We don't know the full story of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. I think basically we have a sort of keyhole look into the room. And we're just seeing a small fraction of what's going on on the other side. And if Donald Trump is in fact the victim of a hoax, if he is totally and completely innocent of all the accusations against him, the obvious rock Occam's razor question is, then why are you fighting so hard to hide everything? >> I am Maddy Hale and welcome to the Trump Report. Pete Hoekstra has faced another hearing. So we're going to speak all about that. We're also going to speak a little bit about a few updates when it comes to the Epstein files. So just a reminder that you can watch us everyday Monday through Friday on the Trump Report YouTube page. You can stream us as a podcast wherever you get your podcast. And of course you can watch clips of the show on Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. My guest today is Professor David K. Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, Professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, and an author of an array of books on Donald Trump. Professor, thank you so much for joining the Trump Report. >> to be with you again, Maddy. >> Let's go through some of the more fiery moments from Pete Hoekstra's appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Now on Wednesday he faced the House Committee members which I spoke about with Professor Scott Lucas yesterday, but you and I are going to speak about his latest hearing which took place on Thursday. So let's start off with Senator Mark Kelly. He pressed Pete Hoekstra over his no quarter comment which basically means that showing no mercy even if enemies try to surrender something that would break the rules of war. So Pete Hoekstra has avoided giving a clear answer. He was repeating that the US fights to win and follows the law. Kelly ends by saying that his refusal to explain himself shows that he is not right for the job. So what did you make of this? >> Well, Pete Hoekstra believes that he's a power unto himself and Donald Trump is a power unto himself, not agents temporarily imbued with power to act on behalf of the American people. Uh in the United States, the no quarter order was canceled in 1863 during the Civil War. It's known as the Lieber Code. It's a General Order 100 and it's still in effect. If troops want to surrender, then you take them into custody. And what Hegseth is proposing is that he doesn't care about war crimes. He's going to commit them because he thinks that that's what Americans should do. Uh and this has appalled other officers and former officers like Mark Kelly, the astronaut who was a combat pilot. >> And then, of course, uh in the in the house uh amazing which we won't we won't get into, but in that hearing he was pressed over that initial strike, which of course killed over 150 uh children at the school. Um so, he spoke a little bit about that, but I want to get into Senator Elizabeth Warren. Uh one of the clip one of her clips has gone quite viral because she was questioning Pete Hegseth over whether he approves stock trades made by his broker asking if he gives his personal sign-off on investments. Pete Hegseth pushed back "Big fat negative" is what he said. He doubled down again saying "Bigger fatter negative" when he was asked if approval is needed. She points out that his ethics agreement says that he must sign off on defense stock trades. This, of course, is in conjunction with fact that, you know, Pete Hegseth was accused of basically investing in things that coincide with the war. Um a lot There's been a lot of insider trading allegations. So, what did you make of his, I guess, pushback against Elizabeth Warren? >> Well, interestingly, there's been no indication that the Trump administration, through the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FBI, or anywhere else, is asking the appropriate questions about these incredibly well-timed trades that have occurred again and again and again, and generated for sure enormous profits. Uh clearly somebody is leaking information. And Hexeth's answers, I think, were intended to be evasive. Uh even his big fat no didn't really go to the question as being asked. And Elizabeth, who I've known for about 40 years and who is a former law professor, she doesn't ask questions where she doesn't have some idea of what the appropriate answer is and what would be a lie. Uh so, once Hexeth is no longer Secretary of He likes to say war, Secretary of Defense. Uh he may have trouble with the testimony, and I think she's building a record to go after him for lying to Congress. >> I mean, Professor, when you look at those well-timed investments and market moves, can any of it be put down to coincidence, do you think? >> Not the size of the moves. I mean, the trading goes on all the time, but you look at the volume of the trades and the size of them, and there's no other explanation but that somebody knew there'd be an announcement in about 15 minutes and made a ton of money through these quick trades. And keep in mind that in the modern stock markets, especially in the US, this isn't really investing. Uh more than 90% of trades are somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of trades are these computer-driven high-speed trades where you can be in and out of of thousands of shares of stock in a second or two. And we're seeing more and more of this kind of behavior where someone essentially knows something's going to happen, clips off the profit from it, and walks away. >> Payton Hexeth, he was questioned over the fact that he's fired around two dozen officers since he took the job. 60% of these uh either black or they're females, which of course he denied had any relevance to why they were let go from their job. He was also asked why he had fired General George. He said, "Out of respect for him and other officers, they don't talk about the nature of why certain officers are asked to step down, but they're that taking the department in a particular direction." Because, of course, as you and I have probably spoken about, Professor, there's been no discussion or reporting of any misconduct as to why there's been these military firings. So, I want to get your thoughts on this military purge in general and this lack of transparency. Is it normal to have this amount and is it normal to have such a lack of transparency on it? Does it look as if Pete Hegseth and the department are hiding something? >> This is not at all normal, period. End of discussion on that point. Um it's very clear, I think, what's going on here. The US military has been removing from bases and museums and places they control uh images and language and displays about glorious conduct and valorous conduct by black, brown, uh Asian and women soldiers. Uh the uh administration has restored the names of Confederates, traitors. I mean, you know, in in in um Germany, there are no bases called Hitler Air Base or Goebbels uh Marine Station. Uh but we have them here in the US. They've used sort of a um a trick in some cases finding someone with the same name as a traitorous general to rename a base. Uh it Hegseth is a white supremacist. He's a Christian nationalist. He has a huge tattoo on his chest that screams that uh he is a white supremacist. And he is also, I believe, lining up to remove those officers who've made it clear that they will not violate the law, they will not violate the Constitution, so that uh he can put in place people who will do as they're told, which is the classic sign of a military coup in the making. >> I wonder if you do think there will be a military coup, a refusal of orders uh in the making, Professor? We uh right now it and we'll get into this in a little bit, but right now it does feel like we're at a stalemate with the Iran war. There's no major updates. We don't know if there's going to be any further escalation. We don't know if there was going to be boots on the ground. We don't know if there was if there was going to be a seizure of Kharg Island or conflict in the Strait of Hormuz. But, that would require, you know, an order to troops and Marines uh and and and and and and uh the Navy in the area to get ready for it. And there was this conversation going on in the last few months about whether you would see militants pushing back and refusing orders. Do you think that would happen at some stage during this war? >> Well, let me be very clear. I don't think we will have a military coup led by Donald Trump because I don't think he will get the officer corps, enough of them to support him. But, that doesn't mean that they're not preparing so that they could try to do that if they choose to. And that's what we should be concerned about. You don't want to look backward on this. You want to look forward. Um I We know that at least two generals were removed because they wouldn't go along with uh war crimes. Uh we've been killing fishermen in the Caribbean and the Eastern Pacific on the assertion that they're really drug boats when the proper action is the interdict the boat. You uh inspect it. If there are drugs, you arrest the occupants and you seize the drugs as evidence. Instead, we are killing these people and we're murdering them. Plain and simple. We are in violation of American law murdering them. And Hexaf has no problem with this, which tells you a lot. Now, the Trump administration does not have the assets in place and they cannot get from other countries the assets for a ground invasion of Tehran. Uh and what that means is the Iranians are really in control of what goes on here. And the analogy that I would make is if you may have sometime seen a cat that catches a baby rabbit or mouse or squirrel or chipmunk, and it's going to eventually kill it and eat it, but it toys with it. It tortures it cuz cats get some perverse pleasure out of this as predators. And that's what you're seeing the Iranian regime do with Trump with these LEGO uh AI videos every day. One of them now shows Trump going down a toilet. Uh, there are a whole host of them. They're They're quite well done. They're becoming a little boring cuz they keep using rap music in the same sounds in the background. But the Iranians are in control here and Trump doesn't know what to do to get out, but the one thing he cannot do because none of America's traditional allies will support him is a massive ground invasion to overthrow the regime in Tehran. >> Across both the um House and the Senate hearings, lawmakers were challenging Patrick Shanahan over the Pentagon's $250 war cost figure that was released a day or two ago. They were pressing Shanahan on whether this figure is actually accurate and what the real total could be. He avoided giving a firm answer, instead pointing to ongoing assessments as scrutiny grew over whether the true cost was actually fully being disclosed. So, this of course comes after the fact that many lawmakers outside of the hearing were questioning this figure, arguing it's probably two to three times that. So, is Trump and the Department of War and the Pentagon, are they lying about this, do you think, and downplaying the money? >> Well, they're not telling the truth. That's without question. There are plenty of outside former experts on Pentagon finances. You can count up the number of Tomahawk missiles and other very expensive weapons that have been used. You can look at the two airplanes that had to be blown up because that they were damaged during the rescue of an airman and all the other costs. And just the cost of the Pentagon clearly have to be well above $25 billion. And let's not forget that the Pentagon hasn't ever passed an audit of its finances. >> Do you think that there is a serious concern about the US military stockpile over what's been used in the Iran war? >> Oh, absolutely. And people like Senator Kelly, a former combat pilot, they aren't raising these questions without their staffs or they having talked with people who are aware of the size of the stockpiles. And HASC has essentially admitted that replacing the used uh Tomahawk and other very sophisticated uh missiles and drones, etc., will take years. We're not talking about something where you can replenish the stock right away. In fact, he said we're building new factories. If you have to build a factory to replenish, it means you've really drawn down those stocks. And then, of course, HASC wants to blame this on the Biden administration because we provided uh Tomahawk missiles and other sophisticated weaponry to Ukraine. >> Well, we can't forget when uh Trump said that uh it was Iran that was likely responsible for the use of Tomahawk missiles when the school was struck on the first day of the war, Professor. And Iran have never had access to a Tomahawk missile. But yeah, that was an interesting um it was an interesting reaction from Pete HASC when he was asked how long it would take to replenish the stockpile. He said months and years. And I can't remember which senator questioned him on it, but they said months or years, uh can you pick one? So, there is obviously uh concern over how much has been used. But I want to switch topics now because a government watchdog, the Government Accountability Office, is looking into how the DOJ handled the Epstein files after concerns arose about how that if they have were not fully open about it. So, even though millions of pages were released which you and I covered extensively, critics say that a lot more are still missing or heavily blacked out. So, the question is whether officials held things back and if so, who they might be protecting. So, that is a big development which of course has gone a little bit unnoticed as the news has been heavily Iran related. So, is this Epstein cover Is this the Epstein cover-up that could come back to hurt Trump? >> Oh, this is the Epstein cover-up and it is hurting him with his MAGA base. Not all of it, but a significant portion of it because he signed that law after resisting it that said all these files should be made public and that's not what's happened. Less than half the files have been released. Uh the Trump administration's acting attorney general Todd Blanche, who was Trump's defense lawyer when he was convicted of 34 felonies, has said we're not going to release any more files. That is just an open declaration that we will defy the law. And one of the things I've been encouraging here in the US is that New Mexico authorities should use ground penetrating radar or lidar to go over the Zorro ranch, the 8,000 acre Epstein ranch in New Mexico, plus about another 1,200 acres he leased for grazing animals to see if there are any bodies buried there because we have sworn testimony from two Epstein victims that there were girls who disappeared and who they believe were strangled. Well, you got to get rid of a body if that's the case. And don't forget that Epstein when soon as he knew that the FBI would likely be arresting him ordered 350 gallons of sulfuric acid. Now, it has plenty of useful purposes. Um but it's also an extremely effective way to get rid of a body. >> Is there proof that that that acid was used in the New Mexico property? >> No, and I would think that no, that would have been used on his island. Um and you could have used it for uh cleaning up the water sewage system through a process called reverse osmosis. Uh but uh the fact that he bought these 350 gallons of sulfuric acid and the timing combined with the sworn testimony about the New Mexico ranch certainly suggests that there may literally be buried bodies or dead bodies to be found and there is no reason at this point to hold back on investigating whether such crimes took place even though Epstein's dead. >> Because that part has nothing to do with Trump. But if it is true and you know this is a situation where there has been murders on Jeffrey Epstein's property, why would the government hold back? >> Well, in the case of New Mexico, it's the state government and they have to be willing to spend the money. It would be tens of thousands of dollars. Uh perhaps more than 100,000 to properly uh examine the site. And of course they could bring in canine dogs initially to see if they find anything. The New Jersey Attorney General has indicated he's very interested in finding out what's what went on at the Zorro Ranch, which is now owned by a different party. Uh but I we don't know the full story of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. I think basically we have a sort of keyhole look into the room and we're just seeing a small fraction of what's going on on the other side. And if Donald Trump is in fact the victim of a hoax, if he is totally and completely innocent of all the accusations against him, the obvious rock Occam's razor question is then why are you fighting so hard to hide everything? >> Well, that's the point uh David because this investigation the watchdogs investigation to the DOJ's handling it of it it's not so much about whether Donald Trump was physically involved in Jeffrey Epstein's criminal operation or knew about it. It's more so about if he knew who was involved and chose to hide it because these people are his friends, or at least that's what Marjorie Taylor Greene says. She said it on record, you know, numerous times, especially in the last few months, that Donald Trump told her if the files were released, it would hurt his friends. So, that means it's all about protecting people close to Trump. So, what kind of abuse of power would be that be if that is found to be true, given that, you know, hardly anyone has been held accountable or prosecuted for this? >> Well, the only person who's been held accountable is Ghislaine Maxwell, who is trying to get Trump to give her clemency. Trump will never give her pardon because she could then be forced to testify about what went on. He would give her clemency, which would preserve her rights against self-incrimination. But, let me push back a little bit. We have a two dozen grown women who say Donald Trump assaulted them sexually. Uh there's the two judgments against Trump by E. Jean Carroll, uh where juries awarded a total of $88 million uh for what a judge ruled was her rape by Donald Trump. And we have numbers, significant numbers of young women whose lawyers have filed court papers saying that Donald Trump personally sexually assaulted them. Now, none of that is proof, and Donald Trump may be the victim of a smear campaign. But, uh it certainly suggests there should be a thorough, robust, independent investigation. And of course, instead, the US Justice Department has been turned into Donald Trump's personal prosecutorial law firm, as shown by things like the indictment of James Comey over putting a picture of seashells from a beach up on the internet. Trump contends that the numbers 86 47 mean kill the 47th president. 86 is a very well-known term in America, uh and it means get rid of or out of out of the you know, we're out of Coca-Cola today or get rid of that chocolate cake it's spoiled. It doesn't mean killed as Trump contends. >> And you know, there was 3 million files over 3 million files released to the public that we you know, we sifted through we went through but an extra 3 million you know, think about how much we got out of those 3 million made public. So the 3 million that hasn't been made public. Of course there's interest into why this wasn't made public. So in terms of the investigation that the watchdog are going to be operating David. What kind of things do you think they're going to be looking for? What kind of evidence do you think they're going to they'll be searching for? Will it be uh interviewing certain people? >> Well, there are there are a number of sources of information beyond the files the Justice Department controls. The Trump estate has either a copy of everything that was taken during the I'm sorry the Epstein estate has either a copy of everything that was taken by the FBI under search warrants or they have an inventory. It's supposed to be a very detailed inventory of what was taken. What we haven't seen are video and photographic evidence with some very relatively limited circumstances and we have sworn testimony that Epstein was videoing surreptitiously men engaged in criminal sexual assaults of girls as young as 9 years old. Uh so it's possible there are other sources of this information. The Justice Department will not acknowledge the more than 1,000 girls who were victims all of whom are now grown women. Uh literally Pam Bondi when she was Attorney General refused to turn around and acknowledge their existence in a hearing. So you're not going to get the Justice Department to do anything. But, congressional investigators can, and come January 3rd, it seems quite clear that the Democrats will control House, they might control the Senate. Um I would expect you will then see uh investigators unleashed to go find sources, interview people, uh demand records, uh subpoena records. And of course, the Trump administration will fight like hell, as Donald likes to say, to make sure that none of the records in its possession get out. So, I think a lot of the focus should be on who else has useful records. >> We'll we'll be We'll be following that story for anyone because I know that a lot of our viewers tune in to um listen to you when it comes to the Epstein files, Professor, because you're so on top of it. Um so, we'll keep We'll obviously have you back on when there's more about that. But, just to wrap up the Iran war and where we're at, the Trump administration has said that the Iran war has effectively ended, arguing that hostilities have been terminated because of a ceasefire, meaning they don't need Congress's approval. Under the War Powers Act, the president must stop fighting after 60 days or get Congress to sign off. So, critics say that this is a loophole, arguing that the war isn't actually over and that the administration is trying to sidestep that legal deadline. What do you think about this? I mean, this is a little bit cheeky saying that we're still on a ceasefire. >> So, let me put on my hat as a law professor, although I'm not a lawyer. Uh a ceasefire does not extend the 60-day limit on use of military force without further approval from Congress. But, the Republicans in the House and the Senate, who completely bow down to anything Donald Trump wants, ignoring their constitutional duties, have signaled that they're not going to allow anything to happen questioning great leaders' decision. Uh and the notion that Donald Trump has won this war is absurd. Uh the reality is that the Iranians, who planned and prepared for some kind of attack for the almost a half century, they're really the ones who in control here. Uh they are limiting the movement of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, although the US has announced that we're the ones doing it, which is is if you think about it on a geopolitical level, bizarre. And the big winner so far in this war that Netanyahu and Trump started illegally and and unconstitutionally in Trump's case, is China. The power and the influence of China is growing tremendously. China is making trade deals with some of America's best allies and drawing them into its sphere of influence instead of Washington's. Uh Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada, has said that, you know, we can no longer regard America as our friend, and they are making trade deals and and military actions all designed to separate Canada from its southern neighbor. Is In essence, what Donald Trump is doing is trashing the system that arose at the end of World War II, which compared to a thousand years of history before it, has generated a lot of peace. >> Professor David Cay Johnston, thank you so much for joining the Trump Report today. >> Thank you, ma'am.