntarfer on Friday after a disappointing jobs report. Newsweek reached out to an economic analyst via email for additional comment. Why It Matters Trump's decision to oust McEntarfer has triggered widespread concern among economists, business leaders and former government officials about the independence of U.S. economic data reporting. The abrupt dismissal followed the release of lackluster job numbers and marked a rare direct intervention by a president in the work of a nonpartisan federal agency responsible for compiling critical economic statistics. The number of new jobs for July dipped well below even modest expectations, with only 73,000 positions added, compared to the Dow Jones estimate of 100,000. This move has now fueled debate over the politicization of federal agencies, the integrity of government data and potential impact on market and public trust in official economic indicators. What To Know Trump announced McEntarfer's firing on Truth Social Friday, also accusing her of manipulating data to benefit former Vice President Kamala Harris around the 2024 presidential election "to try and boost Kamala's chances of Victory." While speaking on CNN after Trump's announcement, O'Leary was asked about Trump's economic policies impacting him as an investor. "I don't look at one day's trading and decide I'm going to change my strategy," O'Leary said. "I want markets to correct. I want them to go up and down. We're used to volatility. We had a bad print on jobs. I did not agree on whacking the commissioner. I don't like that." O'Leary continued: "Whacking statisticians makes no sense whatsoever. You don't shoot the messenger. They used to do that in Ancient Rome. Bad news. They'd kill a guy off the horse. You don't need to do that now. It doesn't matter. This is a job where you just print data. So, I didn't like that story." "I think the market is a little concerned about major trading partners not getting deals yet that make sense. It's not a good idea to have 35 percent tariffs on Canada, we know that that's coming into place at midnight right now, unless something magic happens," O'Leary added. McEntarfer's firing coincided with a significant drop in U.S. stock markets on Friday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 542 points (1.2 percent), the S&P 500 fell 1.6 percent and the Nasdaq composite dropped 2.2 percent. This downward movement was attributed to both weak job figures and a new round of U.S. tariffs announced by Trump. Kevin O'Leary, chairman of O'Leary Ventures, is poised to speak before a Senate joint hearing on April 9 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) Kevin O'Leary, chairman of O'Leary Ventures, is poised to speak before a Senate joint hearing on April 9 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) What People Are Saying JB Pritzker, Democratic governor of Illinois, posted to X on Friday: "Donald Trump just fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because she stated the facts. And the facts show his policies are a disaster for the American economy. Trump said he'd be a dictator on day one and that's just what he's acting like." Trump, in an interview with Newsmax's Rob Finnerty on Friday: "We had some difficulties with her, and there had been a lot of questions and we fired her because we didn't believe the numbers today." What Happens Next It remains uncertain who will be nominated as the next permanent BLS commissioner. Trump announced on Truth Social that McEntarfer "will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified." Former BLS chief William Beach and other Friends of BLS Co-Chairs called for an investigation of Trump's firing of McEntarfer.
Newsweek
6 hours ago
- Newsweek
Ghislaine Maxwell Subpoena Update as House Waits on Supreme Court
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer told Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys the panel is willing to delay her subpoenaed deposition until after the Supreme Court rules on an appeal she has filed, a decision expected in late September. Maxwell's legal team had warned she would invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination unless certain conditions were met, including congressional immunity, conducting the deposition outside her prison, receiving advance questions, and waiting for the appeal's conclusion. Comer said Maxwell's testimony remains "vital" to the committee's Jeffrey Epstein investigation but ruled out granting immunity or providing questions in advance. He added the panel is "willing to engage in good faith negotiations" and will continue its practice of holding detailed discussions about the scope of testimony. This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
Newsweek
6 hours ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Effort to Overturn Birthright Citizenship Struggles in Court
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A three-judge panel in the Boston-based appeals court expressed deep skepticism about arguments from President Donald Trump's Department of Justice as the administration seeks to overturn birthright citizenship, according to Reuters. Why It Matters Trump's executive order, signed on Inauguration Day in January, seeks to restrict birthright citizenship and could potentially affect the rights of millions of U.S.-born children. The order directs U.S. agencies to refuse citizenship to children unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. The crux of the issue sits in the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which will determine whether the constitutional guarantee of citizenship for children born on American soil to non-citizen or undocumented parents remains intact. The case has already gone before the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which last month ruled that the order is unconstitutional, upholding a lower-court decision that blocked nationwide enforcement. A stock photo of a new USA passport. A stock photo of a new USA passport. Stock Photo - Getty Images What To Know The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday grilled Justice Department lawyer Eric McArthur over the core arguments of the administration's position on birthright citizenship, who reiterated Trump's argument that the 14th Amendment was only meant to extend citizenship to the children of former slaves—not the children of immigrants in the country either temporarily or unlawfully. The judges, all appointed by Democratic presidents, pointed to the Supreme Court's ruling in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which guaranteed citizenship to any child born in the country to non-citizen parents. Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron mused that the judges "aren't free to disregard" the Supreme Court's previous ruling. Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued before the court that the Supreme Court has "repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens." While the Supreme Court in June ruled in favor of limiting nationwide injunctions, it allowed certain exceptions within the limits of a certified segment of people for class-action lawsuits to retain that power. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin of Massachusetts in July ruled that a previously granted nationwide injunction against Trump's order could stay in place, even in light of the new Supreme Court restrictions, because "no workable, narrower alternative" would give the plaintiffs relief. A New Hampshire court in the same month also acted within the new ruling to certify a nationwide class of plaintiffs, which included all children born on U.S. soil. The Trump administration has sought to appeal this ruling alongside Sorokin's. What People Are Saying Judge Patrick Bumatay, who dissented in the 9th Circuit's ruling, wrote: "We should approach any request for universal relief with good faith skepticism, mindful that the invocation of 'complete relief' isn't a backdoor to universal injunctions." Former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg via X, formerly Twitter, to Newsweek in July: "Easy decision. If President Trump wants to eliminate birthright citizenship, he needs to change the Constitution. But he can't repeal the language of the 14th Amendment via executive order." Representative Claudia Tenney, a New York Republican, posted to X on Wednesday: "Birthright citizenship was never meant to be a reward for breaking our immigration laws. The Constitutional Citizenship Clarification Act makes it clear: No citizenship for children born to illegal aliens, foreign spies, or terrorists." What Happens Next Legal experts and state attorneys general anticipate that the Supreme Court's possible review will provide a landmark ruling on the meaning of the 14th Amendment—a decision that may reshape the rights of children born on U.S. soil and the future of American immigration policy. This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.
