DOJ Subpoenas WSJ Reporters over Iran Coverage

0:00You've never been one to settle, stand down, or stand still. You're a lifelong learner, energized by excellence. There's a fire inside you you can't ignore. You've got competition to outrun, momentum to build on, and your own high standards to meet. Stop now? Not a chance. At Capella University, we help you catch what you're chasing, because you've always had the drive. Now, go earn the degree. Capella University. What can't you do? Visit capella.edu to learn more. You know, recommendations can be great. Maybe someone recommended this podcast and here you are. But home projects are different. If a podcast isn't your thing, you lose a few minutes.

0:40If you hire your cousin's neighbor to mount your TV, you might end up with a lopsided screen and wall damage. Maybe I know a guy just isn't enough for your home. That's why Thumbtack works. It matches you with top-rated local pros with photos, reviews, and credentials all in one place. For your next home project, try Thumbtack. Hire the right pro today. Welcome to The Beat. I'm Ari Melber. We're following a truly new development in Donald Trump's often flailing but quite serious legal attacks on the press. This one is not about Jimmy Kimmel or jokes or late night comics. This is about the heat on Rupert Murdoch's conservative empire.

1:19DOJ vet Andrew Weissman is standing by and will give us his view and analysis. He will assess a huge shot across the bow tonight. The DOJ now trying to pressure war coverage at Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. That's, of course, Fox News's sister outlet. They're using subpoenas and the government is claiming illegal leaks to, according to many experts, abuse power to shape or stifle critical war coverage. which of course the country is aware of because it is partly the press and information about the war its reality that's made it a very unpopular war plus the economic fallout and i have more on that part of the story later tonight it is a problem for trump and the midterms but this story is one where journalists must actually also kind of weigh how we in this case our colleagues at the Journal, peers, competitors, whatever you call it, but how journalists report on something that Trump has done more than any other administration since Nixon.

2:20How do we report on the government trying to make us, our reporting, or our colleagues and competitors reporting part of the story? Well, the Journal has decided to report on unusual subpoenas that its own journalist reporters received from the Trump DOJ, as you see here. The masthead is the Wall Street Journal. This story is about the Wall Street Journal. This is reporting about how they are reporting and being potentially intimidated or punished through this government that they're reporting on. Now, to be clear, this has been a losing revenge streak in legal moves by Trump. And you probably, if you follow the news, have heard about them.

3:03We've seen these efforts against people. James Comey was a big story. He did an interview on MS Now in the cold just yesterday. We're also seeing it against institutions and journalism itself. That article I just put on the screen notes that the paper received grand jury subpoenas for records covering, records of its reporters covering this war. Now, this is a huge deal. This is about war, which is one of the obviously most important and grave powers a president wields. And remember, this war, which has proven so unpopular, is being waged unilaterally. The president did not work with Congress.

3:42The president did not address the nation up front or leave any time for any kind of meaningful dissent or protest. He launched a proactive attack on Iran. The strait that was once open for our energy needs is now closed. The ceasefire exists. We don't know what comes next. But I mentioned that brief war history to say that with Congress cut out of the loop and the American public cut out of the loop, One of the only other measures left is journalism reporting how the war is going and the facts about the war. And the facts have been, to put it fairly, mixed, negative. Plenty of them look bad for the Donald Trump administration, for the war planning, and obviously for the gas prices and the economy we're all living through.

4:23And against that type of accurate or, shall we say, evidence-based information, this government, your government, is responding by trying to intimidate, legally stifle, and potentially jail the people doing that report. You know, I always try to talk to you. I mean, I'm talking through a camera, right? But I always try to talk to you directly about what we know and don't know and what's happening. This is what's happening. And we know it's a problem. We also know that our Constitution, the 250 years that we're celebrating, argues exactly against any leader, I don't care what party, who would try to rule our government and crush the First Amendment.

5:03It's the first for a reason. And crush this type of free speech. So that's why this matters. Andrew, as I mentioned, joins me shortly. I want to tell you about the methods because it's really something. Trump delivering his message on a sticky note with the word treason in Sharpie placed atop a stack of printed articles that he handed to the acting attorney general. That's how some of this got started, according to a very detailed account from CNN's reporting. Now, that official is, of course, Todd Blanche. And he's under this public pressure by Trump to take measures that, I want to be clear, might ultimately, if he takes them, see Mr.

5:42Blanche investigated. investigated, sanctioned, or disbarred. He knows, with his law degree and his experience, that if he actually is going out and pursuing baseless, false claims against journalists or others that are only designed to intimidate, to do selective prosecution, or to shape war propaganda, yeah, you can lose your law license over that. And if you look at these polls, it's not clear that Trump's friends are going to be in office forever. Trump shared a literal enemies list as well that demands that Blanche indict John Brennan, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. So it's someone else's post, as you see, and it's Donald J.

6:25Trump, the sitting president, who shared it, reposting that. The idea of the Trump DOJ indicting Barack Obama may sound far-fetched, even after everything. but the evidence we have shows that in his demands Trump is serious. It was once far-fetched to think he would abuse legal powers against so many sitting lawmakers, an FBI director, a CIA director, the current Republican leading the Fed. That's already happened. I keep showing you this chart because it's a fact and it is a problem if our country lets this become normal or memory hold like so much other civic amnesia that we have, this is our current situation.

7:08So you can't just look at the new next effort by Trump to turn up the heat on a supplicant like Blanche and say, well, he won't go to Clinton or Obama. They very well may try. Remember, this list of faces were already pursued, most of them, under an attorney general that Donald Trump just canned for not doing enough, in his view. That's why we have Blanche instead of Bondi. Now, the guardrails have still prevented any of these efforts from succeeding. Depending on how you count, he's 0 for 20 or 0 for 25, 0 and 25. But none of these cases have led to any conviction. Many of them, as you saw, have been tossed.

7:48But Trump views Blanche as his enforcer. We have a man who's doing a great job, I'll tell you. I knew it because he kept me out of jail for years. acting attorney general tard blanche i said the other day that some of that stuff should be looked into they said weaponization he's a terrible human being weaponization right cash they blame me for weaponization he is not the communicator he once was indeed donald trump who used to be pretty good at pr knows that you don't just repeat the attacks on yourself they blame me for weaponization he says, reminding everyone that he is weaponizing the government using a term that even the right has said is bad because he is weaponizing the government.

8:37You can call it weaponization. You can call it lawfare. The actual term in the law when you prove that the government has gone after a person for illicit reasons rather than just investigate the facts where they lead, it's called selective prosecution. It gets your case tossed. It can get the prosecutors, of course, sanctioned, as I mentioned, which is something that Mr. Blanche should think about. It's not my job to give him legal advice, but we'll run this clip later if we have to, if Mr. Blanche ultimately not only discredits himself, but loses his law license or worse, because if he goes forward with some of these things, like going after Obama and Clinton because the president asked for it, yeah, that would look like selective prosecution without at least clear evidence to the contrary.

9:20Now, Trump is taking these legal weapons well beyond the Obamas or the Democrats that he's called out, or the critics. He is now, as I mentioned, the lead story that we're going to bring Andrew in on, going after the conservative institution of Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. Now, previously, you may recall, he sued them over their Epstein coverage and lost in the civil courts. And I want to be clear. Anyone in this country can afford themselves the civil courts Including government incumbents So that is something he can do He lost, so he had no case But he can do that But after failing what we're seeing now And why I mention it to bring us up to speed to tonight is Trump's doubling down with this criminal probe Which is much more serious Using a criminal investigation and those kind of subpoenas For journalists Which carry the implied threat of potential jail time If you don't cooperate and using the part of our system that is strong.

10:19When you say to the courts, well, this could be national security or this affects war, there might be illegal government leaks, that can matter. And by the way, the DOJ is allowed, of course, to pursue illegal government leaks. That usually means going after the person in government who broke the law. The journalists didn't if they only reported something that came from the government, but they can do that. The question here is whether this is abusive power leaning on that type of power. to silence and censor the war coverage. Now, Rupert Murdoch is a big figure. He has a complex history with Trump, but he still runs Fox News, which nowadays Trump and MAGA see as a very friendly place.

10:54But just like Putin started with the biggest opposition critics, but moved on to other people that used to be in his inner circle, Trump will go after you even if you own Fox News. Nobody is really safe if you start publishing or airing things he disagrees with. Remember, Rupert Murdoch is such a kind of big political figure. They had that whole show and character based off him in HBO's Succession. Now, this is fiction, echoing perhaps some view of reality, but they cast Murdoch as someone who was tough and willing to fight anyone. Here's the safety briefing. If you move against me, I'll put a hole in the back of your head.

11:37Tough guy. That is a fictional character Based on the real Murdoch But plenty of folks said that That toughness and that style reflects The now aging Patriarch of that Conservative empire What will Murdoch do next? What is the DOJ up to? I want to bring in Andrew Weissman Of course DOJ vet And the author of the upcoming Liar's Kingdom How to Stop Trump's Deceit and Save America That's out this month You can get Liar's Kingdom on pre-order now Wherever books are sold Andrew I mentioned that while any selective prosecution is wrong, Murdoch runs American media properties that are overwhelmingly favorable to Trump in editorial, on air, and yet here they are caught up in these same tactics.

12:23What do you see? So here's the tension. If this was an investigation into the leaking of classified information, if it was the investigation into the leaking of information that although not classified could endanger our soldiers and the ongoing war effort, leave aside that the president says we're not at war. that is something that can be a legitimate investigation the problem here is that the track record of this administration is that they have a war on facts and with todd blanch as they did with pam bondy they they basically have a choke chain on the acting attorney general and you see him doing the president's bidding.

13:19And so the real concern here is that this is, as you said, a way to simply continue the pressure on sort of whitewashing the stories that come out, whether we're talking about suing civilly, as you mentioned, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Kash Patel's lawsuit against The Atlantic, or the attack, as you mentioned, on Jimmy Kimmel or Stephen Colbert or getting the FCC to threaten the media to whitewash the story here, that is a way of silencing the opposition and creating only a rosy picture. And there's nothing more important than having the truth about something as serious as a war that has not been declared by Congress, meaning that this war is not something that is constitutional, which this is something that Congress would have had to declare.

14:21And I'll jump in to say, what do you think about Murdoch here as an adversary who didn't fold in a civil case? And the journal is being clear. I said it's their choice to publish this so people know what the administration is doing, which seems to be an early clue they don't necessarily fold here either. Yeah. So, you know, the Wall Street Journal, whatever you think of its editorial page, it has serious journalists. And this goes to this issue of whether this is a serious news organization that would have published something that they believed was going to threaten or risk the lives of our soldiers.

15:05As you know, reputable news organizations don't do that. They think long and hard, and they usually actually consult with the government before they would run a story where they thought that was an issue. But what the Wall Street Journal, like the New York Times, like our own station, like the Atlantic, will run stories that they believe are truthful, that are sourced. And it is so important. This is getting news to the American public. And it's the last thing that the government should be doing. this is what it means to be in government, to be responsible, is like you may not like being criticized.

15:46If you don't like being criticized, if you don't like people running stories about what you're doing, don't take the job. Yeah, get out of the kitchen. Well, and you and I have discussed now years running how to handle this. What does it tell you that thus far, Murdoch has proven tougher on this issue, whatever the many other concerns with him, than law firm leaders, some of whom claimed they were for facts and civil rights and then weren't, business CEOs who've talked about running media empires and Disney talked about the First Amendment and then responded to a lot of pressure. What does it tell you?

16:24You know, Jack Smith said something when I interviewed him. He said something at the end that he said, you know, at this time, one thing that you learn is you really learn sort of not only who your friends are, but what their metal, like what they're made of. And this is a way of seeing, you can see a Jeff Bezos that, in my view, you know, has all the money in the world and is caving in a way that is just so disheartening in terms of what's happened to The Washington Post, one of the great news organizations of this nation. And whatever you think of the Wall Street Journal politically, whether you agree with them or not, they are standing up for the First Amendment in a very, very important way.

17:15Now, I'm over on time, but I'm going to extend another 40 seconds. Your view on if they fight where this goes, because the courts and you've litigated tough cases, the courts do defer to anything they think is valid national security. And we've seen pressure on reporters. But if this is a trick, a ploy to censor war coverage, then do you think the journal and its reporters have a strong winning argument here? That is a great question. If the government cannot come up with a sort of bonafide reason for a leak of classified information or information that could endanger the war effort. I think that the Wall Street Journal has a very good argument that this is to harass and that there is a Supreme Court case that you cannot do this.

18:11That is the basis that Judge Boesberg used to quash the subpoena of the Federal Reserve with respect to Jerome Powell, that these were grand jury subpoenas to harass. But people should know that is a very hard thing to show. Normally, as you mentioned, there's enormous deference to the government with grand jury subpoenas. And in many ways, this is sort of winning no matter what for the government because the threat is there. What the message is to every news organization is think twice because you can get a grand jury subpoena too. And to me, there's both the Trump story, but there's also the Todd Blanch story that you are seeing such brazen activity.

18:59And it's part of that is not just about him, but it's about this idea that he is the acting attorney general. And so there really is this sense that he's on such a short leash that he's willing to do things that somebody who for years was a career prosecutor and knows very well the difference between sort of selective and vindictive actions and really bonafide good faith actions. Right. And you're referring to that standard I mentioned, the selective prosecution, which even if you're the acting attorney general, if that's what you're proven to have done, there are consequences later. Maybe he's just tried to live in denial of that.

19:36He's watched Pam Bondi, like others, fail to give Trump everything he wants, just like Mike Pence gave him everything except an insurrection and faced, of course, threats of violence. And so we've seen this pattern over and over. Here we have Blanche, as you say, on the audition trying to do this as if as if you don't deliver the next one that he wants, the Clinton and the Obama and all the stuff I documented, that you're going to be Gucci. You're not. Andrew, thanks for joining us. You're welcome. Appreciate it. Here's something I've never said on this program. Thou shall have no idols before me.

20:11Yes. A little biblical reference, which is leading to Trump ridicule. If I may say, it is a full-grown cow. That is a golden cow. And Trump facing an economic gap. I don't think about America's financial situation. I don't think about anybody. Yeah, why think about the people you serve? But we're back with a major development on Epstein in 90 seconds.

20:49you've never been one to settle stand down or stand still you're a lifelong learner energized by excellence there's a fire inside you you can't ignore you've got competition to outrun momentum to build on and your own high standards to meet stop now not a chance at capella university we help you catch what you're chasing because you've always had the drive now go earn the degree. Capella University. What can't you do? Visit capella.edu to learn more. Hi, I'm Angie Hicks, co-founder of Angie. From roof repair to emergency plumbing and more, when you use Angie for your home projects, you know all your jobs will be done well.

21:29Angie, the one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find a pro for your project at Angie.com. Hi, it's Sierra Miller. I can't wait for you to check out my new collection of shoes and accessories at Designer Shoe Warehouse. If you If you love shoes as much as I do, then trust me, I got you. From cute sneak arenas to the perfect flip flops to stunning heels, these shoes are all style, no drama. It's a girls' girls' summer, and DSW has just the shoes. Shop the Sierra Miller Collection right now at your DSW store or dsw.com.

22:08House Democrats are using their powers, and that means Trump has failed to stem this Epstein scandal. Today, the lawmakers actually went to Florida to hold what they call a field hearing and soliciting and basically bearing witness to sometimes emotional testimony from Epstein accusers. He abused so many girls after 2009 at the same exact time that I was asking the government why he got the deal and why they violated my rights. The failures of those sworn to protect us have overwhelmed me. He made it clear that he held the cards. They used my dreams against me. I hope this never happens again to anybody.

22:51Keep it in the history books. Don't stop fighting. Hearing also featuring discussions of following the money. some of these men enabled financial crimes. Follow the money. Financial records are not secondary. They may be the key to exposing the full network. If we're serious about following the money, I believe that these SARS reports must be disclosed by the U.S. Treasury Department now, immediately today. Financial crimes can open the door and lead to real prosecutions. We're joined by Democratic Congressman Raja Krishnamurti, member of that House Oversight Committee, who was at today's hearing.

23:35What was today about? What do you think it accomplished? Well, thank you so much for paying attention to this extremely troubling saga where thousands, literally thousands of girls, now women, survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's heinous child sex trafficking ring have yet to receive a single measure of justice. And so today, for the first time in more of an official setting, they've been able to tell their stories and be asked questions about their particular experiences. And what they said was heartfelt, very moving, and it took a lot of bravery and conviction on their part to come and reveal what they did.

24:23Yeah, you mentioned using the process for that goal. Typically when the system works, it's the DOJ that does all this, that takes witness testimony. You and others have pointed out that that's failed. And so you have a co-equal branch doing that in the breach. I want to play some discussion of the DOJ's failures, negligence that accusers spoke about. Take a look. These files displayed my name, my phone number, my old address, where I worked at the time, where I was studying, and other identifying information. I woke up one day with my name mentioned over 500 times. I can only imagine the long-term impact this mistake will have on my life.

25:18it. How do you contrast something so glaring, obviously hypocritical when Donald Trump and others ran on transparency, then you guys had to pass this unusual law to force him to do what he wouldn't. And then there was great delay and care to protect things regarding political insiders, often men, and Donald Trump, and not these accusers, as the hearing showed today. Well, I think the through line here is that there are corrupt interests that unfortunately are corrupting the administration of justice in this particular case. You're absolutely right. There was a very important document that was displayed at this particular hearing showing that the DOJ itself back in 2019 identified numerous co-conspirators to Jeffrey Epstein.

26:10But that very document came back to us, produced with redactions of at least six individuals, and none of them have been disclosed. They might be among us continuing their predatory practices. And among the others, the only two people who've been prosecuted in any way is Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. And Maxwell now is seeking a pardon. And she might actually get one from Trump, which is completely unacceptable. So you see just a corrupt administration of justice here. Yeah, Congressman, while I have you, the Epstein transparency law also requested information about the circumstances of his death in the custody of the then Trump Justice Department and the Bureau of Prisons.

26:54And we've reported on this. There was a lot of irregularities. The DOJ was not transparent or consistent on that set of history, both under Trump, but then under the inspector general report, which was released during the Biden administration. Now we've got more information, including this purported or possible handwritten note from Epstein's jail cell, believed to be described to be by him as a suicide note. That's new. Took all these years to come out. Do you view that note as likely valid? And do you think it makes it more likely that the government assessment that he took his own life was correct?

27:35um i i read the contents of the note um it doesn't shed a whole lot of light for me on uh the particular situation at hand except it's um you know you know another indication that the government failed the survivors as they pointed out today at the hearing they allowed him there was if you you don't think it was valid or you think there might be foul play what is your what What is your theory of the case? I don't know. I'm still trying to understand the circumstances of his death. Can I just say one other thing, which you pointed out before, but which came out loud and clear at the hearing, which is that there's$1.5 billion worth of wire transactions contained in what are called suspicious activity reports that have not been produced by the Treasury Department and has been specifically blocked by Scott Bessent at Donald Trump's behest.

28:30I feel that that is an obvious and an incredibly important source of information to illuminate the scandal and bringing accountability for what was done. And now I'm out of time, but do you have Republicans who would help subpoena that or they haven't joined that effort? Yes, we're in talks with Republicans as we speak and stay tuned. This is going to be a big topic for my own office and some others to pursue. Interesting. Well, yeah, I know you were, as I mentioned, central in this, especially the hearing today. We wanted to hear from you. So thank you for making the time, Congressman. Let me tell folks who's coming up because there are new numbers on Trump's inflation and they're bad.

29:10And new polling that Republicans blame him for the prices. A warning inside the FCC about the Trump censorship agenda and the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, Marty Barron, on these censorship and free speech issues. He's a rare guess. We sometimes get him. That includes tonight. Coming up.