TODAY: Howard Lutnick to face questions in House Epstein probe

[0:00] Let's bring in MSNOW Capitol Hill reporter Michael Schnell, MSNOW senior legal reporter [0:05] Lisa Rubin, and NYU law professor Rebecca Roife. Michael, this interview is just getting underway. [0:11] How do we expect this to play out? Yeah, well, Ana, it could be long because we know that there [0:17] are a number of Democrats and Republicans who have questions for Secretary Lutnick. And of course, [0:21] it's going to center on his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, but particularly what you [0:25] referenced in that introduction just a few seconds ago. It was the fact that after that 2005 [0:30] encounter, Howard Lutnick said that he had cut off ties with Jeffrey Epstein. Then there was [0:35] the 2008 conviction of Jeffrey Epstein. And then back in 2012, it came out and he later admitted [0:41] to having lunch with his family on Epstein's island. And then in those Epstein files that have been [0:47] released by the DOJ, there's correspondence between Epstein and Lutnick as recently as 2018. So [0:53] certainly a lot of questions about the timeline of their relationship, how long it had continued. [0:58] And this all comes to a head as the oversight committee has been conducting this investigation. [1:03] We just spoke with the chairman of the committee, James Comer, just a few minutes ago [1:06] to preview this transcribed interview. They're going to get underway shortly in that room just [1:11] behind me. He was asked about this changing story from Lutnick. Lutnick initially saying he cut off [1:16] ties with Epstein in 2005 and then word that he had met with him in 2012. And James Comer did recognize [1:23] that he hasn't been entirely truthful with his story, but that they're going to be pressing him [1:28] on a lot of those questions today. Take a listen. [1:30] What I've seen, we're going to ask him all these questions and we'll let the American people judge [1:38] whether the credibility was damaged or not. At the end of the day, I haven't seen wrongdoing in the [1:45] email correspondence, but he wasn't 100% truthful with whether or not he had been on the island. So [1:53] we'll see and we'll obviously release the transcripts and everyone can see for themselves. [2:01] So again, Ana, one of the most, if not the most significant interview that the oversight committee [2:07] has done as part of this investigation into Jeffrey Epstein that's been going for months and very [2:12] notably today, the first cabinet secretary will be talking to the panel about Jeffrey Epstein. [2:18] Lisa, remind us of the big picture and what the release of the Epstein files reveals these emails [2:24] between Epstein or his wife or Lutnick's wife and the back and forth that was revealed after Lutnick [2:32] had made those public comments about having wanting nothing to do with him after 2005. [2:36] Well, many of the emails that came to the public attention were in late 2012. There's an [2:42] email from Jeffrey Epstein's executive assistant, Leslie Groff, telling Jeffrey, I'm sorry, telling [2:47] the Lutnicks that they, she understands that they're going to be in the Caribbean at Christmas time [2:51] and would they like to come over? Then you see a response in December of 2012 from Alison Lutnick, [2:57] Mr. Lutnick's wife saying, yes, we would very much like to come for lunch on the island. And then [3:03] after the visit, there is an email from somebody who works for Howard Lutnick saying, [3:08] I am passing on a message from Howard. It was very nice to see you. Those emails coupled with [3:13] the photographic evidence that we're showing right now, that seems to indicate a visit by [3:18] Howard Lutnick and his family to the island, absolutely put the lie to those statements Mr. [3:22] Lutnick made in the podcast. But I want to go back to something he said. He said that he divorced [3:26] himself from Epstein in three ways, socially, professionally, philanthropically. We touched on [3:31] the socially, but professionally and philanthropically, they continued to have ties as well. [3:36] In 2017, Howard Lutnick was honored by a New York based charity, the United Jewish Appeal. [3:42] Epstein was invited. He purchased a table. And when he was asked, did he want to go to the event? [3:48] He said, no, give the tickets to Lutnick. And there is email traffic indicating that in fact, [3:53] the tickets were given back to Howard Lutnick. For a person who says that he ceased all contact in [3:58] all three of those domains in 2005, that 2017 encounter in particular is quite telling. [4:04] Rebecca, what questions do you think lawmakers need to ask of Lutnick? And do you think he could [4:09] hold answers that would move forward victims or survivors pursuit of justice? [4:15] Absolutely. So there are two basic issues here. One is who else was involved in this wrongdoing. But [4:21] the issue I think that might be more important here is how did somebody like this continue to have [4:27] the connections that he had that ultimately enabled him to continue with this conduct. And I think [4:32] that the you're going to see the lawmakers drill down on the specific questions having to do with [4:37] documents that they have and and especially about that lie. Because somebody who says something that [4:43] was not just, you know, not 100% truthful, that was 100% untruthful. There is no way in which he can [4:49] actually say I, you know, it was a memory lapse or something like that because of the specific words [4:54] he used. And so I would like to see the lawmakers drill down on that, say, what did you know when [4:59] you made those statements? Why did you make those statements? What were you covering up? Because [5:04] clearly somebody who says something that's not true like that is conscious that they are doing [5:08] something wrong. What was he doing? And what did he know at that time? [5:11] And Rebecca, Lutnick has not been accused of a crime here. But based on what we know, [5:16] should prosecutors have questioned Lutnick back when they were investigating Epstein? [5:20] Well, absolutely, they should have. I mean, you know, there are trails that you follow and you [5:24] would follow all of these trails if you were a prosecutor. And, you know, especially, you know, [5:29] if he had been untruthful like he was in that public interview with the New York Post with the [5:33] prosecutor, that would have been something that would have been a massive red flag that they would [5:37] have pursued. And because they didn't, now we're in a situation in which it has to be addressed in [5:41] this particular way. [5:42] And Lisa, Lutnick's going before these lawmakers voluntarily. He wasn't subpoenaed, [5:48] but he agreed back in March when there was a lot of sort of fervor around subpoenaing different [5:54] people. So before he could get subpoena, he said, fine, I'll come. What do you think is the strategy [5:59] there? I think the strategy is to show that you have nothing to hide. Howard Lutnick is trying to [6:04] appear as if he is open and transparent and open book. And so, therefore, he's saying, [6:09] I don't need to be subpoenaed. I'm more than willing to walk in the room and have a conversation [6:13] with you. That's a strategy, by the way, that Pam Bondi tried after she had been subpoenaed. [6:18] She tried to walk in the room with her then deputy, Todd Blanche, and say, I'll tell you [6:22] everything you want to know. I'll talk to you. And that wasn't satisfactory to the lawmakers, [6:26] because at that point she had stonewalled them so much that just walking in for a voluntary interview [6:31] was not going to satisfy them. I think Howard Lutnick was trying to hold that off for himself. [6:36] But he also isn't going to be on video here, right? [6:38] And he's also not under oath. He's not under oath, but there will be some form of audio, [6:45] as we understand it, that will transcribe what is said so that we will get a transcript, [6:50] I believe, ultimately, of what Howard Lutnick says, or at least the committee will. And it will [6:54] have the decision to make whether it wants to share it with us. But as you and I have discussed before, [6:59] not being under oath doesn't immunize you from a false statement to Congress charge if, [7:05] in fact, you perjure yourself while you're sitting there talking to the members of Congress. [7:09] And Michael, the top Democrat on the committee, Congressman Robert Garcia, is notably not in the [7:14] room today. Why is that? Who's leading the charge in his place? And does this change Democrats' [7:19] strategy going into this? Yes. So Robert Garcia, as you mentioned, [7:24] the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, he won't be there questioning [7:27] Howard Lutnick today. We're told that he had a scheduling conflict. It's worth noting, [7:31] Congress is out of session this week. It was a schedule change because King Charles was in town [7:36] last week. So members aren't in town to vote. Robert Garcia not able to make it back. I don't [7:41] think it will change the strategy, though. There will still be plenty of Democratic members in the [7:45] room, including Ro Khanna, Yasmin Ansari, James Walkenshaw, and Suhas Subramayan. In addition to [7:51] staffers, we often see staffers and lawyers for the oversight committee press these witnesses who [7:57] come before them and press these folks. But in terms of the members on the panel, these are people [8:01] who have been in many other of the transcribed interviews and depositions. These are people [8:05] who have sifted through thousands of those documents that the DOJ had released. Also worth noting, [8:11] on the Republican side, we're going to see James Comer and Will Timmons in there in terms of members. [8:16] So again, an out of session day, but certainly still a fairly large group for out of session [8:22] of lawmakers up here who are eager to question Howard Lutnick. And Rebecca, given the history [8:28] of contradictions that we've already discussed involving Lutnick, how would you advise lawmakers [8:34] to approach their questioning? So I think this is an opportunity to move away from political discourse [8:41] and to really approach this as a prosecutor would, which is very carefully with each document, [8:46] go over what it was that they already know and what he knew at the time. If he tries to claim [8:52] that some kind of lapse of memory, you want to actually get him to say that, because that's [8:57] something that as a prosecutor, if you were in front of a jury, they'd be like, no way. You forgot [9:02] four times that you actually went to an island? That's impossible. So you want to make clear, [9:07] if it wasn't a lapse of memory, then what was it? Why don't you remember that? And then you want to go [9:11] over each of these times that Jennifer was saying that there was some kind of interaction with him, [9:16] business, social or professional. And what are the details of that? How involved was it? And what else [9:22] is there that we don't yet know? Because this was just emails. And how are we supposed to believe him [9:26] now since he lied in 2005? So I think his public stance is, sure, I'm cooperative and I'm being here, [9:33] but how do we square that with the fact that he has not been truthful? And I think that those are all [9:38] things that the lawmakers should ask him and drill him down and make sure they get specific answers [9:43] to all of these questions. All eyes on Lutnick today. But of course, there are more to come, [9:48] right, Lisa? Who's next? We have a battery of interviews that are going to take place on a [9:52] between now and July 15th. They include people like Bill Glates, Leon Black, who was one of Epstein's most [10:01] famous or maybe infamous clients. He was a hedge fund manager who no longer leads the hedge fund that he [10:07] founded, in part due to alleged improprieties of his. We also are going to hear from Kathy Rumler. [10:14] She is a lawyer who was the former general counsel or is about to no longer be the general counsel at [10:19] Goldman Sachs, who denied that she had provided Epstein with legal advice until, again, the Epstein files [10:26] do not lie. Documents do not lie. We have a number of people here in the public domain who have made [10:32] very broad declarative statements about their involvement with him only to have documents come [10:38] into the public's hands that disprove what they have been saying. Kathy Rumler is one of those as well. [10:43] She provided many instances of advice to Jeffrey Epstein about how to deal with allegations that were [10:49] coming out. I expect that hers will be one of the more interesting interviews and the last one that's scheduled. [10:55] I'm to be talking to Jeffrey Epstein about the [10:56] judge. [10:58] He wrote about these details. We're talking to Jeffrey Epstein about the [11:00] the lawsuit. He has the actual rights to the fact that he only has a couple ofших [11:01] laws against each of her policies, a couple of human rights to the world that [11:03] will take place in the [11:12] mejor security? [11:14] Great! [11:14] Thank you, if you're watching this video, I'll share with you. [11:17] Okay? [11:17] Great! [11:19] Thank you, thank you for your support. [11:19] Thank you so much for this video! [11:21] If you're enjoying the essaima topic, then you'll be following your story.