Return to Transcripts main page
Inside Politics
Swirling Crises Follow Trump To Scotland On Pivotal Week; Harris Weighs CA Governor Run As Dems Debate Potential Impact; Democrats Relish Potential Pickup In Pivotal Senate Race; House Session Ends, Still No Epstein Files. New Information On Leaked Government Signal Chat. President Trump in Scotland to Discuss Trade Negotiations. Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired July 27, 2025 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:55]
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR: In the rough.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ah, welcome to Scotland, Donald.
RAJU: As President Trump tees off overseas.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's a foul smell in Scotland right now.
RAJU: He faces urgent questions about a major tariff deadline and deepening starvation in Gaza. Will he make any progress?
Plus, no end in sight.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm focused on making deals. I'm not focused on conspiracy theories.
RAJU: As Trump tries to put miles between him and the Epstein saga. Could a new tactic by his team backfire?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not going to die down.
REP. ERIC BURLISON (R-MO): It's the number one phone call that we get, by far. It's probably 500 to one.
RAJU: A conservative congressman who's pushing for more information, Eric Burlison joins me live.
And shake-up. A big win for Democrats as they try to take back Congress. Can they overcome the odds?
Inside politics, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power starts now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Good morning. Welcome "Inside Politics Sunday." I'm Manu Raju. New this hour, President Trump is expected to meet with the European Union Chief in Scotland with the self-imposed trade deadline just days away with more massive tariffs set to snap into place if he does not reach deals with a host of key nations. We'll bring you that meeting live when it happens.
It all comes to the slew of crises and controversies are confronting Trump's White House. The wars he promised to end immediately, are still raging.
In the Middle East, overnight, Israel opened up more aid corridors as starvation crisis devastates Gaza and as talks to end that fighting there stall.
And back home, the Jeffrey Epstein saga has bogged down his presidency. And there are no signs it's dying down.
In moments, we're going to bring you all the latest from the morning's big interview of the political leaders from the House Speaker to the Commerce Secretary.
But first, I want to bring in CNN's Jeff Zeleny, who is traveling with the President in Scotland.
So, Jeff, what are we expecting from Trump's meeting today with this key European leader? And what are the administration officials saying this morning?
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Manu, President Trump is scheduled to meet with Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the European Commission representing the E.U. member nation. She is on her way to the Trump golf course at Trump Turnberry.
Just a few moments ago, the President said he believed there was a 50- 50 chance of reaching a deal with the E.U.
The deadline, as you said, is fast approaching. That's a Trump-imposed deadline of Friday for negotiating a new tariff deal with the E.U., or a 30 percent across the board levy will kick in. That would be devastating to business leaders here, at least in the eyes of European Union officials.
So, it is widely believed that the negotiations now are on track for a 15 percent tariff across the board. That's higher than some would like, but certainly more manageable than the 30 percent.
But Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who's traveling here to Scotland, had this to say earlier this morning about the deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD LUTNICK, U.S. COMMERCE SECRETARY: No extensions, no more grace periods. August 1st, the tariffs are set. They're going to place. Customs will start collecting the money. And off we go.
Obviously, after August 1st, people can still talk to President Trump. I mean, he's always willing to listen.
Europe needs to make a deal and wants to make a deal. And they are flying to Scotland to make a deal with President Trump.
If they offer him the right deal, which is opening their markets and really negotiate with him the right way, you know, they're hoping they make a deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZELENY: If this sounds familiar, it should. This is just the latest chapter in the ongoing really negotiations and threats of rising tariffs that the President really has used as leverage throughout his first six months in office.
But this is something the E.U., of course, of the United States is the E.U.'s largest trading partner. So, that's why member nations are hoping that there is a deal reached. If not, there could be retaliatory tariffs as well.
[11:05:07]
But all sides are indicating, even though the president is saying a 50-50 chance, officials behind the scenes are striking a more optimistic tone that they can avoid a transatlantic trade war.
RAJU: Yes. And suggesting there's no grace period there. But as we've seen Trump, time and again, pushing back these deadlines. We'll see if that happens if they've made -- and make any progress in these negotiations.
And, Jeff, you've described the scene that's in Scotland. We've seen protests break out over the last day or so. How has the reception been so far to the president?
ZELENY: Look, the president speaks fondly of Scotland. It's the homeland of his mother. It's one of the reasons he is here to dedicate a golf course named after Mary Anne MacLeod, his mother who left Scotland at age 18 after World War One.
The Scots do not feel as warmly toward President Trump. That was clear in protest. We saw here in Edinburgh yesterday and around the nation as well. Not as large of protests as there were back in 2018 when President Trump was here during his first term in office, but certainly protests about the foreign policy, the domestic policy.
And again, in terms of foreign policy, Gaza also front and center in the meetings that today as well as in the president's meeting tomorrow with British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer.
RAJU: All right. Jeff Zeleny from Edinburgh, Scotland. Thank you so much for that report.
And let's break this all down in the room here with my excellent reporters. Jasmine Wright from "NOTUS." And "The Wall Street Journal's" Molly Ball. Thanks for hanging around, guys. There's a lot of news still developing.
And there's a lot of anticipation about what Trump may do here on this trade war. We've seen Trump, time and again, make these threats, back off these threats, suggest to make you progress on a trade deal.
What are you expecting as you watch this key meeting play out later today?
MOLLY BALL, SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, I mean, we have to see if they get a deal or not. That's the ultimate question.
And I think -- but to your point, I think the bigger picture with trade and the Trump administration is that we've seen this very muddled picture that has been very frustrating to both Americans and people overseas who are trying to get some certainty in the markets and figure out how they're going to handle the -- the tariffs that affect their businesses.
So, I think a lot of people would just like to see a deal get made, even if it's one that they're not thrilled about, just to have that certainty going forward.
And so it's hilarious to hear, you know, Secretary Lutnick say these -- these deadlines are real unless they're not.
RAJU: Yes, exactly.
BALL: Because that's what we're --
RAJU: You can talk more about it later. Well, wait a second. Is this a deadline or negotiating or not negotiating?
BALL: And that's the sort of whiplash that all of these -- these foreign governments have gone through since the original liberation day imposition of the tariffs is just not knowing which way is up, because these deadlines get put on, they get reversed, the tariffs get put on, they get reversed. So, we will see if something actually gets put into place that has some permanence here.
RAJU: Yes. And look, right now, these announced Trump has threatened these 30 percent tariffs. Twenty percent tariffs have been previously announced or applied.
And there's talk about dropping it down to fifteen percent, which is still historically high.
JASMINE WRIGHT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NOTUS: Yes.
RAJU: But because of the way Trump has set the bar so high that would be seen as, oh, the markets would probably rally --
WRIGHT: Yes.
RAJU: -- if it's 15 percent, even though it's higher than it has been historically. WRIGHT: Yes. The general thought is that the markets could basically eat a 10 percent tariff line. We'll see if they can eat a 15 percent tariff line.
But there are really two major question marks when it comes to our biggest trading partners. Over the last two months from the administration, one was Japan and the other was the E.U.
Last week, he announced a deal with Japan and now it's the E.U.'s time. And again, when you think about the frameworks that they have been announcing, you know, they're not so much of the bespoke deals that they said that typically takes these trade negotiators years and years to negotiate, getting down to the fine line.
There were larger frameworks that set a tariff number that deal with maybe a couple of different items in the U.K.'s case. You know, they deal with beef and things like that.
But then they kind of leave the details to be settled later. So, even if they do announce a framework, which, of course, the E.U. is hoping that they do, it is just that, a framework, a top line.
And then everything underneath has to be filled in, which is the case with so many of these other countries.
RAJU: Yes.
WRIGHT: So, these conversations are going to continue to happen even if they do get a deal.
RAJU: OK. So, that's the international foreign policy aspect of it. And now the domestic politics, as we've seen, has completely abandoned his presidency, how he's handled this Jeffrey Epstein issue, whether or not his names are in the files and Trump saying that all this information will be out there. And then his administration essentially walking aback from that over the last several days. And how he has handled this has, of course, been a big political problem.
This is what Thomas Massie, he's a Republican from Kentucky. He's the one who is leading the charge on the GOP side to get this information out there, to try to force a vote in the United States House.
[11:10:06]
This is what he warned Republicans about just this morning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): What -- 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 in Donald Trump. We'll lose the majority.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Well -- we'll lose the majority. I mean, that's pretty stark rhetoric right there.
BALL: Well, and this is -- is what I keep hearing from Republicans is that that is what they're worried about. They don't think that the MAGA base is going to turn on Donald Trump.
But if you dampen the enthusiasm of your base, those are the people you need the most in a mid-term, the most politically tuned in, the most passionate about Republican candidates. You really need those people to get out and vote in a mid-term.
So, anything that dampens their enthusiasm is what Republicans are worried about as they look toward these midterms.
And to your point, it's remarkable how the Epstein issue has lingered week after week, how it's followed Donald Trump to Scotland. He keeps getting asked about it. He keeps making comments about it. There's just a complete inability to put this away.
And then even when he tries to pivot to international relations, he's confronting so much unfinished business, whether you're talking about the tariffs or you're talking about the ongoing foreign conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza. So, there's just so many fires that he has yet to put out.
RAJU: I mean, how concerned you -- you covered the White House, Jasmine. What do you hear about from the White House about their inability to turn the page on this story?
WRIGHT: Yes. There are certainly White House officials who are frustrated that this continues to be the issue. I mean, just think about it. This is the third Sunday in a week in which Epstein questions are leading the Sunday shows, right? This is something that has real staying power. And it's something that the White House did not necessarily believe initially had that type of staying power.
And so you're seeing them having to be on the defensive. You're seeing Donald Trump trying to run away from these questions. You're seeing them basically tell me and other folks that I've talked to that this isn't the DOJ's hands now. The DOJ is handling it. We're not talking about the Maxwell thing. That's them. We're not talking about releasing more documents. If Pam Bondi wants to, she can.
And so they're really trying to kind of have it both ways by saying, look over here, but also don't ask us more questions. And that's causing them to be frustrated because they're not -- even though they say that they're on the same page when it comes to messaging, I don't know if that's necessarily reflected --
RAJU: Yes.
WRIGHT: -- what you hear.
RAJU: And look, because there's continually new developments that happen that keeps us in the news, including how they handle the Ghislaine Maxwell. Of course, she is a convicted sex trafficker, convicted co-conspirator of Jeffrey Epstein. She's the one who spoke with the number two of the Justice Department last week from her prison cell. Highly, highly unusual and unorthodox meeting there.
And that Trump did not rule out a pardon for Maxwell, even though he was asked about that repeatedly. This morning, speaker Mike Johnson was asked if -- about Trump and the pardon -- for potential pardon for Maxwell and what he thought about that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTEN WELKER, NBC NEWS HOST: Would you support a pardon or a commutation for Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted sex trafficker?
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): Well, I mean, obviously, that's a decision of the president. He said he had not adequately considered that. I won't get in front of him. That's not my lane.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: He wouldn't say Trump should not do that.
BALL: Well, look, Mike Johnson's been around this block several times. And he knows that you don't want to make it -- take a definitive stand on something only to have Trump put you on the wrong side of it later.
But this issue has been remarkable for the situation it's put Republicans in, right? Mike Johnson's whole strategy and it's been extremely effective for him has been to stay as close to Trump as possible as a way of keeping that base on the side of House Republicans supporting House Republicans.
What happens if those are two different things? If being on the side of the base and being on the side of Trump are two different things. That is not a situation that Speaker Johnson or any House Republicans have had to contemplate up to now and it puts them in a very difficult spot.
WRIGHT: And I mean, Speaker Johnson is going to have to deal with this in September, right? This is not an issue that is going away for him specifically. Talk Massie, among other Republicans say that they're going to bring it up. They want more subpoena power. They want more access to the documents, something that the MAGA base is also calling for.
And so this is not going away --
RAJU: Yes.
WRIGHT: -- this summer.
RAJU: Yes.
WRIGHT: And even into the fall.
RAJU: Yes. And there's no question about that.
All right. Any moment, President Trump will be with the E.U. chief. We'll bring it to you live. Plus, brand-new details and concerns as former Vice President Kamala
Harris decides whether she'll run for governor of California.
The President's base demands action on the Epstein's files. I'll go one on one with a conservative House Republican about what he's hearing back home.
[11:15:04]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: How much are your constituents clamoring for more information about Epstein right now?
BURLISON: It's the number one phone call that we get by far. It's probably 500 to one.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
RAJU: Any day now, Kamala Harris will announce her decision on whether she'll run for governor of California.
This weekend, we're learning about some surprising new concerns from top Democrats in her state about how her potential bid could affect other key races in California and even control of the U.S. House.
Our Isaac Dovere has a deep dive on all this in an article this morning. There you see him on the screen. He's sitting right here too.
[11:20:01]
ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Yes.
RAJU: He would've known. So, this is a really good story, Isaac.
One of the -- I want to read to you a quote that you -- from a -- from a Democrat, a House Democrat, didn't want to put his or her name on it. And not surprised when you're criticizing someone in your own party. Oftentimes --
DOVERE: In California House.
RAJU: A California House Democrat. They're sentencing, "There's no groundswell for her candidacy. In fact, it would only fire up Republicans and hurt our ability to win the four to five seats that we need to win the House and hold on to three seats that we just flipped in 2024. She comes with baggage."
It's the first time we're hearing about real fears about the impact she could have down-ticket (ph) in the critical race for the House.
DOVERE: Yes. And look, in the article what I get into is that Harris has, in the last couple of weeks, asked for -- from her aides for stuff about starting a political action committee, for doing a 501(c)(4) that would be focused on building up democratic institutions. Also looking at a potential calendar through southern states if she would be going through with a 2028 run.
But most people around her believe that she will likely land on running for governor of California for a lot of reasons that would take out the 2028 presidential possibility for her.
What I did is I talked to a lot of people on the ground in California, in the House who are looking at what it would mean for them, how it would affect their races, including a lot of these marginal House Democrats.
Among them, George Min, who -- Dave Min, sorry, who won a seat in Orange County last year, flip the seat -- held that seat on, sorry. And he said he was having a nice time talking to reporters about what his district would be and how tough it was.
I asked him about Kamala Harris. And he literally bolted away from me and ran on that.
I asked George.
RAJU: I know how that feels.
DOVERE: Yes, you do. More than us.
George Whitesides, another congressman, who did flip a seat in the outskirts of L.A. last year. And I asked about it. And he paused for a very long time thinking about what to say. And, finally, they ended on. Well, if she decides to run, that's her prerogative.
That said, a lot of California Democrats are looking at the current field of gubernatorial candidates and saying, they don't see someone in there who has the stature and the experience to stand up to Trump.
And they know, based on what this six months have been so far for Gavin Newsom, what he's been dealing with, that that's going to be a big part of whatever California's future holds.
RAJU: And you talked to -- you talked to Nancy Pelosi, who obviously, you know, very well. And a book on Nancy Pelosi. Her quote is very telling. She said -- Isaac asked her what should she do here at Harris. She said, I want her to do whatever she wants to do about running for governor.
BALL: And that's the kind of quote that just screams, please do it.
DOVERE: I mean, they do have a long history too.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Long story.
BALL: A long and tortured history. But -- but it really is remarkable for someone who was just the standard bearer for the party in a massive national election that you really can't find people who are saying, yes, we love her. She's our heroine. And we can't wait for her to get in this. I found the same thing when I was reporting in California a couple of months ago that you don't find a -- a huge amount of people saying that they can't wait for her to run. And you don't find a huge amount of people saying that they think she would be great at the job either.
It's not necessarily a -- a position that her background and experience they feel make her uniquely suited for despite all of her qualifications.
And there's -- and -- and I think there's also a sense of where has she been since the election, right? Tim Walz has been out there on the trail pounding the pavement on a sort of apology tour, trying to figure out what went wrong. She's really been in hiding. She's made a few public appearances, but she has not been out there really.
And, you know, you have a democratic base that is angry and terrified and really wants to see their leaders fighting. And she hasn't been out there fighting.
RAJU: Yes. That is interesting. What do you make about that? But you covered the Harris campaign. She's -- she has not.
WRIGHT: Yes.
RAJU: She's been really behind the scenes. Made so few public appearances.
WRIGHT: But if I put my historian hat on, I think it's actually quite similar to what she did after the 2019 race. When she got out in November, that was a very crushing moment for her the same as last November 2024. And she took a few months off.
And you really didn't see her get back into that conversation. I mean, she was doing a couple of those COVID videos, but you didn't see her get back into the conversation until the vice presidential conversation started.
And so I think that you're seeing her take her time, be with her family, according to sources that I've talked to. But they all do feel like she is really preparing at least, really thinking about it in her mind what it would mean to get in and whether or not she runs.
And I think that they feel that she might, whether or not she's made that decision, though I think is kind of a question mark.
DASHA BURNS, WHITE HOUSE BUREAU CHIEF, POLITICO: And you all know what happens if Harris gets in, what happens on the other side, right? One, Mr. Rick Grenell has told me that he's not running for California governor, unless Kamala Harris decides to run. And then he is very likely to jump in.
[11:25:00]
RAJU: That would (INAUDIBLE) the base.
WRIGHT: I think that's a motivating argument in California. I don't want to be governor unless she runs.
RAJU: That would impact things -- that would impact things down-ticket too.
I do want to talk about one of the big developments that's happening in the race for control of the United States Senate. That was the decision that's expected within the next day or so of the former governor of North Carolina, democratic governor, Roy Cooper, to announce that he is in fact running for the Senate. The open seat being vacated by Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican.
This is what Cooper said last night in Raleigh, North Carolina.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROY COOPER, FORMER NORTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR: Everybody who's planning to run for office next year, please stand up. Stand up guys. Hey, I'm not sitting down, am I?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: Not so subtle. We hope very much expected to run.
BURNS: Yes, just --
RAJU: Yes, that's exactly.
So I think North Carolina is a tough state, no matter what for Democrats and Republicans too. But Democrats have not won there since 2008. That's when Kay Hagan won that Senate seat back then since Senate Republicans have won.
It's been some very close races as well, but this is going to be a difficult map for Democrats no matter, even with Cooper in the race, to take back the Senate.
BALL: That's right. I mean, they did get -- Roy Cooper is their best recruit here. And they feel very good about the race with him in it.
But it's still a tough state at the federal level. They have, of course -- Democrats have won statewide races in North Carolina. When Roy Cooper was the candidate, the current governor, and -- and the -- and other statewide races last year. It's just when -- but when it's a Senate race, it's different. Voters look at a Senate candidate in a much more partisan way. They see you as someone who's going to go to Washington and either vote for John Thune or vote for Mitch McConnell, so they care much more about that partisan label than in potentially a governor's race in a -- in a -- a reddish-purple state.
DOVERE: But that said, Roy Cooper has won in 2008, in 2012, in 2016, in 2020, and going all the way back. He's won since every race that he's gotten into in North Carolina. He is the strongest Democrat in North Carolina.
Importantly, for thinking about the geography of North Carolina, he comes from Eastern North Carolina, which is a place that not a lot of Democrats are -- have been winning in for a long time. He's -- he definitely has the accent of somebody from that. He has that credibility as attorney general and governor. That's why the Democrats were so desperate to get him --
RAJU: Yes.
DOVERE: -- to say yes. And it's -- he has --
BALL: And in other marquee races, they're still trying to get in it.
DOVERE: Yes, for sure.
BALL: Maine, for example, there still is not a -- a marquee democratic recruiting.
RAJU: And questions in Maine, while Susan Collins, in fact, runs. She's indicating she will. She has not made a final decision yet.
And Janet Mills, the governor, will she jump into that race as well for the Democrats? Huge questions, but the magic number for Democrats, of course, is for to pick up the Senate. And there are not many options to flip seats. And they're going to find a big one in Georgia as well.
All right. Still ahead, we're standing by for a crucial meeting in Scotland, where President Trump is set to speak with the E.U. chief about trade.
Plus, I speak with one Republican congressman fielding hundreds of calls from his constituents about the Epstein files.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
RAJU: Members of the House are back home this week after an abrupt end to the session as lawmakers in both parties pushed for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, ultimately forcing Speaker Johnson to close for business a day early until after Labor Day.
Does that mean this controversy is going to simmer until then? I'm joined by conservative Republican Congressman Eric Burlison of Missouri, who sits on the oversight committee, has called for the files to be released. Congressman Burlison, thank you so much for joining me this morning. Appreciate your time.
ERIC BURLISON, REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE, MISSOURI: It's good to be on.
MANU RAJU, CNN INSIDE POLITICS HOST: Absolutely.
BURLISON: Thank you.
RAJU: Yes. So, how animated are your constituents about the Epstein files and the lack of information that has been released so far?
BURLISON: Yeah, I think it comes mostly from a concern that government might be keeping secrets from them, that the intel community might have some kind of intelligence on government officials. Whether it's our intel community or a foreign intel community. All of these -- All of these are questions that people have in mind. And so, we are -- we are definitely getting phone calls. People are interested in knowing the facts. They don't want us to drop the investigation.
RAJU: You said, you told me last week about 500 to 1 were the amount of calls that are coming in. Is that still the case? And how much of it is driven by the concern that, you know, the voters were promised repeatedly that this information would be released by this administration?
BURLISON: Yeah, I think that part of this problem is that there were some false expectations that are created, and that's a political mistake. I think that saying that you're going to be able to deliver when you haven't even looked at all of the files and what's available was probably a misstep. And so I think that that is one of the things that they're playing, you know, that they're having to deal with.
The other thing is they're having to deal with the fact that it's really difficult or almost impossible to disprove a negative. Or in the case of a conspiracy, it's almost impossible to disprove a conspiracy unless you have -- unless you have 100% of all the facts. And unfortunately, that's the situation that we're in. So, but I think that you only fan the flames of conspiracy if you don't demonstrate that you're -- that you're trying to get the information released.
RAJU: We know from reporting, Congressman, that the Justice Department briefed Trump in May that his name was in the Epstein files. That's not to suggest Trump did anything wrong other than having a past relationship with Epstein.
[11:35:00]
But do you worry that it may appear to some that this information is not being released because Trump is mentioned in the files?
BURLISON: Yeah. To me knowing Trump I would -- I would be really shocked if -- if there was any kind of nefarious (ph) activity (ph). And I think that knowing this, this dynamic and being in the political world, what you see is that you're encountering thousands, if not thousands of people every day. You have to in order to create these social networks. It doesn't mean that you participate or even know.
And certainly people that encounter elected leaders, they want to be close, but they don't -- nobody like airs their dirty laundry to elected leaders unless they get extremely close. I'm sure. And so to me, that's part of this dynamic. I'm certain that Trump, it was connected through social (ph). And we've seen the photos. They were both, they were both high in New York scenes.
And so they're going to know each other and be around each other. The question is, did Trump go to Epstein's Island? Was he one of the individuals that Maxwell tried to -- tried to get this (ph) girl to sleep with? He says that's not the case. I believe him. But at the end of the day, I think the American people want to know who did go to Epstein Island and who Ghislaine Maxwell did set up arrangements with. RAJU: And Congressman, your committee, the Oversight Committee now is planning to issue a subpoena for these files. And also two Democrats on your committee, Robert Garcia and Ro Khanna, now want the Epstein estate to turn over the birthday book from his 50th birthday, where Trump and dozens of others were listed as contributors. Would you like to see that book, the birthday book, in the name of transparency?
BURLISON: I haven't heard about the birthday book. I don't know that if that has any kind of bearing on as evidence on who was being arranged to have sexual encounters with girls. I'm more concerned -- That's what I'm actually concerned with is trying to, instead of finding out who he went to a party with or a birthday party with, I care more about, you know, who actually went to the island and who was arranged to sleep with a minor.
RAJU: So, it sounds like you probably, they want a subpoena, the Democrats do, for that book. It sounds like you probably wouldn't support that. Is that right?
BURLISON: I mean, I'm not going to oppose anything that's been, that's going to come to light. But I'm saying I wouldn't be focused on that. I don't know why they would be focused on it, but I wouldn't be opposed to that coming to light.
RAJU: Your committee also issued a subpoena for the deposition with Epstein's convicted conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell.
RAJU: They want that deposition by mid August. Now, the administration gave her unlimited immunity during her meetings last week with Deputy Attorney General Blanche. But this is what James Comer, your committee's chairman, told me last week about whether your committee would give immunity to her.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JAMES COMER, REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE, OVERSIGHT CHAIRMAN: I don't think there are many Republicans that want to give immunity to someone that may have been sex trafficking children.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
RAJU: Do you agree with Mr. Comer that Maxwell should not be given immunity?
BURLISON: I think that if we're, we should take her testimony as very with a high skepticism. Right? But I also think that if it, I'm not opposed to giving some kind of immunity. What I would be opposed to is giving any kind of clemency or pardon. That's not something that I think that any Republicans are going to be willing to do.
RAJU: Yeah. So, that's my next question. Because Trump has been not refused, not ruled out a pardon for Maxwell. Do you think that would be a mistake for Trump to pardon her?
BURLISON: I do. I think it would be a mistake. At the end of the day, she committed heinous acts that I think that it would be a disservice to her victims where she did not have to serve her sentence.
RAJU: All right. Congressman Eric Burlison, thank you so much for joining me this morning. Really appreciate your insight and your perspective. All right, still ahead, President Trump's about to meet with the EU Chief in Scotland about trade. We're standing by for that after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:40:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PETE HEGSETH, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Nobody was texting war plans.
PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: It was sensitive information, not classified.
JOHN RATCLIFFE, CIA DIRECTOR: The Secretary of Defense has said the information was not classified.
HEGSETH: What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordinations.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN RATCLIFFE, CIA DIRECTOR: Indeed, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and others in the Trump administration have been adamant that military plans he sent to Signal a group chat earlier this year had, quote, no classified information. But new this week, we learned the Pentagon's inspector general said -- has evidence that there was classified info on those messages, according to people familiar with that review.
This comes amid a slew of reports about Hegseth's rocky tenure leaving the Pentagon. My panel is back. Jasmine, you have a -- your colleague has a story out and notice Hegseth's Signal scandal is wearing on Trump officials. What are you hearing from inside the White House about his standing right now?
JASMINE WRIGHT, NOTUS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, well, my colleague John Seward reported this great piece.
[11:45:00]
Everyone should go look at that notice. Basically talking about there's a kind of weariness setting in at the White House over Hegseth's tenure. Top White House officials, some of them, sources told them, are on -- Hegseth is on thin ice with them, really pissed off at him. Not just for that Signal gate, which obviously kind of continues to linger on in the background, but other instances in which the White House has felt that Hegseth had acted and not given notification to the White House particularly on that issue of stopping some U.S. weapons from going to Ukraine.
The White House felt very caught off guard by that. Other instances in which they felt that Hegseth wasn't giving proper due to the White House in these really important actions. And so I think that just over really the last six months, we've had about three rounds of kind of scandals or controversies with Hegseth that's really set in kind of a weariness tone.
But the reality is is that the President still likes him. And potentially all of these scandals maybe, you know, if people thought that he would leave the administration. The question is whether or not all these scandals kind of keep him there because Donald Trump doesn't want to fire Pete.
DASHA BURNS, POLITICO WHITE HOUSE BUREAU CHIEF: Look, White House officials are frustrated. The Pentagon a mess. That continues to be the case. There's not the proper staffing in place to help Hegseth through some of these challenging moments. There's widespread acknowledgment of that behind the scenes in the White House. However, to your point, he is still, in the President's eyes, someone he wants to keep. He fought really hard for him to get confirmed, that when he fights really hard for somebody, he fights just as hard when the media comes after him. And so --
RAJU: And there have just been so many reports about this. First, the Pentagon still says there was no classified information shared. That was a statement from the chief spokesman about the findings that are ongoing in this ongoing review. And but there are also other stories too. I mean, the story about how Hegseth's team just yesterday from the Washington Post was told by the White House to stop polygraph tests to try to catch leakers and also fighting with his generals. And so this has been an ongoing problem for Hegseth.
MOLLY BALL, WALL STREET JOURNAL SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: And we've seen the staffing, particularly around Hegseth at the Pentagon be in constant chaos. So it's these, to Jasmine's point, it's these ongoing headaches, more than any particular aspect of Signal Gate, there's a feeling that, you know, because the President stood by him through Signal Gate and defended him, there was an expectation that he would get his act together and instead it's been this continuing headache.
So, that's what's driving that feeling of weariness, is the feeling that he was given a sort of new lease on life. He was given a sort of second chance here. And rather than get everything together and make it look like it's running on all cylinders, there just continue to be all of these problems.
ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Yeah, and look, all the internal drama and the soap opera that tends to be around the Trump White House and all this stuff. We know, though, that the Pentagon is having a lot of troubles with the way it's functioning and a lot of problems with politicization. Generals being -- This is the American military, they're tested every day and we don't know at what point they could be tested in a bigger way. And that's what this is really coming down to.
RAJU: All right, President Trump said this morning there's a 50/50 chance to strike a trade deal with the EU as soon as today. We're standing by for his meeting with the EU Chief in Scotland. Expect it to happen any moment. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:50:00]
RAJU: All right, moments away, President Trump is about to meet with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Turnberry, Scotland. They're set to talk about trade negotiations, and we're minutes away from that. And as soon as they start to talk, we will take that live. Trump today said there was going to 50/50 chance of a trade deal. You know, he tends to say these things. How realistic is that and what clues we'll be looking for here in this meeting to get a sense about whether or not they are actually beyond 50/50, closer to 80/20 or 100%?
BALL: Well, look, all of our trading partners have an incentive to try to get to a deal because they don't want these high tariffs. And we've seen that be an adequate forcing mechanism in these other deals that have been made. Although, as Jasmine pointed out earlier, these are frameworks rather than really detailed trade deals.
So, I wouldn't be surprised to see them making a lot of happy noises because they do both want to get to yes, and that, of course, is the most important thing in any negotiation. Also because they are such a major U.S. trading partner, it would be very significant to have that sort of Damocles of the -- of the deadline and the higher tariffs come off of EU trade specifically just because there is so much trade with the U.S. that is implicated.
RAJU: And look, this is a 30% tariff that the President has announced. Will he go forward with that? Will he pull back to 15%? CNN's Jeff Zeleny is traveling with the President in Scotland. So, Jeff what are you hearing about this meeting?
JEFF ZELENY, CNN NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: We are hearing the meeting will be getting underway shortly. And this is the beginning of the meeting where we are expected to see President Trump and the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen. And just an interesting side note about their relationship. She is one of the few European leaders who has not been to the White House, who does not have a close relationship with the President. So, that is something that's also underscoring this.
[11:55:00]
But some positive words from President Trump as he landed here in Scotland on Friday. He said he respects her greatly. So, that is why she made it a point to come meet him on his turf, if you will, at his golf course there. This was not a scheduled meeting going into this --
RAJU: Listen, Jeff, Jeff. Let's just -- Jeff, let's -- This is starting right now.
ZELENY: -- Clearly wants to try and make a deal.
RAJU: Jeff, so let's listen in.
DONALD TRUMP, US PRESIDENT: Nice to see you.
RAJU: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. And this meeting, this is --
TRUMP: Well, thank you very much. It's a beautiful Sunday in Scotland and we thought we could cut things short by, and certainly travel distance, right, by having our meeting here. So, we discuss options and I just -- It's an honor to have the President of the European Union with us. Ursula has been really done a terrific job for them, not for us, but she's done a great job and she's highly respected by us also.
And we look forward to talking to see if we can do something. We've had a very good relationship over the years, but it's been a very one sided transaction, very unfair to the United States. And I think both sides want to see a bit fairness. But it's been a very, very one sided deal and it shouldn't be. And so we're here with her very brilliant staff and hopefully we'll resolve a few issues. But it's a great honor.
You know, we just built this ballroom and we're building a great ballroom at the White House. The White House has wanted a ballroom for 150 years, but they never had a real estate person. You know, nobody, no president knew how to build a ballroom. But this just opened, you know, relatively short time ago and it's been quite the success.
And I think I was just saying I could take this one, drop it right down there and it would be beautiful. This is exactly what they've wanted. But it's an honor to have you at the new ballroom at Turnberry. And thank you very much. Thank you.
URSULA VON DER LEYEN, PRESIDENT, EUROPEAN COMMISSION: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Thank you very much for inviting me here. Indeed it is today about trade between the European Union and the United States. We are together the two largest economies worldwide.
TRUMP: Right.
VON DER LEYEN: If you look at the trade volume, it's the biggest trade volume globally with $1.7 trillion among us. And if you look at our markets, it's a huge market, 800 million people IF you take the United States and the European Union. So, I'm very much looking forward to the discussions we will have now. Our staff have done some of the heavy lifting, but now it's on us. And you're known as a tough negotiator and deal maker. What is in front --
TRUMP: But fair.
VON DER LEYEN: And fair, and what is in front of us --
TRUMP: That's less important.
VON DER LEYEN: If we are successful, I think it would be the biggest deal each of us has ever struck.
TRUMP: So, I'm very much looking forward -- TRUMP: Ever struck by anybody. That's true. That's true. Right now we have that, that honor goes to Japan. We just struck a deal with Japan, as you know, and we're very close to a deal with China. We really sort of made a deal with China, but we'll see how that goes. And we have numerous other deals.
And mostly I'm just going to charge tariffs, and you know, it's not a deal per se, but people are going to pay tariffs, and we're doing them at the low end, not the high end, because we don't want to hurt anybody. And pretty well, but you and I both figured this is -- this is really the biggest trading partnership in the world, so we should give it a shot, right?
VON DER LEYEN: Yeah. Very much looking forward to that.
TRUMP: Thank you very much. I do, too. Any questions, please?
QUESTION: Mr. President, on Friday, the chances of a deal were 50%, maybe less. It seems like you're in quite a good mood. How would you rate those chances now?
TRUMP: I'm actually not in a good mood, but I will tell you, I think the chances are, yeah, I think Ursula would say probably 50/50 of making a deal, I hope. I'd like to make a deal. I think it's good for both, but, yeah, I'd say 50/50.
QUESTION: And what would you say are the many sticking points are in this move?
TRUMP: We have three or four sticking points I'd rather not get in. We'll be discussing them, but I think the main sticking point is fairness. Please.
QUESTION: Why are you in a bad mood? Was it a bad morning golf, or why are you not in a good mood?
TRUMP: No, the golf was -- the golf was beautiful. It's -- Golf can never be bad. Even if you play badly, it's still good. If you had a bad day on the golf course, it's okay. It's better than other days, but no, I think --
[12:00:00]
