Massie calls out Trump, demands fuller Epstein disclosure (Full Transcript)

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Republicans have just one vote to spare with their razor thin majority in the House. But one Republican has drawn more ire from President Trump than any other. This was Friday at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington.

[00:00:15] Speaker 2: No matter what we do, this moron, no matter what it is, we'll get 100% vote except for this guy named Thomas Massie. There's something wrong with him.

[00:00:29] Speaker 1: Thomas Massie, a libertarian-minded conservative, has represented Northern Kentucky since 2012, a perennial no vote on spending bills, and now a leader in pushing for the full release of the Epstein files over the President's furious objections. He joins me now live from his farm in Kentucky. Congressman Massie, thank you so much for being here. I do want to ask you about that comment from the President of the United States insulting you like that at the National Prayer Breakfast. What's your response to him?

[00:01:00] Speaker 3: Well, first of all, I'm glad to know I'm in the President's prayers. But second of all, you know, on the Internet, some people have suggested that MIT should take my degree away. And my response is, which one should they take away? I have two degrees from MIT. And I'm sorry you booked a moron today on your show.

[00:01:20] Speaker 1: Fair enough. I do want to talk to you about your fight to release the Epstein files in a minute. But first, I want to get your reaction to the news about how the President posted then deleted this racist video depicting the Obama as apes. He has refused to apologize. Do you think he should apologize to the Obamas?

[00:01:39] Speaker 3: He should absolutely apologize. He's gone too far. I mean, he's attacked my wife recently online. And I do think there are limits. For a while, it's kind of funny. But once you pass certain certain guardrails, like attacking a man's spouse or getting into racist tropes, I think it's somebody at the White House, maybe Susie Wiles needs to go to the president and just ask him for his phone and maybe ask him just to show up the tweet before he sends it out.

[00:02:08] Speaker 1: Yeah, I just I just to follow up on your wife, because it is alarming. He's multiple times he has gone after her on social media posts. I mean, how angry does that make you?

[00:02:19] Speaker 3: It doesn't make me angry, but it's unfair to to my spouse. I mean, look, Donald Trump was giving to Democrats when my wife was working for Right to Work and Campaign for Liberty and ran Paul, in fact, worked and ran Paul's office over a decade ago, back when Donald Trump was still a Democrat. So I think it's wrong. Fortunately, everything he says about her is untrue. But it's beyond the pale. And people recoil when he goes to those racist tropes or when he attacks spouses. It's just uncalled for.

[00:02:53] Speaker 1: OK, so let's talk about the Epstein files. Of course, it was your legislation that requires the Trump administration to have released all the Epstein files by last December. The Justice Department now has released more than three million documents. And it says the Justice Department is saying that they have fully complied with the law. Is the Trump administration complying with the law?

[00:03:15] Speaker 3: No, well, they missed the deadline, but that's not the worst part. The two worst parts are they're releasing victims' information, I mean, just outright lists of victims. It's terrible. And beyond that, they are withholding the perpetrators' names. There's still 302 files. Those are the forms that the FBI fills out after they interview witnesses and victims, and they're still withholding those. And they're over-redacting the documents that have, you know, they relate to some really sketchy emails, but we can't see who the sender was. And so they really need to come off some more information. Monday, Todd Blanch said that members of Congress can come and start viewing those redactions. Ro Khanna and I are very interested in going and reviewing some of those redactions. But there are also files that we need to see. And finally, Pam Bondi will be in front of my committee. I serve on the Judiciary Committee this coming week on Wednesday. And so I'll have some questions for her related to the Epstein files.

[00:04:18] Speaker 1: What are you going to ask her?

[00:04:21] Speaker 3: Well, where are the rest of the documents? Why did they release victims' names? They took extra time, they said, to be safe. And you know, what are these redactions? Now, we may get to see those redactions. Hopefully, we can go to the DOJ before she shows up on Wednesday and see how responsive they are to us in person. But, you know, she's really, she's not, if you notice, they don't put her out in front anymore. They put Todd Blanch out in front, because she's been all over the map. She has no credibility on this. She said, there are a bunch, there's a ton of files, they're on my desk, I'm going to release them. And then she said, there's nothing but, you know, child sexual abuse material, and nobody wants to see that. And then she said, oh, we found a whole bunch more, and there are going to be more investigations. But what are those investigations, for instance? And so there's a whole host of questions for her, but I'm glad that she's coming to judiciary. She hasn't been there since she's been attorney general.

[00:05:20] Speaker 1: How are you going to respond if they don't fully comply with the law? You had told me before that you may go to the floor and actually read the names of people on the alleged Epstein client list. Are you still planning to do that?

[00:05:35] Speaker 3: I'm ready to do that if the victims want me to. They believe that the best way to get justice is to force the DOJ to release these names. I've already read one name in a committee with the FBI director there. That's Jess Staley. And again, he may or may not be guilty, but he's been accused by these victims, the lawyer tells me. And there are other names. I don't have them in my possession. But if the victims want to give them to me, I've expressed that I'm willing to do that. But again, the best way is to force the DOJ to release those names on those 302 forms.

[00:06:10] Speaker 1: Trump's Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said that he and his wife decided around 2005 to cut ties with Jeffrey Epstein. But the latest release shows that there was some correspondence after that, even after Epstein pleaded guilty to sex crimes in 2008. What questions do you have about Lutnick's ties to Epstein? And should he come before Congress and testify?

[00:06:33] Speaker 3: No, he should just resign. I mean, there are three people in Great Britain that have resigned in politics, the ambassador from Great Britain to the United States. The prince lost his title for less than what we've seen Howard Lutnick lie about. Look, Howard Lutnick clearly went to the island, if we believe what's in these files. He was in business with Jeffrey Epstein. And this was many years after Jeffrey Epstein was convicted, you know, lightly sentenced, but was convicted for sexual crimes. So he's got a lot to answer for, but really he should make life easier on the president, frankly, and just resign. If this were Great Britain, he'd already be gone.

[00:07:13] Speaker 1: And just for the record, the Commerce Department says that he had limited interactions with Mr. Epstein in the presence of his wife, has never been accused of wrongdoing. I do want to ask you about Trump because his name has been mentioned more than a thousand times in the Epstein files. Do you think that he should answer questions to Congress to maybe even testify about what he knows?

[00:07:37] Speaker 3: You know, I wouldn't go there yet. I think that most of the men that are implicated in these files, they're billionaires, they're friends of Trump, they're people who were in his social circles. To get justice for the survivors, I want to see those men brought to justice. Ro Khanna and I have tried to keep this from being political. In some respects, we've failed. You know, the Democrats want to make this about Trump, and the Republicans want to make it about the Clintons. I want to make it about the survivors and getting them justice and transparency.

[00:08:11] Speaker 1: Mr. Massey, you are perhaps Trump's biggest target this primary season. He's tried to unite the party behind your opponent, Ed Gowrine, and Congressman Andy Barr, a member of your delegation, has now endorsed your opponent. Trump has knocked off incumbents in the past by endorsing their challengers. How hard is it going to be for you to overcome the president and his MAGA allies in your primary?

[00:08:36] Speaker 3: Well, look, I vote with the president 91 percent of the time. The 9 percent of the time my party has taken up for pedophiles, bankrupting this country or starting another war, I don't vote with them. And they want 100 percent compliance. That's why they're trying to take me out. It's really about keeping my colleagues in line. They're under no illusion that I will snap back into line because they're spending millions of dollars against me. It's going to be tough, but I'm going to win. I did notice that at one of his statements, the president had been saying I was polling at 6 percent. Now he says I'm at 9 percent. So I'm glad to see I've gone up 3 percent in his polling. The thing is, he just pulls those poll numbers out of thin air. And my polling shows that I'm winning in spite of millions of dollars being spent against me by the Epstein class, Miriam Adelson, John Paulson and Paul Singer, who are showing up in these Epstein files. They're three billionaires from New York and West Palm Beach who are trying to fund this effort against me.

[00:09:34] Speaker 1: All right. We'll have to leave it there. Republican Congressman Thomas Massey of Kentucky. Thank you so much for joining me. Really appreciate your time.