Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Caught Up in Epstein Scandal; U.S. Aircraft Carrier Strike Group Arrives in Caribbean; Trump Flip- Flops on Epstein Files Release?. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired November 17, 2025 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:00:00]

DANA BASH, CNN HOST: The Eisenhower Building was built in 1888 and now houses most of the White House staff. The lawsuit claims painting the granite exterior could irreversibly damage the building and the proposal must go through the proper preservation review required by federal law.

Thank you so much for joining INSIDE POLITICS today.

"CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starts right now.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: A Trump turnaround, a stark reversal from the president, now encouraging House Republicans to support the full release of files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. We're going to take a closer look at the president's U-turn.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Plus: pressure campaign. The U.S. says its largest aircraft carrier strike group is joining other U.S. warships in the Caribbean as tensions with Venezuela intensify. But is there an off-ramp to diplomacy? The president is now floating that possibility.

And an Army major serving as an OB-GYN at Fort Hood in Texas facing a lawsuit accusing him of sexual misconduct against patients and secretly recording women during medical examinations for years. We will speak to an attorney representing many of the victims in this case.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: So, 16 hours have now passed since President Trump's major reversal on the Epstein files and one lingering question remains: Why? Why, after weeks of urging Republicans to not support an effort for their full release, has the president now flipped, urging this?

His words -- quote -- "House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files because we have nothing to hide and it's time to move on."

Just hours before the shift, Republican Congressman Thomas Massie, who split with the president months ago over this issue and faced threats of a primary because of it, warned that a bigger strategy may already be in the works.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can't be released. So this might be a big smokescreen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them as a last-ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Kristen Holmes is live for us at the White House.

Kristen, the congressman there talking about Attorney General Pam Bondi's vow to investigate high-profile individuals that are mentioned among these files. What are you hearing at the White House?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, he's actually not the only one who has floated this theory.

Republicans are trying to figure out, particularly House Republicans, how they want to approach this vote this week. Many of them telling me privately that they do plan on voting for the release of the Epstein files, but how big do they want to go, other than a vote? How much do they want to speak out about it?

They're all trying to gauge if this is part of a larger strategy, as you heard Massie there talking about, with the Department of Justice wouldn't be able to or would say that they wouldn't be able to release any of these documents because it's now an open investigation again.

Now, we have heard some pushback from the Department of Justice from sources inside of the White House who say, well, we're allowed to reopen this investigation because there's new information now. When this investigation was originally closed, these e-mails didn't exist in the sense that the Justice Department didn't have access to these e-mails.

So that gave them the cause, that's what the sources are telling me, to reopen this investigation. Of course, I would beg the question of why is this investigation only into President Trump's political foes, but that is the separate question here.

Now, when it comes to President Trump and why he made this decision, I had been told on Friday that he saw the writing on the wall, that not only had Speaker Johnson communicated to him that this was likely to pass in the House, that these Epstein files being released was likely to pass in the House, but that his own advisers had told him that, and that President Trump himself seemed somewhat resigned to the fact that this was going to happen.

Now, it wasn't stopping him from going on social media and saying that anyone who voted for this, any Republican, was soft or weak. But then, of course, you saw this full 180. Now a couple of questions. One, are they going to try to use this new Department of Justice investigation to stop the release of these files? And what are they going to do in the Senate? Because it wasn't clear at the end of the week last week what they were going to do, if they were going to try to whip votes, if they were going to try to get senators to not vote to pass this through.

Just a reminder, it would go through the House, then to the Republican-led Senate, and then end up on President Trump's desk. Now, Friday, they still weren't sure, but that, of course, was again before President Trump put out this complete reversal, saying: "I don't care, get the information out there."

And I will note, this is not the first time we have seen this kind of up and down in the last week on how to respond to the Epstein files. First, we had President Trump saying it's all a hoax. Then we had him calling for an investigation into Democrats. Then we had him saying that he didn't think the file should be released.

[13:05:09]

Then we had him saying that they should release the files and they should vote for it. So it certainly seems as though he is all over the map. Where this ends, that's what we're trying to get to the bottom of today.

SANCHEZ: All over the map indeed.

Kristen Holmes of the White House, thank you so much -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Republican Congressman Thomas Massie, who is spearheading this effort in the House, is predicting a possible veto-proof majority.

And, today, some of Epstein's survivors issued their own plea to lawmakers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was 14 years old.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was 16 years old.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was 16.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Seventeen.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Fourteen years old.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is me.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This was me.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is me.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When I met Jeffrey Epstein.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is me when I met Jeffrey Epstein. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's time to bring the secrets out of the

shadows. It's time to shine a light into the darkness.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: CNN's Annie Grayer is live for us on Capitol Hill.

Annie, what are you hearing from lawmakers leading up to this vote tomorrow?

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, House Republicans are increasingly confident that this vote will pass in the House by flying colors. It's a rare moment for rank and file Republicans to really be driving this.

That's something that then this leadership and then even the president is responding to, because if you think back to a week ago, there were only four Republicans who were on that petition to force this floor vote and there was a pressure campaign from the White House, from Trump allies to try and get maybe even one of those Republicans to pull off of it.

But once those 218 signatures were needed, they were clinched to lead to this floor vote, there was no turning back. And that is why the speaker decided to schedule this vote quickly, because he knew that there was an overwhelming majority of Republicans who wanted to vote for it. That's why we saw the reversal from the president over the weekend.

But passing it out of the House is just the first step. It's then going to have to pass the Republican-controlled Senate. And Leader John Thune has not said one way or another definitively if he's going to put this on the floor.

Now, with the president coming out and calling for the release of the files late last night, does that lead to some cover for Republican senators to also sign on? That's a question. But Republicans in the House are hoping that so many Republicans vote for this, that there is a veto-proof majority, and that President Trump has no choice but to sign into law if it were to come to his desk.

KEILAR: All right, Annie Grayer live for us from Capitol Hill.

And still to come: After weeks of deadly boat strikes, is President Trump preparing to strike inside of Venezuela? We will tell you what the White House now says about the possibility as the largest aircraft carrier in the world arrives in the Caribbean.

Plus: An OB-GYN at Fort Hood is accused of sexual misconduct against patients at the Army base. Dozens of women have now come forward, but advocates believe the total number of victims could be in the hundreds.

And then later: patient zero. Health officials in Washington state say they have detected a strain of bird flu never before seen in humans. What you need to know. We have that and much more coming up on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:12:26]

KEILAR: As the Pentagon ramps up its military firepower off the coast of Venezuela, U.S. officials tell CNN President Trump has not yet made a decision on whether to strike Venezuela on land.

America's biggest and most lethal aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, has now officially arrived in the Caribbean Sea, joining other U.S. warships in what the Pentagon is calling Operation Southern Spear. This brings the total number of American military personnel in the region to around 15,000.

Despite the enormous buildup, President Trump says he's open to negotiations with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We may be having some discussions with Maduro and we will see how that turns out. They would like to talk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: We're joined now by Kevin Carroll. He's a former Homeland Security official and a former CIA case officer. He also served in the Army in Iraq and also in Afghanistan.

Kevin, we're seeing this military buildup. Officials say Trump hasn't made a decision on whether to attack Venezuela by land. He brings up diplomacy last night. And CNN is reporting that Trump's hoping the pressure is enough to force Maduro to step down without there being military intervention. How do you see this policy right now? How do you see this going?

KEVIN CARROLL, FORMER SENIOR DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY OFFICIAL: Well, I hope the diplomats are successful in negotiating a good end here, so that young American men and women don't have to go into harm's way.

Perhaps just the presence of the carrier strike group will be enough to motivate Maduro to leave the country or whatever the endgame is here that the Trump administration is looking at, because I think, while the U.S. military is certainly superior to the Venezuelan military, military action here is not without risks.

They have sophisticated Russian and Chinese anti-aircraft and anti- ship missiles. And we could easily have a situation involving downed pilots who have to be exfiltrated or rescued or even the loss of the U.S. ship to an anti-ship missile.

KEILAR: When we're talking about the possibility of regime change here, what do, what should the conversations inside the administration look like?

CARROLL: The very first thing the administration should do is be quiet in public. They have been discussing covert action. It's more like overt action at this point, that there's a presidential finding authorizing the CIA to depose Maduro.

So I think they shouldn't undermine whoever comes next there by making them look like an American puppet by so publicly discussing the CIA's involvement in trying to do regime change. They need a single spokesman on the issue. It should be the secretary of state. And let's wish him best success in resolving this peacefully.

[13:15:08]

KEILAR: What do you think the reverberations in the region could be of regime change? And do you think Americans have the appetite for that?

CARROLL: Well, one of the things that worries me is, the U.S. has demonstrated repeatedly that we're capable of forcing regime change from the air, as in Libya in 2011, or in Afghanistan in 2001 with airpower and just some special operations forces, but that doesn't mean that you can control what happens next.

We obviously weren't able to get a government to our liking in power in Tripoli. And we took a massive investment of U.S. forces to try, ultimately unsuccessfully, to keep a government that we favored in power in Kabul.

So I think the reverberations could be really poor. I mean, you could have some sort of civil war situation develop with competing factions within Venezuela. Another thing is that, for historical reasons, Latin Americans are sensitive about gunboat diplomacy and so forth by the United States.

And so going down there and so obviously forcing regime change is going to raise the hackles of nationalists throughout Latin America.

KEILAR: Trump administration officials told lawmakers earlier this month the U.S. doesn't have legal justification to support those attacks -- or support these attacks against land targets right now.

But according to U.S. official, the Trump administration is seeking a separate legal opinion from DOJ that would provide a justification for launching strikes against land targets without needing to ask Congress to authorize military force. What do you think about that?

CARROLL: Well, I hope whatever legal authorization they're able to get from the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice is better than the apparently tissue-thin rationale that's been offered by OLC for justifying these strikes on boats.

They're saying that because the boats carry drugs and money from drugs is used to buy arms, it's therefore acceptable to sink the vessels and leave the crew to be devoured by sharks. I don't think that it's a serious legal opinion. And what they really should do, if they're going to embark upon a

nonemergency use of force in Venezuela, a strike on the land targets, as you said, they ought to go to Congress for authorization. And the Republicans have congressional majorities in both houses. They're very loyal to President Trump.

They should seek the approval of Congress for the actions that they want to take.

KEILAR: Kevin Carroll, great to get your insights. Thank you very much.

CARROLL: Thank you, Brianna.

KEILAR: And next: a former U.S. treasury secretary caught up in the Epstein scandal after e-mails reveal him asking the convicted pedophile for relationship advice. We will have those details ahead.

Plus, police are asking for help identifying a person of interest in the shooting of New York Jets player Kris Boyd. What we're learning about the investigation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:22:31]

KEILAR: Breaking news in the Trump administration's case against former FBI Director James Comey.

A federal judge has just scorched the Justice Department's handling of years-old evidence, going so far as to raise the possibility that the indictment may be tainted.

CNN's Katelyn Polantz been following this story.

Katelyn, explain what just happened and how significant this is.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Brianna, this is some significant momentum for James Comey's defense team, and it is coming in the form of an opinion by a magistrate judge that's gotten to look at the records in this case, both the records of what the evidence was and also what was said to the grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia, when Lindsey Halligan, the U.S. attorney there, alone went into the grand jury and asked them to approve that indictment against James Comey.

What this is about is about the use of evidence that the Justice Department collected more than five years ago in 2019 and 2020. They got it from a friend of Comey's in a different investigation that didn't result in charges, also a leak investigation. And in that investigation, that friend of James Comey, his name's Dan Richman, he also was a lawyer to Comey.

So what is being alleged here by the judge, what the judge is seeing and saying, there may be a big problem, is that Comey was excluded back in the day and also again recently from having the ability to look at that evidence and say, hey, these are confidential communications with my attorney.

There also wasn't a search warrant gotten now as they were reopening this investigation or an investigation around James Comey for the Justice Department to be able to look at that documents. And then also the judge says they might not have handled the presentation to the grand jury appropriately or fairly.

Quote: "The record points to a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps, missteps that led an FBI agent and a prosecutor" -- that's Lindsey Halligan -- "to potentially undermine the integrity of the grand jury proceeding."

The magistrate judge, William Fitzpatrick, he's giving about a week for James Comey to come together to get his ducks in a row and challenge this indictment even further. It could potentially be thrown out -- Brianna.

KEILAR: Wow, that would be big.

All right, Katelyn Polantz, thank you -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Now to a CNN exclusive.

CNN has learned that Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is calling on Harvard University to cut ties with former school president Larry Summers over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. A batch of newly released e-mails is shedding light on the extent of their friendship and the messages reveal years of personal correspondence between the two men, including Summers making sexist comments and seeking Epstein's advice on romance.

[13:25:13]

CNN's senior national enterprise correspondent M.J. Lee is here with more on this exclusive reporting.

M.J., Senator Warren obviously taught at Harvard.What is she saying the university should do with Summers?

M.J. LEE, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL ENTERPRISE CORRESPONDENT: Well, she's essentially saying that the school needs to cut ties with Larry Summers and she said that he cannot be trusted to teach students.

He, of course, as you said, is the former president of the school and remains a prominent member of the faculty, and all of this is coming after last week we saw a number of e-mail exchanges between Jeffrey Epstein and Larry Summers, where you see that they had an intimate friendship and relationship.

They talked about everything from current events to Donald Trump to examples of Summers seeking romantic advice from Jeffrey Epstein. This is what Warren told me.

She said: "All of this shows monumentally bad judgment." And she said: "If he had so little ability to distance himself from Jeffrey Epstein, even after all that was publicly known about Epstein's sex offenses involving underage girls, then Summers cannot be trusted to advise our nation's politicians, policymakers and institutions or teach a generation of students at Harvard or anywhere else."

You see from those comments there, Boris, that she's not just talking about Harvard. She's essentially calling on every policymaker, any institution that actually gets advice from Summers to stop doing work with Larry Summers.

Now, I do want to put up on the screen a couple of examples of these kinds of exchanges that we saw between Summers and Epstein.

For example, November of 2018, there's an exchange where Summers seems to forward an e-mail that he got from a woman and then goes on to ask Epstein's advice on whether to respond. Summers says -- quote -- "Think no response for a while? Probably appropriate."

Epstein writes back: "She's already beginning to sound needy," smiley face. "Nice."

March of 2018, they are again discussing whether Summers should write back to apparently a woman of romantic interest. Epstein, among other things, writes back in capital letters: "That would be bad form."

Now, I just want to emphasize the significance of this time period that we are talking about because, remember, Boris, 2008 is when Jeffrey Epstein was convicted in Florida. And then, in November of 2018 is when we saw that exhaustive "Miami Herald" investigation that really detailed all of the alleged abuses of Jeffrey Epstein when it comes to underage girls.

So the timeline is really important because you just got to keep in mind so many of these details were known at the time. I should also note that CAP, Center for American Progress, did say in a statement that they are looking at last week's disclosures and determining appropriate next steps because he is a senior fellow at that group.

SANCHEZ: Quickly, M.J., Summers previously called his relationship with Epstein an error in judgment. Has he responded to this?

LEE: He has not. He has not given a comment on the story. He's not responded and Harvard has not yet either.

SANCHEZ: M.J. Lee, thank you so much for that exclusive reporting.

So it was her signature on a House petition that ultimately forced tomorrow's vote on the Epstein files. Next, we're going to ask newly sworn-in Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva about the president's sudden change of tune, as he now urges Republicans supporting the files' release.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)