Joe Rogan weighs in on Jeffrey Epstein files controversy amid uproar over DOJ probe
The podcast giant lambasted the Trump administration's announcement that there was never a list or footage revealing clients of the high-flying sex pest.
'They've got videotape and all a sudden they don't,' Rogan, 57, said on the latest episode of his podcast 'The Joe Rogan Experience,' released Tuesday.
'You had the director of the FBI on this show saying, 'If there was [a videotape], nothing you're looking for is on those tapes,'' Rogan added, referring to Director Kash Patel's appearance on the show in June.
3 Joe Rogan said the Trump administration's turnaround on its disclosure of Jeffrey Epstein evidence was ridiculous.
The Joe Rogan Experience
'Like, what? Why'd they say there was thousands of hours of tapes of people doing horrible shit? Why'd they say that? Didn't Pam Bondi say that?'
Rogan was referring to comments Attorney General Pam Bondi made on July 1 — just days before the Department of Justice announced there was no 'Epstein List' or incriminating footage of the disgraced financier's associates — in which she told reporters the FBI was reviewing 'tens of thousands of videos' of Epstein 'with children or child porn.'
And months earlier, Bondi intimated that the supposed Epstein List was on her desk waiting for review — though she later clarified that there was an Epstein investigation file ready for her review, not the so-called list at the center of countless conspiracy theories.
The turnaround comes after President Trump spent months talking about plans to release everything the government had on Epstein and his associates — even publishing 'The Epstein Files: Phase 1' to great fanfare in February. Next to nothing new was revealed in those files.
3 Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide after his 2019 arrest.
AP
Rogan didn't seem to buy the Trump administration's new stance, suggesting the president was trying to distract supporters from his campaign promises about Epstein.
'Just bomb Iran and everybody forgets. Everybody forgets about it,' Rogan said, referring to Trump's late-June strikes on Iranian nuclear weapons facilities.
It was just the latest bone Rogan picked with Trump, whom he endorsed ahead of the election, on his podcast in recent weeks.
Earlier in July, he called the president's ICE round-ups of illegal immigrants 'insane,' and said authorities should focus on investigating dangerous criminals instead of raiding Home Depot parking lots for arrests.
'There's two things that are insane. One is the targeting of migrant workers. Not cartel members, not gang members, not drug dealers. Just construction workers. Showing up in construction sites, raiding them. Gardeners. Like, really?' Rogan said.
3 Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel have changed their tune on Epstein, insisting no cover-up.
REUTERS
He appeared to be referring to the incidents that sparked the Los Angeles protests in June, when ICE agents staked out parking lots where manual laborers gather to find work during mornings.
The Department of Homeland Security disputed Rogan's characterization of ICE's arrests, with a spokesperson saying 'an overwhelming majority' of ICE arrestees in Trump's crackdown had prior criminal convictions.
Rogan, whose podcast commands an audience of about 10 million listeners, has had a mixed stance on Trump.
He used to be a virulent critic of the president, but ended up endorsing him ahead of the 2024 election, saying Elon Musk's arguments in favor of Trump convinced him.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CBS says Stephen Colbert's 'The Late Show' to end in May 2026
Stephen Colbert's "The Late Show", long a staple of late night US television, will end in 2026, the CBS network said Thursday, days after the comedian blasted parent company Paramount's $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump as "a big fat bribe". CBS said in a statement the cancellation was "purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night," and was "not related in any way to the show's performance, content or other matters happening at (parent company) Paramount." "Next year will be our last season," the host announced on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert" on Thursday to boos and shouts of disbelief. "The network will be ending the show in May (2026)." Paramount, CBS's parent company, reached its $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump this month in a lawsuit the entertainment giant described as meritless. Trump had sued Paramount for $20 billion last year, alleging that CBS News' "60 Minutes" program deceptively edited an interview with his 2024 election rival, Kamala Harris, in her favor. The company is seeking to close its $8 billion merger with the entertainment company Skydance, which needs federal government approval. Colbert said on Thursday the cancellation was not just the end of his show but the end of decades-old "The Late Show" franchise, which has been broadcast continuously on CBS since 1993. "I'm not being replaced. This is all just going away," he said. 'America deserves better' Trump's political opponents and other critics drew attention to the timing of the decision. "CBS canceled Colbert's show just THREE DAYS after Colbert called out CBS parent company Paramount for its $16M settlement with Trump -- a deal that looks like bribery," Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren said on social media platform X. "America deserves to know if his show was canceled for political reasons," Warren said. Democratic Senator Adam Schiff, who was on Colbert's show the night he announced it would be ending, said: "If Paramount and CBS ended the 'Late Show' for political reasons, the public deserves to know. And deserves better." Talk show host Jimmy Kimmel, who has his own late night program "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" for ABC, was among the celebrities that condemned CBS's decision. "Love you Stephen." CBS said in its Thursday statement it was "proud that Stephen called CBS home." "He and the broadcast will be remembered in the pantheon of greats that graced late night television," its statement said. Colbert, one of the most popular American comedians who made use of humor in his incisive political commentatary, succeeded David Letterman as the host of "The Late Show" in 2015. Before that Colbert was a regular on Comedy Central alongside fellow talk show host and political pundit Jon Stewart. The late-night television landscape has long been dominated by satirical comedy shows that blend entertainment with political commentary. For decades, programmes such as "The Late Show", "The Tonight Show," and "Late Night" have served as television touchstones, with hosts like Johnny Carson, Jay Leno, David Letterman and more recently Colbert and Jimmy Fallon shaping public discourse through humour and celebrity interviews. abs/fox
Newsweek
18 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Iran's Military Leaders Threaten to Resume War
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. Iran's military leaders are warning the world that their forces are fully prepared to restart the war with Israel at any moment. Even though a fragile ceasefire brokered by the U.S. has paused the recent 12-day conflict, Tehran says it will not back down or show mercy if attacked again, raising tensions across the region. Newsweek has reached out the State Department and Iran's foreign ministry for comment. Why It Matters The renewed warnings from Iran's top commanders come as Israel signals that the recent fighting may not be over. With the U.S. pushing for diplomacy while keeping military options on the table, the Middle East remains on edge. How Iran responds next could shift the fragile balance between confrontation and peace. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, second left, listens to commander of the Revolutionary Guard's ground force Gen. Mohammad Pakpour, left, as the army commander Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi, right, stands while they review an annual armed forces... Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, second left, listens to commander of the Revolutionary Guard's ground force Gen. Mohammad Pakpour, left, as the army commander Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi, right, stands while they review an annual armed forces parade marking the anniversary of the beginning of war against Iran by former Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein 44 years ago, in front of the shrine of the late revolutionary founder Ayatollah Khomeini, just outside Tehran, Iran, Saturday, Sept. 21, 2024. More Vahid Salemi/AP Photo What to Know Major General Mohammad Pakpour, commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said his forces are "fully prepared to resume combat from exactly where it stopped." Speaking during a meeting with Iran's Army chief, Major General Amir Hatami, Pakpour stressed that "the aggressors will not be spared" and praised the unity and determination of the Iranian people. He added that Iran will respond with full force only if war becomes necessary. Nuclear Sites Claim Meanwhile, The Trump administration is pushing back against a new intelligence assessment that contradicts President Donald Trump's repeated claims that U.S. airstrikes "obliterated" Iran's nuclear facilities last month. According to five current and former U.S. officials familiar with the assessment, NBC News reported that while Iran's Fordow nuclear enrichment site was mostly destroyed in the U.S. military operation, the Isfahan and Natanz sites may have only been set back by months and could resume operations. In response, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell posted on X, "False. The credibility of the Fake News Media is similar to that of the current state of the Iranian nuclear facilities." False. The credibility of the Fake News Media is similar to that of the current state of the Iranian nuclear facilities: destroyed, in the dirt, and will take years to recover. — Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) July 17, 2025 Return to Talks? As questions swirl around the long-term impact of the strikes, Iran's foreign minister warned that any return to nuclear talks would only happen under terms Tehran views as fair and balanced. Following a call with his counterparts from France, Britain, Germany, and the EU's top diplomat, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi pushed back on Western pressure for a deal by the end of August, saying it was the U.S.—not Iran—that walked away from diplomacy. "It was the US that withdrew from a two-year negotiated deal, coordinated by the EU in 2015, not Iran," Araghchi posted on X. I had a joint teleconference with E3 FMs & EU HR last night, in which I made the following points clear: It was the US that withdrew from a two-year negotiated deal -coordinated by EU in 2015- not Iran; and it was US that left the negotiation table in June this year and chose a… — Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) July 18, 2025 What People Are Saying Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell: "The credibility of the Fake News Media is similar to that of the current state of the Iranian nuclear facilities: destroyed, in the dirt, and will take years to recover." IRGC Commander Major General Mohammad Pakpour: "Our forces are fully prepared to resume combat from exactly where it stopped. The aggressors will not be spared." Israel's Military Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir: "The campaign against Iran is not over. We are entering a new phase." Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi: "It was the US that withdrew from a two-year negotiated deal -coordinated by EU in 2015- not Iran; and it was US that left the negotiation table in June this year and chose a military option instead, not Iran." What Happens Next The ceasefire has paused the fighting, but tensions remain high. Iran's commanders say they are ready to resume hostilities if provoked, while Israel says the conflict is unfinished. The U.S. is pushing for renewed nuclear talks but continues to threaten further strikes. Tehran says it will only return to negotiations under fair terms and rejects Western pressure. With diplomacy stalled and both sides digging in, the risk of renewed conflict remains dangerously real.
Vox
18 minutes ago
- Vox
Democrats are right to flirt with Trump-Epstein conspiracies
is a senior correspondent at Vox. He covers a wide range of political and policy issues with a special focus on questions that internally divide the American left and right. Before coming to Vox in 2024, he wrote a column on politics and economics for New York Magazine. A group of young protesters holds pictures of Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump outside federal court in New York City on July 8, 2019. Luiz C. Ribeiro/New York Daily News/Tribune News Service via Getty Images Democrats want you to know that President Donald Trump definitely might be protecting a cabal of child abusers. Or so the party's recent messaging suggests. For years, extremely online conservatives have been agitating for the release of the 'Epstein Files' — a hypothetical trove of confidential documents that reveal the powerful co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein, the financier and accused sex trafficker who died in prison in 2019. When Fox News asked Trump last year whether he would release these files upon winning reelection, the Republican said, 'I guess I would.' Upon taking office, the Trump administration hyped the imminent disclosure of these documents. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested in February that a list of famous people who had abused Epstein's trafficked girls was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' Around the same time, Bondi and Trump's FBI released what it billed as the 'first phase of declassified Epstein files.' But these proved to be binders comprised largely of already public information. Then, earlier this month, the Justice Department declared that Epstein did not actually maintain a 'client list,' that he had died by suicide (contrary to the popular theory that he'd been murdered to prevent the exposure of his clients), and that no further files on his case would be made public. This incensed much of the online right. And Democrats have decided to echo its outrage. This story was first featured in The Rebuild. Sign up here for more stories on the lessons liberals should take away from their election defeat — and a closer look at where they should go next. From senior correspondent Eric Levitz. The party's decision to dedicate so much energy to promoting this controversy might seem dubious. For one thing, Democrats' ostensible outrage over the alleged suppression of the Epstein Files is obviously hypocritical. After all, he died six years ago. A Democratic administration was in power from January 2021 through January 20 of this year. If there are secret federal documents about this case that incriminate public figures, then Joe Biden had them at his disposal. Thus, by affirming the notion that incriminating 'Epstein Files' exist, Democrats risk perpetuating the idea that both parties are toxically corrupt — a form of cynicism that Trump has long exploited to excuse his shameless graft and malfeasance. Separately, Democrats have already spent much of the past decade trying to tar Trump's image by spotlighting his scandals. Yet the minority of Americans who are open to supporting Trump — but not dead set on doing so — haven't evinced much concern for his character. Generally, messaging that emphasizes how Trump's policies would materially hurt ordinary Americans has tested better than attacks on the demagogue's shady dealings or authoritarianism. Whatever one may say about the White House's handling of the Epstein case, it does not seem likely to increase Americans' cost of living. By focusing on Epstein, Democrats are thus arguably defraying attention from Trump's true vulnerabilities — such as the tariffs that are raising prices for consumers or Medicaid cuts that will take health insurance from lower-income people. But these worries are misguided. The Democrats' decision to lean into the Epstein controversy is a political no-brainer for several reasons. Trump's relationship with Epstein – and handling of his case – is genuinely eyebrow raising To a degree, the furor over Epstein is rooted in beliefs that are unproven, if not outright false. For instance, there is no public evidence that he kept a labeled list of fellow sexual abusers, much less that such a document is in the government's possession. But the Trump administration has genuine liabilities on this subject, which Democratic advocacy can direct public attention toward. First, the incontrovertible facts about Trump's relationship with Epstein are unflattering and eyebrow raising, even though they are not incriminating. In the 1990s, Trump and Epstein were repeatedly photographed and video taped beside each other at social events. This by itself isn't especially damning. There's no reason to presume that everyone who ever associated with Epstein participated in his sex crimes. Criminals do not generally socialize exclusively with their co-conspirators. But in 2017, Epstein told the journalist Michael Wolff that he had been Trump's 'closest friend for 10 years.' And in 2002, Trump told New York magazine, 'I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.' What's more, on Thursday night, the Wall Street Journal published the text of a letter that Trump sent to Epstein to celebrate the latter's 50th birthday. In that missive, Trump wrote his signature below the following lines of imaginary dialogue, which were typewritten: 'Voice Over: There must be more to life than having everything,' the note began. Donald: Yes, there is, but I won't tell you what it is. Jeffrey: Nor will I, since I also know what it is. Donald: We have certain things in common, Jeffrey. Jeffrey: Yes, we do, come to think of it. Donald: Enigmas never age, have you noticed that? Jeffrey: As a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you. Trump: A pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be anothedr wonderful secret. It's as though the administration cannot anticipate the most obvious consequences of its own actions, or think a single step ahead. It's possible that Trump did not realize quite how young Epstein's sexual targets were. And it's also conceivable that the playful references to 'age' and a 'secret' in Trump's letter reference something innocuous. But at the very least, these are extraordinarily inconvenient things to have said about — and to — a man who allegedly trafficked 14-year-old girls. To be clear, there is no evidence that Trump participated in Epstein's abuse of children. But his longtime friendship with the rapist, avowed knowledge of Epstein's taste for youth, and own record of alleged sexual misdeeds makes this a politically hazardous subject for Trump. Making matters worse for him, his own claims about the Epstein controversy are wildly contradictory. In recent days, Trump has claimed that the government does possess secret files with explosive claims about Epstein, but that these documents were forged by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, ex-CIA Director John Brennan, and 'the Losers and Criminals of the Biden administration.' He has also insisted that this whole controversy is dull and deserves no public attention, telling reporters, 'I don't understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff. It's sordid, but it's boring.' As The Atlantic's Jonathan Chait notes, these two claims are a bit hard to square. On the one hand, Trump suggests that the FBI, CIA, State Department, and the Obama and Biden administrations all conspired to fabricate defamatory documents about an alleged child sex abuse conspiracy. On the other hand, he says that this is a really boring story that shouldn't interest anybody. But an elaborate conspiracy involving the highest levels of the US government — and seemingly aimed at politically damaging Trump — seems like something that would quite naturally interest Americans in general, and Trump supporters in particular. What's more, even if we put Trump's conspiracizing to one side, his claim that he doesn't understand why the Epstein case interests people still seems disingenuous. After all Trump, accused former President Bill Clinton of visiting 'the famous island with Jeffrey Epstein' in 2015, and spread allegations that Clinton was behind Epstein's death four years later. Trump subsequently demanded 'a full investigation' into Epstein's death and crimes, telling reporters, 'You have to ask: Did Bill Clinton go to the island? That's the question. If you find that out, you're going to know a lot.' It seems clear then that Trump knows perfectly well why the Epstein case interests people. The fact that he now feels compelled to claim otherwise, while begging his supporters to stop talking about the controversy, seems rather odd — and also, like an indication that Democrats would be wise to keep attention focused on this matter. Meanwhile, it is clear that Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel deceived the public about the Epstein case — either when they suggested that the government had been suppressing documents about his co-conspirators, or when they later insisted that such documents did not exist. In 2023, Patel suggested that the Biden administration possessed Epstein's 'black book,' and insinuated that this document was not merely a catalog of the financier's contacts, but rather, a list explicitly identifying various famous people as 'pedophiles.' As noted above, Bondi told Fox News that an Epstein client list was sitting on her desk. Now, Patel and Bondi maintain that no such lists exist. This leaves two possibilities: Either America's two top law enforcement officers misled the public about the Epstein case in the past, or they are doing so today. Put more pointedly, Patel and Bondi either cynically promoted conspiracy theories about a Biden administration coverup, despite knowing they lacked evidence for their smears, or they suddenly decided to perpetrate such a coverup themselves. Neither interpretation recommends them for high office. And both readings of their actions make the Trump White House look grossly incompetent. If the administration knew that it had no compelling information about Epstein to unveil — or else, that it possessed explosive information that it didn't wish to make public — why did Bondi spend months hyping the release of the Epstein documents? It's as though the administration cannot anticipate the most obvious consequences of its own actions, or think a single step ahead (a suspicion also raised by Trump's trade strategy). Cuts to Medicaid provider taxes are never going to get more clicks than conspiracy theories about elite child sex abuse rings If the Democratic Party had the power to dictate which topics would trend on social media, then they would be well-advised to pick Trump's Medicaid cuts or tariffs. But they do not have such power. Every Democratic official in the country could spend all day every day talking about Trump's defunding of rural hospitals — posts and podcasts about Medicaid provider taxes still wouldn't outperform content about whether Epstein was a CIA asset. Millions of Americans may vote once every four years on the basis of mundane economic policy concerns. But they are not typically going to entertain themselves by viewing TikToks about the 'de minimis' exemption on a daily basis. Democrats can and should foreground their party's strongest policy arguments in paid media. With a TV or YouTube ad, you can force the public to think about the subject of your choice. But the range of topics that you can get people to post about for free is much narrower. And of all the stories that could plausibly drive weeks of public conversation, Trump purportedly suppressing information about Epstein — to the chagrin of his own allies — seems like one of the most favorable for Democrats. There's a major difference between this scandal and all Trump's prior ones Generally speaking, when you have an opportunity to increase the salience of an issue that divides your opposition, it's wise to do so. But Trump's base was behind him in all of those instances. Today, by contrast, major right-wing influencers are validating the Democratic Party's narrative that a Republican White House is hiding something. And Trump's attempts to shut down discussion of the Epstein case have gotten him 'ratioed' on his own social media platform. Generally speaking, when you have an opportunity to increase the salience of an issue that divides your opposition, it's wise to do so. This is especially true when that issue also pits your adversary against majority opinion. And in trying to persuade the broad electorate that the Trump administration is mishandling the Epstein case — possibly, for nefarious reasons — Democrats are pushing on an open door. A YouGov/Economist poll released this week found that nearly 80 percent of Americans want the government to 'release all the documents it has about the Jeffrey Epstein case,' while more than two-thirds — including half of Republicans — say that the government is 'covering up evidence it has about Epstein.' Internal Democratic polling tells a similar story. A recent survey from Blue Rose Research found that 70 percent of the public — including 61 percent of Trump voters — believes that law enforcement is 'withholding information about powerful people connected to Epstein.' And a majority of voters agreed with the statement, 'authorities are keeping secret' a list of Epstein's clients to 'protect powerful people like Donald Trump.' There's a broader narrative here about Trump betraying his campaign promises, in service of the powerful Finally, it isn't that hard to weave the Epstein controversy into a broader story that touches on voters' material concerns. And Democrats are already doing this. In the party's telling, Trump's refusal to release documents related to the case reflects a core truth about his presidency: his fundamental commitment is to protecting the powerful, even if doing so requires breaking campaign promises. Hence, Trump's willingness to slash Medicaid — after promising for years that he wouldn't — so as to finance tax cuts for the rich. As Pat Dennis, president of the Democratic super PAC American Bridge, told Politico, the Epstein controversy is 'an interesting foot in the door to the overall case' that Trump 'doesn't have your back on Medicare, on health care, on veterans.' Thus, the Epstein story is a clear boon for Democrats, who've been right to increase its salience. Still, Democrats still have a lot of work to do Even as the party savors Trump's squirming, however, it should not lose sight of its own lackluster political standing. As CNN's Harry Enten noted this week, Democrats' poll numbers are far worse today than at this point in the 2006 and 2018 midterm election cycles — years when the party enjoyed large congressional gains amid a Republican presidency. In the generic congressional ballot, Democrats lead Republicans by just 2 points today, compared to seven points in 2006 and 2018. All else equal, the Epstein scandal is a helpful development for Democrats. But its impact so far is miniscule. The online right's freakout notwithstanding, 90 percent of Republicans still approve of Trump in a recent Quinnipiac poll. By contrast, Democrats disapprove of their own congressional leadership by a 13-point margin. Democrats can and should continue cultivating distrust in Trump. But to increase faith in their own party, they will need to do more than affirm voters' conspiratorial suspicions about a long dead sex offender.
