[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. Well, this has been another week of high drama in the unprecedented times we're living in since January 6th of last year. You know about last week's FBI search of Mar-a-Lago authorized by a federal court search warrant and attention around classified documents that former President Trump apparently is refusing to give back to the government.

You know about the warrant being made public, which both Trump and Attorney General Merrick Garland agreed would be a good thing. Maybe you know that Republicans and several news organizations are asking for the affidavit requesting the search warrant to be made public to know more about exactly what the Justice Department is investigating, but DOJ is arguing against the release of that. They say it would blow their whole investigation. Maybe you know that in a separate investigation, Rudy Giuliani appeared for six hours yesterday before a grand jury and Georgia after being named as a subject of a criminal investigation there for possible illegal efforts to influence how the presidential vote there was certified.

You probably know about the FBI and Department of Homeland Security warning that there's been an increase in threats of violence against federal law enforcement officials since the Mar-a-Lago search and the context of more radicals on the right wanting a new civil war. With that in mind, maybe you know that after Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Vice Chair of the January 6th Committee in the House, of course, lost her reelection primary on Tuesday. She gave a concession speech for the ages that invoked names like President Lincoln and General Grant.

Liz Cheney: All who fought in our nation's tragic civil war, including my own great-great-grandfather, saved our Union. Their courage saved freedom. If we listen closely, they are speaking to us down the generations. We must not idly squander what so many have fought and died for.

Brian Lehrer: Congresswoman Liz Cheney, on Tuesday night, giving many Americans of all parties chills. Let's see where we are. With us now USA Today Washington bureau chief Susan Page. She is also author of the books, Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi and the Lessons of Power and The Matriarch: Barbara Bush and the Making of an American Dynasty. She's got a new one on the way on TV journalist, Barbara Walters. Susan, always great to hear your insights. Welcome back to WNYC.

Susan Page: Hey, Brian. It's great to be with you.

Brian Lehrer: Let's start on Liz Cheney. Did she give the concession speech you expected to hear?

Susan Page: She did. No surprise that she lost. The surprise about her loss was margin, she lost by 37 percentage points. That is pretty much a message from Republican voters in Wyoming, but we knew that was going to happen. We knew that from the moment she voted for President Trump's impeachment and then agreed to serve on the January 6th panel, that she was likely to have a very hard time in her home state, the state that gave President Trump his biggest margin in the last election. We knew that she doesn't plan to bow out of politics, although exactly what she plans to do is unclear. She took very much a big picture perspective, the kind of thing that you do when you start quoting Abraham Lincoln.

Brian Lehrer: Well, we'll talk about her potential run for president in 2024, which she invoked. People probably heard about that. Before we get that far, does her loss by that margin in this primary say something about the national Republican rank and files response to the January 6th Committee presentations and everything related or is it just more specific to Wyoming, which percentage-wise I think is the most Republican state?

Susan Page: The margin is perhaps Wyoming-specific, but the message is nationwide. We had 10 House Republicans vote to impeach President Trump. Eight of them are now out of the picture, either through retirement or through defeat in primaries. Only two of them even have a prospect of returning to Congress next year. This is a nationwide phenomenon. It shows the hold that President Trump continues to have on this Republican Party.

Brian Lehrer: Cheney told NBC's The Today Show yesterday morning that she's considering running for president in 2024. Would she run as a Republican under the circumstances you just described or as an independent?

Susan Page: Excellent question. Not one that she answered. I would say that she says her primary goal is to make sure that Donald Trump does not become president again. Most analysts believe that if she ran as an independent, she would make it easier for Trump to win the White House again. It seems that that path is one that would have some concerns for her.

If she runs for the Republican nomination, there is no chance at this moment, at least, that she would win it. It would put her in a position to continue make her arguments about why Trump is the wrong choice for the Republican Party and the nation. I think we'll have to wait and see. She has a lot of money, she has a lot of provenance, she continues to have the platform of the January 6th Committee, so I think she has any number of options for what she wants to do next.

Brian Lehrer: If we accept that analysis, that if she runs as a Republican in Republican primary, she's got no shot and if she runs as an independent, she would siphon votes more from Democrats in the November election in 2024 and therefore, make it more likely for Donald Trump, if he's the nominee, to win, then she would just be doing it, if she does do it, if she runs, presumably, as a Republican in those primaries, she would be doing it just to have the platform to amplify the message about Donald Trump's threat to the republic.

Susan Page: There are many errors I've made in covering politics over the years and I try not to make them more than once or twice [inaudible 00:06:29] catch on. One of the mistakes I made early on was in assuming that symbolic candidacies didn't matter. I think we've seen that political quest, it seem like you're just trying to make a point, they can have a real impact.

I'm thinking in particular about Bernie Sanders, who I think was originally seen as kind of a guy with crazy hair from a little state who called himself a democratic socialist. He ended up having over the years huge impact on Democratic Party that I didn't see at the beginning as a possibility. You don't know what happens next. You don't know what happens. Our politics have been so turbulent, that I think it is a mistake to assume that we've got a straight line ahead.

Brian Lehrer: Once upon a time, John F. Kennedy, before he was president, I know you know this as a Washington journalist for a long time and as an author yourself, but John F. Kennedy, before he was president, wrote a book called, Profiles in Courage, about members of Congress who went against the usual positions of their party to do courageous things.

Liz Cheney probably goes right to the profiles in courage Mount Rushmore for her January 6th Committee role. That's recognizing that at the same time that she was ever a nominee for president, Democrats, who feel very moved by what she's been doing recently, would have to confront the reality that she is conservative pretty much down the line on all the issues except this, abortion rights and everything else, but nevertheless, profile in courage.

Susan Page: Hey, absolutely. She voted with President Trump 93% of the time in Congress, so she is not a closet Democrat. She is a conservative Republican in the traditional mold, in the mold of her father, Dick Cheney, but on this issue, she has stood up for what she sees as principles at some great political cost. Before Donald Trump came on the scene, Liz Cheney was seen as a potential future Speaker of the House. That is a path that, at the moment, does not seem open to her.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, your calls are welcome on Liz Cheney, the Giuliani criminal investigation, which we're going to get to now, and grand jury appearance, threats to law enforcement. Also, should a court release the affidavit that argued successfully for the Mar-a-Lago search warrant or anything related for Susan Page, Washington bureau chief for USA Today. 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692 or tweet @BrianLehrer. Susan, let's move on to Rudy Giuliani, his six-hour appearance yesterday, but I don't know if we can call it six hours of testimony before Georgia grand jury. Did Giuliani just take the Fifth for six hours like Trump did in his New York State Attorney General questioning last week in another case?

Susan Page: I've seen no news reports that answer that question, but before he went in there, Rudy Giuliani said that he could claim attorney-client privilege. He's also, of course, free to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination which some of the other people who have been subpoenaed before their grand jury have done. We might think that it's likely, that what he mostly said was I take the Fifth or I'm invoking attorney-client privilege rather than responding to the questions, but I don't think we know that for a fact quite yet.

Brian Lehrer: What's Giuliani's status exactly in the Georgia investigation? How specifically do we know what he's being investigated for and what it means that he's named as a suspect or reportedly named as a suspect? Where does that actually stand?

Susan Page: Well, he's a target, he's been informed that he's a target of this inquiry. That means that he could be indicted, although he wouldn't necessarily be indicted, but it means that they are considering at least the possibility of indicting him, he's being investigated for his statements arguing that it was evidence of real significant election fraud in Georgia in the 2020 election, that there were suitcases under a tabulation table that were stuffed full of ballots and that there was underage people voting and that there were dead people voting and that the voting machines were rigged. These are things that investigations have concluded are not true. That is, I think, the threats of the investigation that has made him a target.

Brian Lehrer: When will we know if he's indicted or not?

Susan Page: When the grand jury acts and we don't know when that will be

Brian Lehrer: Well, if Giuliani is charged for that kind of election interference or lying specifically, would Trump also need to be charged for his phone call to the Georgia Secretary of State asking him to find enough votes to flip the result? We all know about that phone call to Brad Berger, the Georgia secretary of State elected Republican. We've heard that tape. Is that the same thing or is that a different thing than they're looking at with Giuliani?

Susan Page: I barely have a journalism degree. I do not have a law degree, so you should probably ask a lawyer or a prosecutor that question, but we know that Trump loos large over this Georgia investigation. I hate to say, wait and see but I don't know what else we can quite do in this case.

Brian Lehrer: Are there any, to your knowledge as a non-lawyer, civil suits against Giuliani, you mentioned the lies that he was telling presumably knowing they were untrue or it may or may not even matter if he fully knew they were untrue during that people will remember the testimony before the January 6th Committee of the African American mother and daughter who were poll workers in Georgia, just doing their job, passing ginger mints that Rudy Giuliani said were some drugs and accusing them of messing with ballots, which they absolutely did not do. Could they Sue him, are they suing him for defamation or whatever that civil case would be, or anybody else who he may have named?

Susan Page: We know that dominion voting systems has sued Rudy Giuliani for defamation and that case is also preceding other few figures in Trump world have also been cited in that investigation. We also know that Rudy Giuliani has lost his law license in New York as a result of these activities.

Brian Lehrer: Kylie in Northern Virginia. You're on WNYC with Washington bureau chief for USA Today, Susan Page. Hi, Kylie.

Kylie: Hello. Good morning. I was hoping you were going to talk about this today because, for the last couple days, I'd be so frustrated with the reporting that I've been seeing on CNN about what Liz Cheney can and can't do and what she's not going to be able to do. I just love just that your guest today is saying it's not going to be a straight line and there are some benefits of having not only a symbolic presidency but for someone speaking up on the record, to be on the right side of history, so I'm just really happy that she said that.

Brian Lehrer: Symbolic presidency.

Kylie: Yes. Then the second thing is I understand that Liz Cheney also has, like, she's got a lot of money that she can put behind other candidates. It's not just a matter of, is she going to run for the Republican primary, but isn't there also a chance that she could help to really fund a moderate candidate for the Republican Party, which then, maybe in the general election, some Democrats, myself included, right, would vote for, if we don't think the Democrats get a candidate that we think can win. I just wonder about the bigger conversation, because it's either Liz Cheney can run or she can back somebody else to run.

Brian Lehrer: Susan?

Susan Page: Kylie, that's a great point. Liz Cheney not only has millions of dollars now that she is transferring to this new local action committee, she has the capacity to raise an enormous amount of money from both Republicans who are anti-Trumpers and also from Democrats. One of the things about which there has been speculation and she herself talked about this in the interview she did on The Today Show Wednesday morning would be to campaign against election deniers because if you're looking at concerns about the future of democracy, electing people who do not accept the results of a free and fair election and installing them as secretary of state or as governor or in other positions of authority in states is certainly something that would be dangerous.

There is some thought that she could-- That's how she could use both her money and her status to campaign against some of these election deniers. That would mean that she would be, in some cases, working to elect Democrats. That's a question that she didn't answer directly in that television interview about whether that's something she would be comfortable doing.

Brian Lehrer: Kylie, could you go over what you said before about a scenario in which you could see yourself voting for a moderate Republican? I think I know, from your previous calls to this show, that your own politics are quite progressive. Could you see yourself voting for a moderate Republican over a Democrat somewhere?

Kylie: I could. I definitely could. My policies were quite progressive. I also used to live in New Jersey and now I live in Virginia. It's a new world, it's a whole different world down here, but no, I could, because I like Liz Cheney, thinks that what's most important is that Donald Trump and people who deny the election and folks like Donald Trump not be elected.

If there were a moderate candidate-- If the Republican Party put forth a candidate that required some Democrats to vote for that candidate in order for them to win, then I guess that would mean I'd have to become a Republican, vote in a primary. I don't really know exactly how that would work out, but I would certainly be willing to back whoever's going to be most healthy for our democracy. I don't know what the Democrats are going to do, who they're going to put forward either. There's a lot of question marks.

Brian Lehrer: As we get to 2024, you'll have to keep us posted on your politics depending on who's running.

Kylie: I will do that.

Brian Lehrer: Kylie, thanks for your call. I appreciate it. Susan, before we get too far from the Georgia story, what about Lindsey Graham? Didn't he make that kind of call too to try to get the votes flipped in that presidential race of that state?

Susan Page: Yes, he did. He has also been subpoenaed to testify before this grand jury. He has also been trying not to do so, but a federal judge this week on Monday dismissed his latest efforts to avoid having to appear before that grand jury. It is possible that he will also be called down there to sit in the same seat that Rudy Giuliani was sitting in yesterday.

Brian Lehrer: Patrick in Brooklyn. You're on WNYC. Hi, Patrick.

Patrick: Hey, thank you so much, Brian. Out of Brooklyn first-time caller. The guest just said that she's not at closet Democrat, that she's actually a 100% Conservative. I want to understand--

[crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: Liz Cheney.

Patrick: Yes. How was Trump able, because I saw a clip where Trump was campaigning for the lady that just won. How was he able to paint her as a rhino, because he was saying in that picture, she is a Democrat in name, well like a Republican in name, only she is a rhino, but her record doesn't show that. How are they able to paint her as a rhino, because I believe that is one of the reasons why she was able to be defeated with big margins.

Brian Lehrer: Patrick, that's the question of the year for the Republican Party in America. Susan, I think the answer would be something like being a Republican in name only means you could be for every conservative position under the sun, but you don't defend Donald Trump.

Susan Page: Yes. Patrick has really put his finger on an important point here. Republican name only no longer means a Republican defined as someone who [unintelligible 00:19:11] conservative principles like fiscal responsibility and a strong military and a small government. Those are the things that used to be the pillars of the definition of Republican.

The definition of Republican now is Trump supporter. It's less policy, it's more personality. It is a loyalty to this individual. It's a kind of populism that is not a traditional conservatism. Someone who was a rhino 10 years ago might not be a rhino now, somebody who was a member of the last Republican ticket that got elected and re-elected president in the 2000s, that would be Dick Cheney, he would now be seen, I think, by the Trump Republican as Republican in name only.

Brian Lehrer: Somebody wrote in some publication, I wish I could remember who so I could credit them, that the family that was not that long ago, the biggest threat to democracy in our republic is now the biggest defender of democracy in our republic. I know I botched that quote, but there was something like that drawing that line of what Democrats at least used to think about Dick Cheney, to Liz Cheney's so surprising to so many people role considering her family history that she has stepped up to.

Susan Page: Brian, one of the things that struck me Tuesday night as I was watching the [unintelligible 00:20:42] is Donald Trump's remarkable success in toppling political dynasties. In 2016, he toppled Bush, trying to see defeated and humiliated Jeb Bush in winning the Republican nomination. In that general election, he toppled the Clinton dynasty, the time's most powerful family name, and democratic policies and democratic politics. Now he's toppled the Cheney dynasty, also one of the big names in Republican politics. He has been enormously successful in disrupting the people whose families we think of as leading American political families.

Brian Lehrer: Will continue in a minute with Susan Page. More of your calls, more of your tweets. We'll get to how serious these threats of violence against law enforcement are. We'll get to the question, and listeners, some of you are calling in with your opinion on this. We'll kick it around a little bit. Should the courts release the affidavit that led to the Mar-a-Lago search warrant? What are the risks and benefits of that? More with Susan Page and you after this.

[music]

Brian Lehrer on WNYC with USA Today Washington bureau chief Susan Page. 212-433-WNYC, tweet @BrianLehrer. The threats to law enforcement, Susan, since the Mar-a-Lago search that aren't just liberal media, blah, blah, blah. This is an official warning from the FBI and Department of Homeland Security. How organized and serious versus how much just random, radical individualized spouting off on social media?

Susan Page: We know that law enforcement officials are increasingly concerned about real threats to law enforcement officials. They do not have to be organized with large groups, they can be individuals who are radicalized by our political climate. That's what we saw in Cincinnati, with a guy who attacked the FBI office there and was then killed. We've seen an indictment in Pennsylvania, of a man who was threatening to assassinate FBI agents.

We've seen the terrible reaction to the two FBI agents whose names were revealed by the leaking of that search warrant, a Mar-a-Lago. They've encountered a lot of harassment. We hope it doesn't go beyond harassment since [unintelligible 00:23:22]. I think this is something that is of great concern. The threat of political violence here is very real.

Brian Lehrer: Is this like the climate before the 1995 Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing by right-wing radical Timothy McVeigh that killed hundreds of people? Was there this kind of chatter leading up to that? I'm thinking about the 1990s, Bill Clinton was elected, there was this anti-Clinton dementia on the right that went so far beyond whatever his policy positions were, the black helicopters are going to come and take your rights away, all the stuff that was going on.

Newt Gingrich led the Republican revolt that won the majority in Congress in '94 after Clinton became president in '93, and then boom, the next year '95, there's the Oklahoma City bombing, in the context of a lot of militia movement activity and some Republican rhetoric. How much of a parallel do you think this is?

Susan Page: There's been a long thread in American political life of radicalism and threats of violence and anti-government sentiment, and of course, the tragedy of Oklahoma City. We've never forgotten that, but this seems so much worse to me. It seems so much broader. We now have a situation where a majority of Republican voters say they do not believe that Joe Biden was legitimately elected, even though we know he was.

We know that the percentage of Americans who say they could envision the need to take violent action against their government has been rising in national polling. I just think this is such a perilous time for us. 1980 was the first presidential campaign I covered. I've just in that time, just never seen anything like the temper that we have in our politics today.

Brian Lehrer: By the way, heads up Kylie in Virginia, listener tweets, "Just checked if your previous caller is voting in Virginia, they have open primaries, so she doesn't have to be registered as a Republican to vote for a Republican in a primary."

Susan Page: Brian, that's such a smart email, because, of course, it's only because of open primaries that the two House Republicans who voted for impeachment managed to survive in California and Washington State, those states that have open primaries. If they had had the traditional party primaries in those two states, those two members of Congress would not have survived to the general election. Really something to think about as Americans across the country try to figure out what we can do. There's not going to be one thing that fixes our politics. What can we do that makes our politics a little better? I think the record of open primary has been pretty striking.

Brian Lehrer: Namina in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hi, Namina.

Namina: Good morning, Brian, how are you?

Brian Lehrer: Good. Thank you.

Namina: Look, I'm an African woman from Freetown, Sierra Leone, West Africa, and I'm in my 60s. I've been voting in this country. I am so proud. If this woman can hear my voice, I am so proud of Ms. Cheney. Proud of her that she stood her ground. If they give me the tallest building, I would beat and sing in the African song with the drum for her. She stood her ground. Yes, it's just her, but it's about time. History book is going to define her. She is a winner. They look at evil. Evil doesn't last. Donald Trump is not going to last because Satan is with them, God is with Ms. Cheney.

I am one African woman that she make so proud that she stood her ground. She has the truth by her side. She stood her ground and she is the winner. It breaks my heart that people when you look at life, and you-- Oh, my God, Brian, I just want if this woman can hear me that she has one person in her corner. I am like that. As long as you have the truth, do not be afraid.

Even if they're going to kill you, as long as the truth, you have it. She fought for the Bushs'. She fought for the Clintons'. She fought for her and her father. She did not lose. She did not because it's evil and lies. That's it. I hope she can hear me. I hope she has a blessed day, and I hope she walked out, she walked tall and proud, and do not bow your head for Donald Trump and his cronies. I love her for that. God bless her.

Brian Lehrer: If Liz Cheney could hear you, I think she would be so moved. Namina, thank you very much, and please do call us again. Well, there's at least one remaining optimist in America, Susan, that good will triumph over evil and that the truth will out.

Susan Page: Yes. Let's hope that Namina is exactly right.

Brian Lehrer: Manuel in North Bergen, you're on WNYC. Hi, Manuel.

Manuel: Yes. Hi. I was saying that I'm following what's going on. I think you know I'm from Spain. I'm familiar with a fascist ideology, unfortunately. The Republicans actually now they're coming out recognizing it. For Southern Arizona, the Republican Party say, they are not believing in democracy anymore. They rather only shift and people vote. They're going to be gaining the electoral system, they already are planning for it. Even if a Democrat wins a particular area or state, they will cancel it. What do you think about that?

Brian Lehrer: Manuel, thank you. That's really the biggest threat, right? We have our eyes on Congress in the midterm elections. People are already speculating about the 2024 presidential race, but Susan, what's going on in Arizona, which Manuel cites there, and some other states, where people are at least being nominated in the Republican Party will see if they win for positions like Governor and Secretary of State with authority over election results.

They may not accept legitimate democratic wins in 2024, that maybe is the biggest threat to our democracy at the moment. Curious about your thoughts on that and Manuel, I'm not sure what country he's from, but he says he speaks from experience knowing what fascism is. Do you use that word in USA Today?

Susan Page: We don't have a policy about using the word fascist and we would use it if we thought it applied there, but I would agree with Manuel that it's the mechanic-- 2020 was this remarkable election. It was during a pandemic. We had an incredible election. We had a huge turnout. We had very smooth voting. Then we had the election deniers led by Donald Trump saying it was fraudulent. I agree with Manuel that the election and the nomination of election deniers is perhaps the most serious thing that is happening now.

He mentions Arizona, a narrow sweep for the Republican nomination of election deniers in Arizona, and that matters particularly in Arizona because it's become a swing State. If you elect an election denier in Wyoming, it looks like the new secretary of State in Wyoming is likely to be an election denier, matters less because Wyoming is almost certain to go Republican in a presidential election, but in Arizona, it's become a swing State, in Michigan, another swing State, in Georgia. These are the States where I think we need to watch with the most concern.

Brian Lehrer: Pennsylvania with their Republican nominee for Governor.

Susan Page: Absolutely. The Governor there has a lot of power over how elections are conducted and accepted. I think that's right, we've never spent as much attention as we are this year to the nominations for a Secretary of State in States across the country because they suddenly matter very much.

Brian Lehrer: The affidavit that for people who don't know is the piece of paper or it's probably like 80 pages arguing from the FBI and the Justice Department generally to a court to approve a search warrant, like the search warrant for Mar-a-Lago, that in particular of course the search warrant was released. Now some news organizations, as well as some Republicans are asking for the affidavit to be released. There's transparency about what case the government thinks it might actually have against Donald Trump or anybody else at Mar-a-Lago. Susan, is USA Today one of those news organizations participating for this release?

Susan Page: I was worried you're going to ask me that because I'm just not sure we've been partied to some of the legal actions in some States on the release of documents. I'm just not informed about that one. Sadly, our legal department does not confer with me before they undertake these efforts.

Brian Lehrer: [laughs] That's a good thing. Keep that firewall between the news reporters and editors and the legal department, but how about the arguments on each side?

Susan Page: We're going to have a hearing at one o'clock. We're all going to be watching it closely. We think it will go for a couple of hours. We know the government, and the Department of Justice is going to argue against release of the affidavit. The lawyers that I've seen talking about this say that the Justice Department is likely to prevail, and that it would be very unusual to release this affidavit. It details for the judge who approved the search warrant exactly why the Department of Justice thought a crime was being committed and they needed to, and why they needed to conduct this very aggressive search.

They have argued that it would reveal too much about their case. It could have a chilling effect on others, but we'll see it was somewhat unusual that we got the search warrant itself, the search warrant, and the list of documents and other material that the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago that was in part because President Trump had made an issue of it. Since he was the person whose property was being searched that held some sway with the Department of Justice agreeing to go along with that release, but I think it is seen as unlikely that we're going to see this affidavit as a result of this court action today. Again, we'll see. It's up to the Judge.

Brian Lehrer: Here's a listener posting on Twitter saying he's a lawyer. It says I believe most lawyers would say you don't allow the affidavit to be released until their indictments and or no true bill, meaning no indictment, otherwise, you jeopardize what is still an investigation versus a prosecution. Trump would like nothing more. It is this unusual coalition between Donald Trump and major mainstream news organizations. Here's a little bit of that.

I just looked this up on the CBS News site. This says attorneys for many of the nation's largest media companies will try to persuade a federal magistrate judge today to make public the affidavit supporting the warrant that allowed FBI agents to search former president Donald Trump's Florida estate last week. The Associated Press, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, CBS, and the other broadcast TV networks, CNN, and others want magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart to release the affidavit.

USA Today wasn't named there, but all those major mainstream news organizations were, and then it goes on to say Trump in a post last week called for the release of the unredacted affidavit in the interest of transparency. We have the major news organizations and Donald Trump on the same side in court this afternoon.

Susan Page: Go figure out fake news and Donald Trump. Yet, probably as the lawyer who wrote in said probably not enough we think to persuade a Judge to go ahead.

Brian Lehrer: The CBS story on itself really says the companies argue the affidavit's release would help the public determine if the Justice Department had legitimate reasons for the search or if it was part of a Biden administration vendetta against Trump as the former president and his backers content. We will see what happens there this afternoon and so much more on all these threads which obviously we will continue to follow as will our guests, Susan Page, Washington bureau chief of USA Today, and author of books, including Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi and the Lessons of Power and The Matriarch: Barbara Bush and the Making of an American Dynasty. Susan, we always appreciate it. Thank you so much.

Susan Page: Brian, it's always a pleasure. Thank you.

 

Copyright © 2022 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.