A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, July 27, 2025 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JONATHAN KARL, ABC “THIS WEEK” ANCHOR: President Trump wants the Jeffrey Epstein story to go away, but it just forced the speaker of the House to send members of Congress home for the rest of the summer.
THIS WEEK starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Release the damn files.
KARL: Republican frustration on Capitol Hill boils over.
REP. RICK SCOTT (R-FL): I think they should release everything they can. I think -- I think that's what the public wants.
KARL: As the president's deputy attorney general meets with Epstein’s co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell and President Trump refuses to rule out clemency.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about.
KARL: This morning, Aaron Katersky and Rachel Scott with the latest. The legal and political fallout with Chris Christie and Sarah Isgur.
Plus, Congressman Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie on their bipartisan push for the Epstein files.
Building pressure. The president makes an unusual visit to the Federal Reserve and gets a real-time fact check from the Fed chairman.
JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: That's a third building. It’s the (ph) Martin building.
TRUMP: Well, yes, but it’s -- it’s a building that’s being built.
POWELL: No, no, it’s been -- it was built five years ago.
KARL: Our roundtable on the fallout over the Fed and all the week's politics.
Plus, Stephen A. Smith on the state of the Democratic Party.
And humanitarian catastrophe. Israel resumes air drops in Gaza as aid groups warn about mass starvation.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The hunger crisis is being accelerated by the collapse of aid pipelines.
KARL: My conversation with Save the Children's Rachael Cummings on the desperate situation for Gaza's most vulnerable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: From ABC News, it's THIS WEEK. Here now, Jonathan Karl.
KARL: Good morning. Welcome to THIS WEEK.
You may be wondering the same thing we are, Epstein again? President Trump has repeatedly made it clear he wants the story to go away, and he's not alone. The guy was evil. There’s no question about that. But he's been dead for six years. So, why is Jeffrey Epstein once again front-page news?
Well, the answer almost entirely is because of what Donald Trump and his Republican allies did this week. On Capitol Hill, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson was forced to shut down the House of Representatives, sending members of Congress home for the rest of the summer because he couldn't keep Republicans from joining with Democrats to force a series of votes, calling for the release of more Epstein files.
And Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, he's the man responsible for running the day-to-day operations of Trump's Justice Department, chose to spend two days in Florida meeting with Epstein’s former partner and co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell, a woman now serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking.
While President Trump was saying nobody cares about Epstein anymore, we learned new details this week about just how much manpower his administration has devoted to combing through the evidence in the government's files about Epstein. "The New York Times" reporting that, quote, “Justice Department officials diverted hundreds of FBI employees and federal prosecutors from their regular duties to go through the documents at least four times, including once to flag any references to Mr. Trump and other prominent figures.”
In fact, ABC News reported back in March that as many as a thousand FBI personnel, that's 1,000 FBI personnel, many of whom had been working on national security matters, were assigned to review the Epstein files.
So, where does all this go from here? We begin with our chief investigative correspondent Aaron Katersky.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AARON KATERSKY, ABC NEWS' CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice over): This week, the latest stunning development in the ongoing Jeffrey Epstein saga.
DAVID MARKUS, ATTORNEY FOR GHISLAINE MAXWELL: We're hoping for another productive day.
KATERSKY (voice over): A two-day sit-down between Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's former partner and a convicted felon.
KATERSKY: A meeting between a sex trafficker and the number two official at the Department of Justice is almost unheard of. It lasted about nine hours over two days on the fourth floor of this building.
KATERSKY (voice over): Blanche, President Trump's former personal attorney, meeting with Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. Sources tell ABC News, Maxwell was granted limited immunity to freely answer questions without the risk of that information being used against her in the future.
MARKUS: She was asked maybe about 100 different people. She answered questions about everybody. And she didn’t hold anything back.
KATERSKY (voice over): The sit-down between Blanche and Maxwell comes as President Trump tries to move past the political crisis sparked by his administration's handling of the Epstein case. But sources tell ABC News it was Maxwell who initiated the meeting, not the White House, as she appeals her conviction and looks for reprieve from her 20-year prison sentence.
KATERSKY: You haven’t asked for anything?
MARKUS: Of course, everyone knows that Ms. Maxwell would -- would welcome any relief.
KATERSKY (voice over): With Trump claiming a pardon isn't on his radar.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about.
KATERSKY (voice over): One of Epstein's victims, who previously testified against Maxwell, Annie Farmer, called it disappointing Maxwell would be given an audience with the number two official at the Justice Department.
ANNIE FARMER, JEFFREY EPSTEIN ACCUSER: She didn't just procure girls and women for Epstein, but she, herself, participated in their abuse.
KATERSKY (voice over): "The Wall Street Journal" reports Attorney General Pam Bondi told the president his name was in the Epstein files earlier this year, alongside other high-profile people. Appearing in the files is not indicative of wrongdoing. The president denying he received that briefing this week.
REPORTER: Were (ph) you briefed on your name appearing in the Epstein files ever?
TRUMP: No, I was never -- never briefed. No.
KATERSKY (voice over): The president's friendship with Epstein is well documented, but Trump said after Epstein's arrest in 2019, they had had a falling out 15 years prior and hadn't spoken since. In 2020, when Maxwell was arrested, the president offering this.
TRUMP: I haven't really been following it too much. I just wish her well, frankly. I've met her numerous times over the years, especially since I lived in Palm Beach and I guess they lived in Palm Beach. But I wish her well, whatever it is.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KATERSKY (on camera): Trump, later that year, standing by that statement and saying in an interview he wished her well.
Jon.
KARL: All right, Aaron, can I just ask you a really, really basic question? Why -- why did Todd Blanche have these meetings with Maxwell this week? Why did he go to Florida to do this?
KATERSKY: The Justice Department never really said. Sources told us, Jon, that it was Maxwell who asked for the meeting. And Todd Blanche said on social media, he wanted to find out from her whether she had information about other people who may have committed crimes against victims. But he did not say why that job fell to him as the deputy attorney general and not some ordinary line prosecutor who might be building a case. Blanche said he would release information about what he learned from Maxwell at the appropriate time.
Jon.
KARL: All right, Aaron Katersky, thank you very much.
Let's bring in former New Jersey governor, and former federal prosecutor, Chris Christie, and SCOTUSblog editor and former Trump Justice Department spokesperson, Sarah Isgur.
Chris, let me start with you. Do you -- do you buy that? So, he went to get -- the deputy attorney general of the United States went to spend two days in Tallahassee to talk to a woman in prison because he wanted to see if she had more information?
CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) FORMER NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR; Look, I joined the Justice Department 23 years ago, as the U.S. attorney in New Jersey, I’ve worked under -- I worked under four different deputies attorney general, and I've watched a number of others since that time.
KARL: Yes.
CHRISTIE: I have never seen this done, ever. The deputy attorney general runs the Department of Justice. They don't interview witnesses. And so, I -- I wonder -- the first question that popped in my mind, as Sarah and I were talking about this was, you know, whenever you're a line assistant or anyone who’s interviewing a witness, you bring at least one agent with you, if not two, so there are a number of people taking notes and there are witnesses there. We have heard nothing about whether Todd Blanche brought anyone with him to verify whatever he's going to report back as a third independent source. This is highly unusual.
And if they’re building a case, building a case for what and against who? She's in jail for 20 years, and her co-conspirator is dead. So, what exactly are they doing? It makes it look even worse.
I think this is a bad political move for the White House on top of it. It makes it look like one of the people that is being accused of covering up, Todd Blanche, is now in charge of digging out the truth.
KARL: So, I mean, my understanding is there were no career prosecutors that joined him. I guess, Sarah, one of the big questions -- actually two questions -- was this recorded, will there be a transcript of this, and will that be made public?
SARAH ISGUR, EDITOR AT SCOTUSBLOG & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: They'd better hope it was recorded. To not record something like this would be malpractice at this point, on both sides. Maxwell's attorney would also need this recorded.
And then, of course, this is to -- to Chris' point about why this is sort of political malpractice, if not legal malpractice. Well then, of course, there's going to be pressure to release the recording.
You also have someone that they've interviewed who the Department of Justice had previously charged with perjury. So, now they're going to say they do believe what she's offering them or they don't believe. It just puts the Department of Justice in a very difficult and unwinnable situation.
KARL: One of the strange things that we've seen over the last few days, many strange things, is the idea of many in Trump's -- of his supporters suggesting that Maxwell is some kind of a victim.
So, I want to play one of Epstein's accusers, one of his many accusers, one of his many actual victims when asked about that. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARIA FARMER, EPSTEIN ACCUSER: I've never met a more predatory, terrifying human being in my entire life. There's hundreds of us that were preyed upon by Ghislaine Maxwell. She's a very dangerous person.
So, it's completely unacceptable for anyone to call her a victim. The woman is not a victim.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: So that's Maria Farmer, one of -- one of the victims in this case.
Maxwell's attorney is also portraying her as a victim.
Is -- I mean, did she get railroaded in this? I mean, she's appealing to the Supreme Court. Does she have a case?
ISGUR: They have asked the Supreme Court to look at this. They are not claiming that she is innocent in that appeal to the Supreme Court. They have said that the Department of Justice offered a deal to Epstein in Florida that should have included all U.S. attorneys’ offices and all co-conspirators in it.
KARL: A deal that said what?
ISGUR: The deal for Epstein said that the United States would not bring charges against four victims/co-conspirators, including those four. They're claiming that she should have been part of that deal as well. The Department of Justice, this Department of Justice has filed a brief in opposition asking the Supreme Court not to take that. That, in fact, this is very clear, the deal was meant for that U.S. attorney's office and that her prosecution could stand.
But none of this goes to whether she was railroaded, whether she's a victim, whether she's innocent. None of that is mentioned.
KARL: So, Chris, the president has not ruled out a pardon or clemency of some kind for Ghislaine Maxwell. Could that really happen?
CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) FORMER NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Of course, it could.
KARL: Well, and what would it be --
CHRISTIE: Charles Kushner was pardoned and then appointed ambassador to France.
KARL: Yeah.
CHRISTIE: You're acting as if this couldn't happen. If he wants it to happen, it will happen.
KARL: Do you see that -- is a -- do you think he would do that?
CHRISTIE: I don't know, Jon, but I will say this. This is what's going to make it a continuing growing political problem for him because he looks like he's trying to get out of something. He looks like he's trying to cover things up. And sometimes, appearance matters more than reality, as we know in this business, Jon.
And here's his other problem. This is now broken in from shows like this to popular culture. He was on the ESPYs. The ESPYs crushed him.
KARL: Yeah.
ISGUR: Don't forget “South Park”.
CHRISTIE: Well, that's what I was going to go to next, with “South Park”.
KARL: Let me -- let me -- just before we go, I want to play something a little I thought was a little unusual.
Todd Blanche is actually good friends, it appears, with David Markus, Maxwell's attorney, and has appeared a couple of times on a podcast he does. I just want to play a little clip from one of those podcasts. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID MARKUS, GHISLAINE MAXWELL’S ATTORNEY: People will get a lot out of it that you were willing to come on and talk to me for an hour about the case.
TODD BLANCHE, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: I was happy to do it, David. And I mean, in all seriousness to you, I know a lot of people that have worked with you. I know a lot of people who know you very well.
I now consider you a friend and someone who I know pretty well. You are by far the best out there, and I'll always say yes to this podcast.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: Okay. So, by the way, the case they were talking about was Trump's criminal case last year. That was last year.
But look, I know prosecutors and defense attorneys are often friendly, but that seemed very chummy.
ISGUR: Well, if you're looking to have a good defense attorney, you want that defense attorney to know the prosecutor. Nothing unusual about that part.
CHRISTIE: No. And, Jon, all I'd say is that it's interesting, if those two guys were the only two people in the room other than Ghislaine Maxwell, you really going to believe what they say came out of that?
KARL: All right, we'll see. We'll see who was there.
Thank you very much, Sarah, Chris.
For the latest on the White House's response to this, let's turn overseas to ABC's senior political correspondent traveling with the president in Scotland, Rachel Scott.
Rachel, let me ask you, did the president sign off on Todd Blanche's trip to Florida to meet with Maxwell?
RACHEL SCOTT, ABC NEWS SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, I'm told the president was not caught off guard by this. In fact, I'm told the president thought it was appropriate for Todd Blanche, until up until recently was his personal attorney, to go forward and have this meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell.
The president really viewing this through a political apparatus. Although this is an unusual step, the president knows that his supporters are frustrated. He's trying to answer these calls for transparency.
But at the same, Jon, in many ways, this is now backfiring because it's only leading to more headlines and more questions, including about the possibility of a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell which the president has not ruled out, Jon.
KARL: So, does the White House think this is going to go away?
SCOTT: I'm told that behind the scenes this has dominated much of the time, many of the conversations, not only with the president, but among his top advisers as well, including top Republicans over on Capitol Hill. They have been looking and searching for a way to move past this.
The bottom line, this is still a political crisis that the president is now faced with. They are hoping that House Republicans leaving town helps quiet some of the controversy surrounding this. But this drumbeat continues to grow louder and louder. And even as the administration and the president brings up even more things with Ghislaine Maxwell, again, more questions are arising, Jon.
KARL: All right, Rachel, thank you.
And I’m joined now by the bipartisan duo pushing the Trump administration to release the Epstein files, Republican Congressman Tom Massie of Kentucky, and Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California.
Congressman Massie, let me start with you.
You are co-sponsoring this bill to force a release of these files. Why -- what does -- what does your bill do exactly, and why now?
REP. THOMAS MASSIE, (R) KENTUCKY & JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MEMBER: It would force a full release of the files. It has the force of law. It's not a subpoena. It's not a pretty please would you release the files. It's the force of law. And it's got protections to redact victims' names and to prevent, you know, release of child pornography.
Why are we doing it now? Because it wasn't until now that I realized how insincere the people working on this were. I mean, they've told us all along that we were going to get these files, and then only recently did we find out they're not going to release the files.
KARL: So, Congressman Khanna, let me ask you a really basic question on this. Why are Democrats suddenly interested in the Epstein case? I mean, did -- did you or -- I mean,n did you ask the Biden Justice Department to release these files?
REP. RO KHANNA, (D) CALIFORNIA & OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBER: It's not a sudden interest. Actually, the former chair, Elijah Cummings, had an investigation starting in 2019. And I have tweeted out supporting that back in 2019.
We have been pushing for transparency. During the Biden administration, both in 2021 and 2024, the court ordered release of documents. But Donald Trump raised the stakes. And he did it in a way in the campaign that was justified. He said, look, when I get there, I'm going to release the files. Pam Bondi says there's a client list. Then she says, no, it’s just a file. She's going to release them.
I didn't criticize them at all those first few months. But when they refused to release the files, when they said there's nothing more to see, that’s when we said transparency demands the full release of the files.
KARL: Yes, and -- and what is going on in the administration on this, Congressman Massie? I mean, they -- they devoted -- we talked earlier -- about 1,000 FBI, DOJ personnel, DOJ personnel working on this, all this talk of releasing it and then suddenly the president’s out referring to it as a hoax and saying nobody cares.
MASSIE: Well, I don't think it's a hoax at all. It's emblematic of the promise that President Trump brought with him to the White House, how he energized so many people who had checked out of the political system. He was going to be the guy who holds all the rich and powerful and politically connected people accountable, and that's why there's so much disappointment right now.
I don't think the president himself is particularly implicated in these files. You know, there have been some theories that that's the case. But I do think he has friend who may be embarrassed by the release of these files. And the release of these files may not implicate them. It may just be embarrassment. But for some reason, he's decided to do a 180 on this.
KARL: Now, there was this story in "The Wall Street Journal" about a -- a birthday message that -- that "The Journal" reports that Trump wrote to Epstein for his 50th birthday. And it’s part of a book of -- of messages. Obviously, the president denies that he did this. He's suing "The Wall Street Journal" over it. But would you support something that Congressman Khanna has been calling for, which is a -- pressing the estate of Jeffrey Epstein, subpoenaing the estate to turn that book over?
MASSIE: Well, I think we should get a lot more than just the book. Let's get the financial records of the estate. We’re -- follow the money, as they say up here.
KARL: Yes.
MASSIE: We should look at the plea-bargain, open that up, see what was the deal -- what was the deal that was cut. I think there's a lot more than just that letter.
But that letter is also sort of representative of something that's embarrassing, but not illegal. That, you know, another reason why these files may be sealed and -- and stay sealed. But we're going to -- we’re going to force a vote on this when we get back from the August recess. Ro Khanna and I are using a procedure in the House called a discharge petition, whereby if we get 218 votes, and we're well on our way to that, 218 signatures, then we can force the vote.
KARL: Yes. So you’re just going to need a couple more Republicans to sign that if Democrats go along. Are -- you can get that?
MASSIE: If every -- if every Democrat signs this, I've already got 12 Republican co-sponsors, and I only need six to sign it.
KARL: But will they sign? I mean, will they -- because that -- because that’s taking control of the House schedule away from the speaker.
MASSIE: Yes. I think the pressure is going to build over August recess. I don't think it's going to dissipate like the speaker hopes that it will. And if merely just half the people who've co-sponsored this legislation follow through and sign it, then it's going to come to the floor for a vote.
KARL: So, Congressman Khanna, we had this rather extraordinary visit to Florida of Todd Blanche to meet with Ghislaine Maxwell. Do you agree with those who say that she should testify, wanting her to testify before Congress?
KHANNA: I do. I have skepticism given she was indicted of perjury, given she has a motive for getting a pardon. Again, love that Todd Blanche was meeting with her, allegedly, one-on-one. But I'm for all the evidence coming out.
It's important, though, that this is not something that is anti-President Trump. This is for transparency. I'm less concerned about his mentions. I'm much more concerned about the hundreds of people who were powerful and rich, who had impunity, and I'm concerned about restoring justice for the victims.
He promised to expose this. I think the American people don't think he's a perfect person. They thought he was going to expose a system that wasn't working for them, and that's really what this is about.
KARL: What would be the reaction if he actually went through and did some form of clemency, granted some form of clemency to Ghislaine Maxwell, Congressman Khanna?
KHANNA: Well, I think people would say, why is he doing that? And is -- can we really believe Maxwell's testimony? I mean, I don't love the broad pardon power in the first place. I think it has been abused. I think at this point, though, what the American people desperately need is for all of the evidence in the files to come out so they can decide for themselves, so they're not relying on Maxwell, so they're not relying on even congressional committees. Let the American people decide.
KARL: And how would you react to a pardon or a clemency?
MASSIE: I don't think she deserves that or needs that. I mean, she's guilty of crimes. But it's hard to believe that she herself and Epstein did these crimes by themselves, right?
KARL: Yes.
MASSIE: So it's time to find out who else was involved. And I agree with Ro here. The bank records don't lie. The documents don't lie. They don't change. The plea bargains that have been sealed don't lie. Let's release those.
KARL: Before you go, I want -- I want to look at how Speaker Johnson has reacted to what you are doing on this, trying to force a vote to release the records. Here's just some of what Johnson said this week about you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): I say Thomas Massie is the one trying to bite Republicans. OK. I'm not certain what his strategy is. I don't understand Thomas Massie's motivation. I really don't. I don't know how his mind works. I don't know what he's -- what he's thinking.
Thomas Massie could have brought his discharge petition anytime over the last four and a half years, over the last four years of the Biden administration.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: And he also said bless your heart.
MASSIE: Yes.
KARL: So, how do you respond to that? And he's making -- yes, he's asking a variation of the question I asked Congressman Khanna. He's like, you know, why didn't you try to do this four years ago?
MASSIE: Well, like Khanna said, you know, I've got evidence of tweets where I've been asking for these things before. The question is, why isn't Mike Johnson having this vote? Why did he send us home early? And he talks about political pain for Republicans, as if by invoking transparency and inflicting pain, that should be very telling. What is painful about having this vote?
I'll tell you what's politically going to be a liability is if we don't vote on this and we go into the midterms and everybody becomes, you know, they just check out because Republicans didn't keep their promise, and Donald Trump. We'll lose the majority. By the way, they're also running $1.8 million of ads against me, Republicans are.
KARL: Republicans. Yes.
MASSIE: For bringing measures like this to the floor.
KARL: All right. Congressman Massie, Congressman Khanna, bipartisanship here on THIS WEEK. Thank you both very much.
Coming up, why were the president and the chairman of the Federal Reserve wearing hard hats as they made a rare joint visit to the Fed? That story when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are there things -- are there things the chairman can say to you today that would make you back off some of the earlier criticism?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I'd love him to lower interest rates. Other than that -- other than that, what can I tell you?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: That was President Trump during his highly unusual presidential visit to the Federal Reserve headquarters this week, which is undergoing a costly renovation. The Trump White House has called into question Powell's management of that yearslong renovation. The president's focus on the high cost of the project has led to speculation he may be laying the groundwork to fire Powell before his term is up next year.
But when Trump alleged the costs had skyrocketed to more than $3 billion, Powell fact-checked him in real time. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: So, we're taking a look, and it looks like it's about $3.1 billion. It went up a little bit, or a lot, so the 2.7 is now 3.1.
JEROME POWELL, FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: I'm not aware of that, Mr. President.
TRUMP: Yeah, it just came out.
POWELL: I haven't heard that from anybody at the Fed.
TRUMP: It just came out. (INAUDIBLE)
POWELL: This came from us?
Popular Reads
GOP Rep. Massie wants more from Epstein estate than his reported ‘birthday book’
Jul 27, 11:41 PM
Why more drivers are demanding an 'analog experience'
Jul 27, 6:01 PM
Israel announces 'tactical' military pause in 3 Gaza areas, as aid routes set to open
Jul 28, 4:16 AM
TRUMP: Yes. I don't know who does that.
POWELL: Oh, you’re including the Martin renovation. You just added -- you just added in a third building is what that is. That's a third building.
TRUMP: It's a building that's being built.
POWELL: No, it’s been -- it was built five years ago. We finished Martin five years ago.
TRUMP: It's part of the overall work. So --
POWELL: It's not new.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: So, what does it all mean for Powell's future and the Trump economy? And what will Trump do if the Fed doesn't lower interest rates when they meet later this week?
I'll be right back with the roundtable.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KARL: All right. The Roundtable is here. Former DNC Chair Donna Brazile, former RNC Chair Reince Priebus, and Politico Hill Bureau Chief Rachael Bade.
Rachael, I want to get to you on Epstein because you had a very provocative column this week, actually what's provocative on this story, but you write, Democrats are running circles around Republicans on Epstein.
RACHAEL BADE, POLITICO CAPITOL BUREAU CHIEF & SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, I mean, look, smartly, they have totally seized on this issue and it's really been a gift to them. I mean, they have been able to drive a wedge through the Republican Party with a base that typically stands behind Donald Trump, not anymore on this issue. I mean, by bringing this up and forcing votes -- or trying to force votes, they are bringing up an issue that embarrasses Trump, exposes the limits of his power.
They effectively shut the House down. They are distracting, Republicans from talking about their Big, Beautiful Bill and trying to sell it to the public. And not only that, this is an issue that actually unites Democrats in a way we haven't just seen since Donald Trump came back into power. So, I mean, they've been getting grilled by their base across the country with Democrats saying they're not fighting hard enough. Not here.
I mean, in fact, what they're doing in Washington, you're now seeing it happen across the country in different state houses where Democrats are seizing on this playbook that they have started here and bringing up Epstein, forcing Republicans to vote on it over and over again. And one more thing I want to say about this. There's been some discussion about, are Democrats choosing the wrong issue here? Is this going to really matter with voters when it comes to the midterms?
But I would argue that it would be political malpractice for them to turn the page right now and try to talk about anything else, because why not just let see -- the country see the Republican Party sort of melting down on this issue?
KARL: Well, Donna, how about that question? I mean, do voters actually care about this issue?
DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER DNC CHAIR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: This is not about fighting for Medicaid recipients, fighting for veterans, fighting for education. This is not about the, what I call, the day-to-day hustle in terms of issues. This is about a larger question. Jeffrey Epstein is a sexual predator; Ghislaine Maxwell, sexual predator. Republicans promised to bring all of this information to light, to stop protecting the well off, the powerful, and the connected.
And all of a sudden they're hiding. Mike Johnson, the Speaker, would much rather have Republicans go home and sit than address this issue. So, Democrats did the right thing in pressing the Rules Committee, pressing the Judiciary, pressing the House Oversight Committee because voters want to see Democrats fight, not just on Medicaid and healthcare, Social Security, but they want to see Democrats fight and they're showing that they're willing to take this battle to Republicans.
KARL: But, but -- but Reince, this wouldn't be effective unless Republicans were going along with it. And you have Republicans joining Democrats and (ph) fighting on this.
REINCE PRIEBUS, FORMER RNC CHAIR, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF & ABC NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Some are -- some are, I mean, two things can be true at the same time. First of all, Donna, the Democrats are absolutely hypocritical here. I mean, the fact of the matter is, where were the Democrats in 2001, 2002, 2000 -- excuse me, 2021, 2022, 2023. They had Biden, they had the White House, they had the House. They had the Senate. Where were the resolutions from Democrats to release the document?
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: (Inaudible) Ghislaine Maxwell?
PRIEBUS: Where was Ro Khanna?
BRAZILE: Who prosecuted?
PRIEBUS: Where were these Democrats? Look --
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: Who prosecuted Ghislaine Maxwell?
PRIEBUS: The fact that -- I said two things could be true.
BRAZILE: Joe Biden Justice Department.
PRIEBUS: One thing could be true. I'm going to give you your -- a little bit of what you want. Number one, the Democrats are hypocrites. Number two, the DOJ -- the DOJ needs to get their arms around this. They need to come to the public and say, we had two meetings with -- with -- with Maxwell. Here's where we're going to go with it. Here -- here's what we're going to try to do with the new information we have, and here's how we're going to actually bring people to justice that need to be brought to justice.
I don't know why the DOJ can't release documents. One reason could be they're under seal. Another is witnesses have immunity. Another is, there was a 2008 settlement that sealed a lot of these documents. But that all being said, I would suggest releasing what you can and showing a pathway to the public.
BRAZILE: But Mr. Chairman, you forget. You forget.
PRIEBUS: Even though Democrats are hypocrites.
BRAZILE: No, no, no. Not hypocrites, the hypocrites are the people who promised to their base with these conspiracy theories that we got some -- there's some data there. And as soon as you let us back in the office --
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: We are going to open them to all (ph).
(CROSSTALK)
PRIEBUS: That's the reason Democrats (inaudible).
BRAZILE: No, that’s the reason why Pam Bondi said in February, this is on my desk.
PRIEBUS: Oh. Right.
BRAZILE: That’s why we are learning now that there was a birthday book, and there was files, and there was all this other stuff. It’s drip, drip.
PRIEBUS: Should people over promise another -- another episode of two things being true.
BRAZILE: It’s -- Republicans (INAUDIBLE). But the hypocrites are the people who went out and make this this -- this conspiracy theory.
PRIEBUS: OK.
BRAZILE: It’s bigger than life. So, you’re in a pickle. You’re marinade --
PRIEBUS: Another -- two things being true.
BADE: It’s also -- it’s also --
KARL: Rachael. Rachel.
BRAZILE: You’re marinading (INAUDIBLE).
KARL: Rachel.
BADE: It’s also -- I mean, if -- if you’re explaining, you’re losing at this point.
PRIEBUS: That’s true (ph).
BADE: I mean -- I mean Scalise, the (INAUDIBLE), they've been making this point about Democrats.
PRIEBUS: Maybe. Maybe.
BADE: Where were they, you know, four years ago?
PRIEBUS: Yes.
BADE: I mean, the reality is, it's getting totally -- totally drowned out at this point.
PRIEBUS: Right. But the idea --
BADE: But I want to bring it -- I want to bring it -- I want to make a point, though, about, you asked about Republicans.
KARL: Yes.
BADE: They're the ones who are helping fuel this fire.
BRAZILE: Right.
BADE: And I -- I want to say, you know, at some point for Republicans on The Hill, this becomes about political survival. I've talked to a lot of these guys. They have never seen the MAGA base come after them like they are right now. They have never been accused of covering up --
KARL: So, it really is something that actual voters are talking about?
BADE: Yes. Very much. Absolutely. Their voters. They have never been accused of covering up for pedophiles. That's what they're hearing right now. From -- from people back home, that’s what they're, you know, dealing with in terms of attacks from Democrats and independents. And so, at some point for them, it's not about Trump anymore. They want to win their next election, right?
PRIEBUS: I agree with you, but --
KARL: So -- so -- so -- but -- but -- but let me -- let me -- let me get to another point here, which is the larger context with the Democrats.
Take a look at this poll from "The Wall Street Journal" showing that voters nationally, Democrats have their lowest approval rating in the 35-year history of that "Wall Street Journal" poll.
BRAZILE: Yes.
KARL: Donna, what's going on?
BRAZILE: Democrats are out of power. But you know what, voters are still willing to give Democrats -- it's only three percentage points, not eight -- saying that if the election was held tomorrow, they would support a Democrat.
Look, the Democrats are going to have to learn how to play the -- the long game. And the long game is, they have to be better connected. They need to persuade voters. They need to go back to their districts and talk, not just about Epstein, but talk about the real issues that impact the American people, lowering costs, the tariff that's a tax on everybody's money.
KARL: Let me --
BRAZILE: But, yes, we're in a -- we're also -- we’re not just in the wilderness. We need a vision and we need leaders to take us out of that wilderness.
KARL: Take a look at something else from this poll, which is a whole series of issues where Republicans have -- are underwater, where Trump is underwater and still Democrats actually have a lower approval rating than Republicans.
BADE: Yes.
PRIEBUS: Well, you don't always have to outrun the bear. You just have to outrun the guy next to you. So, that's pretty clear in politics. And it's true.
So, now the Democrats have this Epstein issue, and the Republicans need to make it less easy on them. The idea that Democrats are interested in Epstein because of MAGA podcasters, I think, is a little ridiculous.
KARL: So, we -- we -- we saw the stuff at the Fed. First of all, what -- what -- what a visit the president and the Fed chairman.
Reince, let me just ask you, what is Trump going to do -- the Fed meets Tuesday and Wednesday -- if they don't lower interest rates?
PRIEBUS: It's going to be -- this is going to ratchet up. And what he's trying to do is something called a constructive dismissal, you could say. And that means he makes life --
KARL: Constructive dismissal.
BRAZILE: Never heard of that.
KARL: Constructive to who?
BADE: Write that down.
PRIEBUS: You make life so uncomfortable, and then you offer an alternative, and you say, look, do you really want to be here for eight more months? We’ve got Kevin Warsh and Kevin Hassett here who are people that you can live with.
KARL: So, you don’t think -- so, he's not going to fire him?
PRIEBUS: I think Jerome Powell's life would be a lot easier to cut a deal and say, put Warsh or Hassett here. I'll move on.
KARL: Yes.
PRIEBUS: He'll make a ton of money. As opposed to going through a nine-month fight with Donald Trump.
BRAZILE: The independence of the Fed is so important to our economy --
PRIEBUS: I agree, it’s important.
BRAZILE: To the bond market, to the dollar. And to destabilize the -- the Fed at this time is, I think, would be a huge mistake.
KARL: All right, we’ve got to take a quick break.
Up next, ESPN's Stephen A. Smith on whether the Epstein saga has staying power, and his grades for Democrats. You won't want to miss it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KARL: I'm joined now by the host of ESPN's “First Take”, Stephen A. Smith, who has two new shows coming to Sirius XM in September, a sports show and a politics show. And there is no shortage of material on the political front.
So, Stephen A., thank you for joining us. Great to have you back on “This Week”.
STEPHEN A. SMITH, HOST OF “THE STEPHEN A. SMITH SHOW”: My pleasure.
KARL: So let -- let's start with the -- what we saw in the White House this week. Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, coming out making some extraordinary claims about Barack Obama. The president of the United States accusing Obama of treason. Again, no evidence whatsoever for any of this stuff.
But what did you think as you were watching that?
SMITH: I thought it was -- I thought it was a lot of hyperbole to be quite honest with you. You know, we can talk about the veracity of the things that she was saying and challenge that to some degree, and I'm quite sure people on the left will do so.
But at the end of the day, courtesy of Donald Trump, what are you going to do about it in the end other than smear the former president of the United States, Barack Obama, and sully his name? What else is going to happen to him?
He's not in danger of any lawlessness. He's not going to jail or anything like that. You know, based on the Supreme Court's decision from last, you know, from a few months ago, essentially, if you're the president of the United States, due to Trump and what he was pushing, you essentially get to operate with relative impunity as long as you're making decisions, you know, from a government perspective as the commander-in-chief.
So, Barack Obama doesn't really have much to worry about. Once again, I think this is Trump throwing food to his base because, obviously, if you rile up MAGA to some degree by highlighting the things that have transpired in years past that basically buffer your points that you were making, you look good with them.
And those kind of things that have been -- being discussed has me looking at the president with a raised eyebrow because I'm saying to myself since the bill was the Big, Beautiful Bill and there's so much good that emanates from the bill, you literally are distracting our attention away from that for issues like this?
I find it hard to believe that this is going to amount to anything to be quite honest with you. There's -- obviously, you look at, you know, the CIA, the FBI, look at their involvement and look at weaponizing the intelligence agencies, I'm certainly not trying to dismiss that as a concern because it is a concern. It is something we should all pay attention to.
But to call Barack Obama out by name with no evidence that you've put forth, I mean, I would need to see more. But if you're going to incriminate a former president of the United States like that with such, you know, hyperbolic words like treason and what have you --
(CROSSTALK)
KARL: Treason. Treason, he said.
SMITH: -- more information before you do that. That's what he said. That's what she said.
(CROSSTALK)
KARL: And --
SMITH: That's what he said.
KARL: And to be clear, I mean, I went through all that Tulsi Gabbard did. It was -- there was no evidence whatsoever to the allegations they were making.
And then, you know, to -- maybe, it's because of your point about the immunity decision, but Trump actually suggested last night that that Kamala Harris should be prosecuted for allegedly buying the votes, endorsements of celebrities like Beyonce. Again, no evidence to this stuff.
But I mean, what --
SMITH: Well --
KARL: -- this is back-to-back, almost in the sports, a couple days that the president of the United States calling for prosecuting the former president and the former vice president.
SMITH: Well, listen, the -- at some point in time, somebody needs to challenge the president on what he's doing now because if what you're doing is so great, why would you want to distract our attention?
Wait, that's not the Donald Trump we know. The Donald Trump that we know lives in the moment of things that he deems to be doing successfully in his eyes. If the Big, Beautiful Bill, you know, preserves the 2017 tax cuts and does so much to the economy and does so much for small businesses and what have you, like he has proclaimed, why would you want to distract our attention with all of this stuff? Maybe you're evading the issue of the Epstein files because your Administration overpromised and underproduced.
We all know what you were telling MAGA, right, that there was a whole bunch of stuff to be released, and certainly it was forthcoming and certainly it did not happen. And so, when you look at it from that standpoint, you find yourself saying, excuse me, the former president, treason, former vice president and Democratic nominee for the presidency of the United States, you know, you want her prosecuted.
It just seems to be, I wouldn't say much ado about nothing because I'm not trying to absolve anything from anyone in terms of any kind of actions that they may have engaged in that, dare I say, are illegal. We don't know that. We haven't seen any proof of that. But for Trump to be focused on, on this, this is where the big problem comes in.
KARL: OK.
SMITH: You are looking backwards when America needs to look forward, and that's the problem right Now. Let's look -- let's move forward.
KARL: OK. So let me move forward on the Democrats. We were just talking on the Roundtable --
SMITH: Yeah.
KARL: -- about this new Wall Street Journal poll that shows even on issues where the public does not approve of the president or of Republicans, they actually have a lower approval rating of the Democrats.
SMITH: Yeah. Well, that's easy to understand. One party has a lead in Donald Trump. You can refute. Yeah. Nobody can refute that. He is the leader of the GOP and the Republican Party. Make no mistake about it. The Democrats don't have a leader. We -- I see -- who -- who's your leader? Who is it? Is it AOC? Is it Bernie Sanders? Is it Jasmine Crockett? Who is it? We respect so many people on Capitol Hill.
I'm certainly not here to cast dispersions upon individuals, but as a body, the Democratic Party just looks very, very bad right now because they look leaderless. They don't have a definitive voice that anybody can depend on. When we look towards 2028, for example, we see a guy like Governor Wes Moore, who I like a lot, and I think is very capable, a Josh Shapiro, the Governor of Pennsylvania, who I like and I think is very, very capable.
But when you talk about a national voice for the Democratic Party, it is literally non-existent. You have no one right now. I'm in New York City. You've got these guys around Mamdani that won the Democratic nominee over former government -- over former governor, Andrew Cuomo. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Eric Adams are going against one another as an independent, and there's fear about them canceling one another out, and set and paving the way for Mamdani, who's a renowned socialist, that's not what America really, really is about.
Nevertheless, he could end up being the mayor of New York City. Why?
KARL: Yes.
SMITH: Because when you don't have any kind of leader whatsoever, you are going to look to grab one any way --
KARL: All right.
SMITH: -- you can, any chance you get. That's what the situation is with the Democratic Party. They do not have a leader.
KARL: All right. Stephen A. Smith, thank you for joining us. We'll have you back. Appreciate your time.
All right. Up next, our report on the dire hunger crisis in Gaza. I'll speak with Save the Children's Humanitarian Director on the ground in the Gaza Strip. We'll be back in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KARL: As global outrage grows over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, this weekend Israel restarted air drops of food to the Gaza Strip, and it has implemented a partial military pause to allow the float of aid convoys in to feed the desperate population.
ABC's chief foreign correspondent Ian Pannell has the latest.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
IAN PANNELL, ABC NEWS CHIEF FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The starvation of Gaza, a real-time manmade humanitarian crisis plumbing new depths.
Under massive international pressure to alleviate the suffering and allow more aid in, Israel pausing its relentless bombardment for the first time since March. Overnight the IDF also restarting aid drops. Over 100 world leading aid groups warning of mass starvation in Gaza.
TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION DIRECTOR-GENERAL: We're now witnessing a deadly surge in malnutrition-related deaths.
PANNELL: The World Health Organization says nearly 30,000 children under five are now malnourished.
The haunted faces of a pediatric hospital captured by our team on the ground. With hollow eyes and emaciated bodies, the hungry cry out, desperate for the world to heed their call.
But there's little salvation here. At least 133 people have died of starvation including 87 children, according to the Hamas-run health ministry. An American doctor in Gaza describing the horrors he's witnessed at Nasser Hospital.
DR. TRAVIS MELIN, NASSER HOSPITAL ANESTHESIOLOGIST: You can see in the desperation, you know, it's palpable that people need food.
PANNELL: Israel accusing Hamas of stealing food aid.
DAVID MENCER, ISRAELI GOVERNMENT SPOKESPERSON: In Gaza today, there is no famine caused by Israel. But there is a manmade shortage which has been engineered by Hamas.
PANNELL: But an internal U.S. government review says it hasn't found any evidence that Hamas has engaged in widespread diversion of assistance. The IDF contesting the report's findings in a statement to ABC News, saying, "It ignores clear and explicit evidence that Hamas exploits humanitarian aid to sustain its fighting capabilities," while claiming the IDF aid groups are, "aimed at safeguarding both the aid and the humanitarian actors."
But for 11 weeks, from March to May, Israel imposed a total embargo on food, medicine and fuel into Gaza. And its new aid system has been ineffective and deadly.
The U.N. saying more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed trying to get food under this system. Dozens of countries condemning the killing of civilians including children seeking aid. Germany, the U.K. and France calling for an immediate ceasefire. But the U.S. and Israel pulling out of ceasefire and hostage release talks.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Hamas didn't really want to make a deal. I think they want to die, and it's very, very bad.
PANNELL: For THIS WEEK, Ian Pannell, ABC News, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KARL: Our thanks to Ian.
I'm joined now by Rachael Cummings, the Gaza humanitarian director for Save the Children, who is right now coming to us on the ground in Gaza.
So thank you, Rachael. Thank you for the work you are doing. Thank you for taking time to speak with us. Just give me a sense, how is it looking right now on the ground?
RACHAEL CUMMINGS, SAVE THE CHILDREN GAZA HUMANITARIAN DIRECTOR: The situation in Gaza is catastrophic for children and increasingly now for adults. There is no food available in the market. Children are literally starving, and we run health connects in Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis through a nutrition center in Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis, and we are seeing an exponential lines in the number of children attending our clinic.
In the first two weeks of July, we've seen exactly the same number of children we saw in the whole of June, and we're expecting that trajectory, sadly, to increase. The number of children who are malnourished, very concerningly, pregnant women, women who are breastfeeding are also malnourished. But this morning, I went to our clinic in Deir Al-Balah, about 10 minutes from where I am right now.
And it was absolutely packed, and it was a scene I had never witnessed before. And I've been working in this sector for over 20 years in the whole (ph) of Africa, in various places around the world. And every child in the health center today was malnourished, but also every adult was extremely thin, gaunt-looking, exhausted. The situation is absolutely terrible here.
KARL: And you've been there since early last year, so you've seen a desperate situation getting exponentially more desperate.
CUMMINGS: Yeah. And for months, I've said, how can it get worse for children? It cannot get any worse for children, but apparently, yes, it can get worse for children. And now, we are seeing all of the coping mechanisms that families have deployed within -- with mothers eating less than three meals a day to two meals a day, to one meal a day. Now, they're not having a meal a day. And this is very, very concerning. And this is at scale.
KARL: So overnight, we saw the Israelis do these humanitarian air aid drops. I know that you and other aid workers say this is not the effective way to get support in. But you also have this pause in the military operations. Is it -- are you seeing any signs that this is going to make a difference?
CUMMINGS: We welcome the humanitarian supplies entering Garza, of course. And we need to do that in a controlled manner. Airdrops are not in a controlled manner and one airdrop is equal to around one truck. So we need to bring in humanitarian supplies, supplies over land through the recognized routes. We need the U.N. system be enabled to manage the distributions.
We know as Save the Children, as humanitarian agencies, how to do safe and dignified distributions. So yes, we welcome the fact that now the U.N. is allowed to bring in humanitarian supplies, including food, including medicines, including nutrition commodities, and including hygiene supplies.
KARL: All right. Rachael Cummings with Save the Children, again, thank you for the work you're doing. I can hear your commitment. I can hear the emotion in your voice. Thank you for sharing your observations with us, and we hope this situation turns around and turns around soon. Thank you very much.
CUMMINGS: Thank you.
KARL: We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KARL: That's all for today. Thank you for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Have a great day.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)