Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
NY Post: Black Glove Found Near Nancy Guthrie's Home; Bondi Clashes With Lawmakers In Explosive Hearing; Johnson Changes Tune On Failed DOJ Indictment Against Six Dems. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired February 11, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): --and yet for all everyone knows about this outgoing, optimistic, accomplished woman, it's the unanswered questions that trouble now. Where is she? How is she? And when will she be back home?
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NANCY GUTHRIE'S DAUGHTER: We love you, mom.
ANNIE GUTHRIE, NANCY GUTHRIE'S DAUGHTER: We love you, mom.
CAMRON GUTHRIE, NANCY GUTHRIE'S SON: We love you, mom. Stay strong.
A. GUTHRIE: We love you.
FOREMAN (voice-over): Tom Foreman. CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Well that's it for us. The news continues.
"THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: And we do have breaking news tonight, as investigators are sweeping the area around Nancy Guthrie's home, this evening, and may have found a potential clue in their search on its 11th day.
The New York Post reports tonight that as officials were scouring the roadside, less than two miles from where Nancy Guthrie lives, they recovered a black glove, that you can see here. Obviously, that picture immediately caught everyone's attention, given the footage that was released by the FBI shows the armed individual who approached Guthrie's home, and her front door, wearing these dark gloves, as you can see here.
Right now, what we still don't know, as we come on air tonight, is whether or not authorities in Arizona believe that is the same glove that was being worn by the person in that doorbell camera footage. The FBI is declining to comment on this new discovery, as a spokesperson for the Pima County Sheriff's Department also said they don't have any details to confirm tonight either.
This comes as law enforcement officials tell our colleague, John Miller, that investigators are also looking at the type of backpack that the person was seen carrying in this camera footage. Of course, when he goes, this person, to get the plant as he was trying to cover up the camera, you can see a pretty good image of what that backpack looked like.
John Miller will join us in just a moment with his latest reporting.
And all of this is coming tonight, as the search for more clues are continuing in new places. That includes the foothills about a mile north of Nancy Guthrie's home, where investigators were seen searching the roadways and combing through shrubs in the desert. One source tells us the FBI agents are looking for anything else that armed individual could have dropped.
And this latest search comes after the man who was detained in last night's traffic stop that we were covering here, near the Mexico border, has now been released. Authorities say that they were following up on incoming leads, when they stopped him, and that he was known to investigators before the FBI had released that recovered surveillance footage.
A search warrant allowed investigators to not search just his home and his car, but also to question him. And after he was let go, there has been no activity around his home since then. This person told reporters that he hopes investigators can actually find the suspect here, so they can clear his name.
Authorities have been sorting through more than 4,000 tips, we know, since the FBI released these shocking and chilling images of the person on Nancy Guthrie's doorstep. Right now, they are offering a $50,000 reward if you can offer any information here.
But one thing that has stood out, as we have been piecing through the information, and what we've learned in the images that we've seen, is so far, they've remained tight-lipped when it comes to answering any questions about how the investigation is progressing. The FBI has not had a public briefing in nearly a week. And when it comes to the Pima County Sheriff's Office, they said they'll call a news conference should a significant development occur.
I want to bring in my investigative and legal sources tonight.
And as I mentioned, CNN's Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst, John Miller is here.
Our former FBI Deputy Director, Andrew McCabe.
And also the former federal prosecutor, Elie Honig is here.
And John, first, can we start with the image of this glove? Because I know they're not saying whether or not they know or believe that it is the glove the person was wearing as they approached Nancy Guthrie's front door. What are they doing with that glove right now, to try to figure out if it was that person's?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT & INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, they don't know either. But that glove is on its way to the FBI Lab at Quantico. And there, a host of experts are going to examine it in a very specific order of scientific disciplines, because one examination affects another.
And they're going to be looking for all of the things that a glove that could have been worn by a perpetrator in this crime might offer. And that includes, number one, potential for DNA on the inside, potential for DNA, or perhaps even a full or partial fingerprint on the outside, in that it has that smooth, shiny outside, potential for hair or fiber that could tie it to the scene.
But overarching fact that we all know that has worried all of us is, remember, the individual who came in appears to have come out from the front door with the victim, and that there is blood on that front set of steps leading out to the driveway.
[21:05:00]
If the person who used those gloves to get in the house, used those gloves carrying Nancy Guthrie out, there is also the potential, which would be very probative in a case like this, in terms of tying that glove, not just to a perpetrator, but also to the crime, that there could be traces of her blood on that glove if it's connected to this.
The final thing is, this was a good strategy to expand the search in a -- in a linear way, outward from the crime scene. Finding this glove gives a couple of potential clues beyond itself, if it's connected. One, a direction of flight. What way did they leave if they tossed that out the window? And two, to expand that further, because if you tossed a glove out of the car, discarding evidence at that spot, did you toss another one out a mile further, and perhaps a ski mask, or something else?
So, the investigative strategy was a smart thing to do. The question is, is this glove going to be connected or not?
COLLINS: John, can I ask you, though, because some people might look at this tonight, and say, OK, we're on day 11 of this search. They just found this glove tonight, about two miles from Nancy Guthrie's home. Less than two miles, is what we're told. Are you surprised, John, that they didn't find this sooner?
MILLER: No, because they know things in the last 48 hours that they didn't know before. Their original searches were in concentric circles out from the house, looking for potentially a body that may have been taken out or left, or other evidence in the immediate area.
The idea that they now saw this person, and they said, There's a mask, there's gloves, there's things that we now know what we're looking for. Seeing a glove on the side of the road eight days ago might not just have been significant to them. But the idea that they knew what they were looking for, and they could go in multiple directions, where there's only two directions a car could have gone from that house, to go in both directions, looking for it, was a good call.
COLLINS: Well, and Andrew McCabe. John obviously mentioned the blood that we know was Nancy Guthrie's, that was found right outside the front door of the house that matched her.
Beyond looking for those potential traces there, the DNA, the fiber, is there -- are there other things that the investigators could glean from this glove, if it does belong to that person, in terms of the size of their hands, matching their profiles, they're still trying to build out who this person was, and potentially, where they bought the gloves from. That kind of history, or anything like that?
ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST, FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: Yes, certainly. I'm not sure how much they would get from the size of the glove, because it's hard to say how hard of a correlation there is between hand size and height or weight. You pretty much are going to get height and fairly consistent weight estimates from just the photographs that we saw yesterday, the photographs that you have, the video that you have up there running on the screen now.
But definitely, the provenance of the glove, like, where does it come from, who manufactured it, what sort of compounds are in it. And, more importantly, who sells that glove? Are there one -- or is there one, or are there multiple locations in the immediate area that sell the glove? Is it something that you could -- that most people purchase on Amazon? All those -- the answers to those questions help you create a population of individuals, who might be that person on the video.
And while the identification of individuals who purchased that glove, either in that area, or in the timeframe that they think is relevant, that single fact alone may not lead you to the person on the video. But it's the cumulative effect of being able to do that sort of analysis with the glove, and then maybe with something else, like the backpack, which we know they're also investigating pretty strenuously right now, where the backpack comes from, who sells it, what's the model name, that sort of thing.
So, when you start to layer those factors on top of each other, that population of purchasers who picked up all of those items starts to get very small and very manageable, and then--
COLLINS: Yes.
MCCABE: And that's, of course, a group that you then go out and try to find and interview, and rule in or out.
COLLINS: John, what can you tell us about the backpack? Because I know you have new reporting on how they're looking at that as well.
MILLER: Well, the backpack is something that they have been working to identify. We ran similar identifications to see, well, who made this backpack? What kind is it? And it's the same thing that Andy McCabe is talking about. OK. So, who ordered that backpack? Who ordered that backpack around Tucson? Who ordered that backpack which looks brand- new, around Tucson, at a time that might be not long before this kidnapping?
[21:10:00]
And at some point, the FBI will likely come out with a set of announcements, which is, This glove was made by these people, the backpack by this manufacturer, and so on, to say, Do you know somebody who bought these items, or has these items?
COLLINS: Yes.
Elie, I mean, just overall, as we're talking about the make and manufacturer of this backpack. It's made by the brand that Walmart carries, we know from John's reporting tonight. The glove. Right now, it's a single glove. We'll see if they find a second one, or what exactly that looks like.
But they've also gotten 18,000 tips into their lines since those pictures came out. As we've been looking at them. And I heard Mary Ellen O'Toole talking to Anderson earlier, talking about the lights in the background, all of this.
How are you looking at this tonight?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: So first of all, the tips are just a question of personnel. You have to divide them up by subject matter. They're probably falling into certain different buckets. And then it's just a matter of running them down. I know Andy McCabe and John Miller have both done that in their careers.
The glove, to me, is really interesting, because there's two investigative questions. One, as John was laying out, is this glove linked to the crime scene? And given all the types of DNA and fingerprint potential -- potentialities in that glove, if it was a glove used at the crime scene? Odds are pretty good they'll be able to make that connection. That's number one.
But then number two is, can they link that glove--
COLLINS: Even if it's been sitting out in the desert zone--
HONIG: Oh, sure.
COLLINS: --for a 11 days and these--
HONIG: Yes, that--
COLLINS: --to find?
HONIG: DNA and fingerprints can absolutely survive for that long. I've had cases where DNA survived for years.
COLLINS: OK. HONIG: The second key question, though, is, if they make that link, then can they link the glove to a specific person? There is not some universal DNA database that has everyone in the state or everyone in the country's DNA in it. Different states do it differently.
But generally speaking, you're only going to have DNA in that database if you've voluntarily given it in for some reason. People sometimes do that for security reasons, for children. Or if you've been previously arrested. A lot of arrests have mandatory DNA testing upon intake. So, you can do it that way.
Or alternatively, if you have someone who becomes a person of interest, you can get a search warrant and swab them, usually inside the cheek, take a DNA sample from that person, see if it matches.
COLLINS: Are you surprised, last night, by them detaining this guy, questioning him for hours, searching his home, which they got a search warrant for, obviously. But, I mean, understandably, he seemed very shocked by it all, when he was speaking today. Does it surprise you that they called someone who seemed that off base to them?
HONIG: I don't second-guess them for that. I think you have to run down every possibility here.
And this is a good example of why when we say when people get -- when prosecutors get search warrants, it's a lower standard. It's probable cause. You don't want to have to show proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And sometimes, you have enough for the search warrant, but it's not the right guy. That's what happened here. I don't fault them at all for trying.
COLLINS: OK.
Elie Honig. Andy McCabe. John Miller.
If you hear anything new, John Miller, please let us know. We'll check back in with you.
Anyone at home, I mentioned those 18,000 tips, if you have any information, or any of these images, or what you're seeing here, from the gloves or the backpack stands out to you, please call the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI.
We're going to check back in on the search for Nancy Guthrie this hour, as it is very much continuing right now.
Also, here in Washington, that furious, expletive-laced reaction to the Trump administration's attempt to seek indictments against six Democratic lawmakers. It backfired spectacularly.
But the insults are not in shortage here on Capitol Hill today. There was a combative hearing with the Attorney General. And I don't even know if, Goes off the rails is the way to put it. But this is what happened.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Didn't ask Merrick Garland anything about Epstein, not once, when he was--
REP. BECCA BALINT (D-VT): Weak sauce. Weak sauce.
BONDI: And also, I want the record to reflect that -- you know, with this antisemitic culture right now, she voted against a resolution condemning--
BALINT: Oh. Oh.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just want to be clear--
BALINT: Oh. Do you want to go there, Attorney General?
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Time -- time -- time belongs to the Gentle--
BALINT: Do you want to go there?
JORDAN: Time belongs to the Gentle--
BALINT: Are you serious?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: There are heated hearings on Capitol Hill. And then there's what happened today.
As Attorney General, Pam Bondi, was testifying in front of the House Judiciary Committee, what was supposed to be an oversight hearing devolved into shouting matches with Democrats, and Republican Thomas Massie who wrote the bill forcing this Justice Department to release what they have on Jeffrey Epstein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): You're not going to answer this question, so let me just say this.
BONDI: Chairman, I'll direct it to you.
JAYAPAL: What a massive cover-up--
BONDI: No, I'm answering a question.
REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Mr. Chairman, will you restore her time? The witness is interrupting.
JAYAPAL: Stop the time--
BONDI: I'm not going to get in the gutter with this woman. She's doing theatrics.
JAYAPAL: Stop the time and let me have my turn.
RASKIN: You can let her filibuster all day long, but not on our watch, not on our time.
REP. JERROLD NADLER (D-NY): Reclaiming--
RASKIN: No way.
NADLER: Reclaiming--
RASKIN: And I told you about that, Attorney General, before you started.
BONDI: You don't tell me anything, you washed-up loser lawyer.
RASKIN: Oh, I did tell you because we saw what you did in the Senate.
BONDI: Not even a lawyer.
REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): Here's -- here's the question.
BONDI: This is a political joke and I need to give my answer on that.
JORDAN: Yes. We'll let the -- we'll let the Attorney General respond and then the gentleman can move to his next question.
MASSIE: Chairman, this is my time. Chairman--
BONDI: Within 40 minutes -- you asked me a question.
MASSIE: You can give me--
BONDI: Within 40 minutes, Wexner's name was added back--
MASSIE: Within 40 minutes of me catching you red-handed.
BONDI: Red-handed -- there was one redaction out of over 4,700.
MASSIE: Where he's listed as a co-conspirator.
JORDAN: OK.
BONDI: And we invited you in.
MASSIE: You know what? Show the video--
JORDAN: Gentleman--
BONDI: We -- and this guy has Trump derangement syndrome.
JORDAN: Gentleman--
BONDI: He needs to -- you're a failed politician. You need to--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Gentleman, time to--
MASSIE: This cover-up spans decades, and you are responsible for this portion of it.
BONDI: He is the most transparent president in the nation's history. And none of them, none of them asked Merrick Garland over the last four years one word about Jeffrey Epstein. How ironic is that? You know why? Because Donald Trump -- the Dow. The Dow right now is over -- the Dow is over 50,000 -- I don't know why you're laughing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00]
COLLINS: Amid all that yelling, there were two moments from the Attorney General that also stood out, when she was questioned, one, about Ghislaine Maxwell's prison transfer, where she went to a much cushier prison, and also, potential new investigations regarding Epstein's orbit.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DEBORAH ROSS (D-NC): Who ordered her to be transferred to the minimum security prison that she was ineligible for? Who signed off on the special privileges? Was it Mr. Blanche? Was it one of your other subordinates?
BONDI: She was transferred, I learned, after the fact, to the same level facility, and that is a question for the Bureau of Prisons. I was not involved in that at all. The same level facility. I don't know why.
REP. CHIP ROY (R-TX): Well, I want to know, will anyone besides her or Epstein, which I congratulate President Trump's previous administration and this Department of Justice for continuing all of that, but that they were indicted. But will anyone else be indicted and prosecuted under this, given the information that's in front of us?
BONDI: We have pending investigations in our office.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Joining me tonight is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig.
Elie, who's in charge of the Bureau of Prisons?
HONIG: The United States Department of Justice, which is led by the Attorney General.
And when Pam Bondi gave answers like that, there's only two possibilities. She doesn't know, or she's intentionally misleading. Either way, it is a big problem. I think it's a perfect example of all that was wrong today. Because, this hearing that we sat through, I sat through, today, for six hours, was just a straight-up embarrassment. There's no other way to put it. It's everything that you are taught not to do as a prosecutor.
I'll tell you a quick thing. Before I gave my first-ever jury address, the night before, I asked my supervisor at DOJ, What am I supposed to do tomorrow? And he said, Be clear, calm and credible.
OK, clear. Did Pam Bondi clarify anything today? Do we know anything more of any use that we did yesterday? Calm? I mean, you showed the clips. That was ridiculous. Credible? Who believes her when she's railing about the Dow, and Donald Trump is the greatest president in U.S. history. You think she's a straight shooter? Is she calling it straight? That was an embarrassment.
COLLINS: Well, and she was obviously appealing to an audience of the President with that performance, going after Democrats. And she's done that before. But I think this is an issue that even Republicans want answers to, on Ghislaine Maxwell and on this.
But just overall. Merrick Garland was invoked. But I was thinking, I don't remember Bill Barr's -- or Bill Barr's hearings going like that, or Jeff Sessions, or any of the Republican attorney generals--
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: --in recent memory.
HONIG: I wrote a whole book criticizing Bill Barr. But he didn't conduct himself anything like that.
And to the Epstein points that you raised. The specific problems that I think the lawmakers rightly raised are, number one, there is zero clarity, still to this moment, as to whether there is or is not an investigation, criminal investigation, of anyone else around the Epstein case.
Pam Bondi has said there is, at times. Todd Blanche has said there is not, and it's OK to party with Mr. Epstein. And today we got sort of this admission--
COLLINS: He did say it's OK. He said it's not a crime.
HONIG: He said it's not a crime -- you're right -- It's not a crime to party with Mr. Epstein. Not a line I'd want attached to me.
And then today, we still don't have any clarity.
And the other thing, as Massie and others pointed out, is there are over-redactions of names that should not have been redacted under the law, and under-redactions that revealed victim information. She doesn't have a good answer.
COLLINS: Well, and Thomas Massie was on this show, two nights ago, and he had pointed out that when he went in, there were names that had been redacted, that he could not even -- that he saw in there that should not have been redacted, people like the former CEO of Victoria's Secret.
She was saying today, Well, we unredacted it within 40 minutes. But only after Thomas Massie criticized them over it.
But there was a point where she had this kind of like she was looking at her binder a lot, and she had a lot of insults or comebacks for these Democrats and Republicans. Jared Moskowitz of Florida basically made fun of her for at the end of his five minutes, and this is what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JARED MOSKOWITZ (D-FL): So because I'm curious, and I just I'd like to see, flip to the Jared Moskowitz section of the binder. I'm interested to see what staff provided on the oppo on me. And because we're in the Olympics, I'm going to give it a grade. I just want to see how good it is.
(LAUGHTER)
MOSKOWITZ: So give me your best one.
BONDI: So, first of all, nothing is funny about mocking the Bible and holding up a Trump Bible--
MOSKOWITZ: I'm not--
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Thomas Massie wrote after and said, a funny thing about her insults to members of Congress who had serious questions. Staff literally gave her flash cards with individualized insults, but she could not memorize them, so you can see her shuffle through to find the flash-card-insult that matches the member.
People might laugh at that. But also, when you look at the pictures of what she brought with her, you could see the search history of certain lawmakers when they go to the Justice Department to look up the unredacted Epstein files. This was on, it says Pramila Jayapal's Search History of the specific documents of the Epstein files that she had looked up on DOJ computers.
[21:25:00]
HONIG: Good God. The fact that the A.G. is putting together comedy roast material before she goes in to testify in the House, I think, speaks for itself. And let's not lose sight of it. The utter ridiculousness of what we saw today should not obscure the destructiveness of it. I mean, here we have a person who has enormous power. She's in charge--
COLLINS: Wait. Say that again?
HONIG: The utter ridiculousness of what we saw today should not distract from the destructiveness of it. Because we have the person who's in charge of all of the Justice Department, Bureau of Prisons, FBI, U.S. attorneys, and she's up there, trying to crack jokes, yelling at people, giving no straight answers, giving answers that I don't think anyone in the American public can credit or can learn anything of value from.
COLLINS: Elie Honig, thank you for that.
HONIG: Other than that, I have no feelings on the matter.
COLLINS: Yes. Clearly, no strong ones.
My next source, speaking of, has also built a legendary career when it comes to standing up to rich and powerful. She has led Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, founded The Daily Beast, and was among the very few who published aggressive reporting on Jeffrey Epstein, 15 years ago, refusing to be intimidated by his wealth, his influence, or his legal threats. That is Tina Brown, and she joins me now.
And I'm so grateful to have you here.
Because just beyond today alone, I don't think people thought that the Jeffrey Epstein saga would consume this much of Trump's second term. But what do you make of how this has played out?
TINA BROWN, WRITER, FRESH HELL SUBSTACK NEWSLETTER, FORMER EDITOR-IN- CHIEF, THE DAILY BEAST: It's absolutely stunning to see the kind of level of sort of putrid sewage that's just spewing out through these emails now, embracing everybody, so many big names, so many -- so many, supposedly, prominent members of the establishment. It's gone global. I mean, it's nearly brought down the British government. It's even rocking the Norwegian royal family.
It's really remarkable how this story has metastasized. And I see no end of it, because there's so many of these emails coming out, and like this tranches of stories in each kind of grouping of these emails. I mean, you could go on with this for years.
The ironic thing, of course, though is, is that, at first, it was all about Trump not releasing the files, and MAGA being very angry that he hadn't. But in this incredibly deft way that he has, of turning things on their head, now it's really become a fantastic destruction -- distraction for Trump from all of the other bad stuff that's happening to him. His bad polling, and the Minneapolis outrages, and all of these things that he's grappling with. Everybody just talks about Epstein's sleaze. So, it's actually working for him now, I think.
COLLINS: But do you think it's working in his favor if -- you know, Pam Bondi is there being questioned about why is Ghislaine Maxwell moved to a lighter security prison? Why are men's names redacted when only victims or survivors are supposed to be redacted?
BROWN: I think Trump only cares about Trump. I mean, he's thrown Pam Bondi to the wind or -- into the wolves already. I mean, her performance was just for one customer only, which was Donald Trump. She has to emote, she has to insult. Those are the things that Trump is looking for, in one of his subordinates, to make that performance on television.
I think she came off as absolutely absurd today. I think the most absurd thing she said was that she didn't know anything about Ghislaine Maxwell being moved to a different level security prison. When, in fact, she's over the department, you know, the Bureau of Prisons. That was like, Who is she kidding here? It was so preposterous. But I think she's just waffling and panicking her way through this hearing, completely with no answers, let's face it.
COLLINS: You are actually named in the Epstein documents. You're probably the only person named who's not worried about that. That's because you had written in The Daily Beast, and the emails show that he was panicked. As you would put it. He was basically having someone spy on you because he was so worried about what you were -- what you were writing about him, how you were covering him, wanting to get you to take down the critical things you had said about him.
How do you feel looking through all of this?
BROWN: I want to have a T-shirt made with one -- this PR wrote him, how do we neutralize Tina Brown? So, I just -- that would be a nice--
COLLINS: You can't.
BROWN: --a nice T-shirt. It's like -- I love that so much when I read that.
It's a strange feeling, because it actually gives me the second sort of half of a story that I was, of course, only involved in the other half, which was publishing the stories at The Daily Beast, that were the first comprehensive story about the sweetheart deal that Epstein made in Florida, and the fact that there were so many other women that have not been allowed to be mentioned in this case.
So, I was busy sort of publishing that at The Beast. We were doing that story. Meanwhile, the emails show how he and his -- this PR person, who was spying on me, were desperately trying to figure out, like, what they could do to stop other stories coming out. So, it's kind of fascinating to see that, that other side of things.
[21:30:00]
But it's also kind of disheartening, because the PR lady in question, I mean, you know, I thought she was sort of a friend of mine, and now I discover that, in fact, she was sort of absolutely his stooge, it seems, and was trying to figure out ways to stop us doing our journalism.
So, it's a strange feeling being in those files, I have to say. And what you feel reading them is, is that it's like a sort of underground railroad of sort of upper echelon decadence. You know? It's like Epstein had this talent for just making people feel -- giving them permission to be their most decadent selves. You know? It's a kind of weird spell he was able to cast on everybody in his network, so that they all feel that it's special to somehow be part of his -- of his sordid world. It's quite a remarkable magnetism that he had.
COLLINS: Yes, it's safe to say they're not feeling special now.
BROWN: They don't. COLLINS: Tina Brown, it is always great to have you. And thank you for the work that you did do this--
BROWN: Thank you.
COLLINS: --on this then, especially when he was trying to intimidate people out of covering him.
And for everyone, you have to read Tina's Substack newsletter. It is called Fresh Hell. Appropriately so. And it is a great thing to read.
BROWN: Thank you.
COLLINS: Thank you, Tina Brown, for joining us tonight.
BROWN: Thank you, Kaitlan. Thank you.
COLLINS: Up next tonight. My source is one of those six Democrats who was featured in that so-called video that -- where they talked about illegal orders. The Justice Department wanted to get people indicted on this. A grand jury said, Thanks, but no thanks. And we'll get reaction from one of those senators, next.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): If these (bleep) do think they're going to intimidate and bully me and get me to back down from doing my duty, they have another thing coming.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: OK, we bleeped it, but you get the gist of how Congressman Jason Crow feels.
Tonight, he is part of a furious Democratic uproar that is underway, against the President and his Department of Justice, after they tried and failed to get a grand jury to indict Congressman Crow, and five other Democratic lawmakers, who all made that video, urging service members to not obey illegal orders.
A source tells CNN that Senate Democrats are actually going to hold a meeting about this tomorrow morning, and that the Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer, is promising this won't go unchecked.
Joining me tonight is a source who took part in that video to service members, having been one himself, and he has been part of the targets of the President's ever since. Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona is here.
First, what went through your mind when you heard that they actually did try to indict you over this video?
SEN. MARK KELLY (D-AZ): Well, I mean, we got a little heads-up, and then we didn't know the outcome. And then we learned, a little bit later last night, that they failed to get an indictment. And you know, I got some texts from people talking about, Oh, this is great -- this is great news. And I'm like, This is not great news.
This is Donald Trump trying to -- trying to break the system, him and his cronies, trying to break a system that's in place for 250 years, trying to weaponize the Department of Justice against sitting members of Congress, because we said something that he didn't like.
It's rather simple. I mean, he wants myself and Elissa Slotkin and four House members to go to prison, because we restated what was in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I mean, has that ever happened in our country's history? I mean, we're a separate branch of government. I have a responsibility to my constituents, people who voted for me to do my job. Donald Trump doesn't like how I'm doing my job. And for that, he wants me to go to prison.
COLLINS: Do you think they'll try to do so again?
KELLY: I would not put anything past these guys. We've seen this before. This is also right out of the authoritarian playbook. We see stuff like this in other countries, right? This happens in places like China and Russia. But this happened this week, right here, the United States of America, in Washington, D.C.
COLLINS: And some people might look at this and say, Well, the President -- it's not just that he wants this to happen. He has people willing to try to make this happen.
I talked to one person who worked for Trump in his first term. I won't say who it was. They texted me right after and said, This is un- American, and that no reasonable lawyer would believe there was a probable cause to support an indictment. That person should probably be disbarred who tried to bring it.
I mean, when you look at that, and you look at how many times he's tried to get other people indicted. Senate Democrats are meeting tomorrow. What do you want your colleagues to do?
KELLY: Well, we're going to talk about this, because this is not just about me, it's not just about Elissa Slotkin. I mean, this is about all of us, all of us in the Senate. Also about the Republicans, by the way. This is their body too, and they've got to try to defend this as an institution.
We're a separate branch of government, come before the presidency, Article I. If this becomes a new norm? Will fundamentally change our democracy going forward. So, we can't allow this to happen. I mean, we're trying to sort through, like, what are -- you know, what are our next steps.
And by the way, this President, he's not like he was in 2016. To me--
COLLINS: What do you mean?
[21:40:00] KELLY: Well, he just feels like a different guy, almost, and there's a level of vindictiveness. And if he perceives you as an enemy, he's going to go after you, and he's -- and I really don't expect him to, like, give up anytime soon. We've seen this with other people that he -- you know, he tries to do this again, or takes a different approach.
And you mentioned those people that work for him. Jeanine Pirro, and Pam Bondi. I watched some of that hearing today. And you can -- you can see that when these folks in the administration come before the Senate and the House, that they're performing for one person. And that's the President.
COLLINS: House Speaker Mike Johnson, I want you to listen to what he said yesterday after they failed to get this indictment of y'all, and what he said today about this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): I mean, look, I think that any time you're obstructing law enforcement and getting in the way of these sensitive operations, it's a very serious thing, and it probably is a crime. And, yes, they probably should be indicted.
It's a very dangerous gambit that they were playing. Should they be sent to jail? Probably not. But we need to call it out as being wildly inappropriate, and they need to course correct.
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: But you think they should be indicted?
JOHNSON: I don't -- I don't know what the terms of it were. I don't know what the charges were, what was being sought. I'm not -- I can't evaluate something I haven't seen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Between that, and John Thune saying today that the failed indictment was the justice system at work I guess.
Is that what you're seeing?
KELLY: I guess, no. I mean, I think this is an attack on our democracy. I mean, we should have never found ourselves in this position, with this president saying we should be hanged, and then executed, and now prosecuted.
They're trying to demote me, after spending 25 years in the United States Navy, flying 39 combat missions. I flew the space shuttle four times. I served in the Navy for 25 years. They're trying to take away my rank and take away my pay.
And what the hell is Mike Johnson talking about? Obstructing law enforcement? Does he have any idea what he is even talking about?
And by the way, I mean, John Thune seems to sort of get it. Not a very strong statement. Mike Johnson is supposed to be the Speaker of the House of Representatives. I mean, he has an incredibly -- I mean, one of the most important, I'd say the second most important job in the country, after the President, ahead of the Vice President. And that's the way he acts? I mean, who is he -- it seems to me that he is, maybe not the Speaker of the House, but he is there representing the President in that building.
COLLINS: You want to see him put out a stronger statement?
KELLY: Mike Johnson, I want to see him, at least understand the facts of what we're talking about. He seems kind of clueless about the whole thing.
With regards to John Thune, this affects his members too. And, by the way, he's the Majority Leader. He's the top -- you know, the top senator. And I think he has a responsibility to defend the institution. And this institution will be significantly damaged if they continue to pursue this line of attack, against myself and Senator Slotkin.
Again, this President wants to throw us into prison, because of something we said, that was lawful in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It sends a chilling effect, not just to the Senate. There are over 2 million retired service members across the country, similar to me. I've spoken to retired admirals and generals who now have changed what they say and do, because of what this President is doing to me.
COLLINS: That's remarkable.
Can I also ask you tonight. Because you talked about your service, you talked about the space shuttle. I mean, you're from Arizona.
KELLY: Right.
COLLINS: And one thing I didn't realize until earlier was you actually live, you and Gabby, not far from where Savannah Guthrie's mom lives.
KELLY: That's correct.
COLLINS: And I just wonder, as you're looking at this and how this has just gripped everyone tonight, and it's so horrifying, what you make of, of how this search has played out, and what's underway in your home state.
KELLY: It's horrible. And I was talking to the Pima County Sheriff, just yesterday about this, getting an update from him. Chris Nanos, the Sheriff. And he's in close coordination with the FBI. The FBI put a lot of resources there. I appreciate that. He's got nearly 200 investigators, working this, to try to bring Nancy Guthrie home.
It has rallied the community in Tucson. We've been through like hard stuff like this before, in 2011, when my wife, Gabby, was nearly assassinated. It brings the community together. I know Savannah has a lot of support there in Tucson. I just implore anybody who has any information to please call the Pima County Sheriff's Office, the FBI, their local police department. Don't assume that it's not helpful. If you have some information, please call.
COLLINS: Yes, that's a really good point.
Senator Kelly, thank you for joining us tonight.
KELLY: Thank you.
COLLINS: Really appreciate it.
[21:45:00]
And also, I want to note something else that happened on Capitol Hill tonight that we don't usually see in Washington these days. And speaking to what the Senator was just saying there, Republicans defecting from President Trump. There were six members of the House GOP that joined with Democrats, in a vote tonight, to effectively repeal President Trump's tariffs on Canada.
Although the House Speaker Mike Johnson, who we saw at the White House earlier on the campus, claiming that the President was not upset, and that he understands what's going on with these votes against his tariffs.
The President contradicted that a few minutes later, when he posted that, Any Republican, in the House or the Senate, that votes against TARIFFS will seriously suffer the consequences come Election time, and that includes Primaries.
Now, of course, even if this does pass the Senate, the President could block it with a veto. That would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers to override that. It's not likely to happen. But still, those six House Republicans voted for it, knowing all of that.
Up next for us tonight. We're going to check back in on our coverage on the ground in Arizona. Investigators have been pouring through thousands of tips that they have gotten just since releasing those images of the armed individual.
[21:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Back to our breaking news tonight, as we are now a 11 days into the search for Savannah Guthrie's mother, Nancy Guthrie, with investigators have reportedly found a potentially significant clue, which is that black glove, is about a mile and a half from where Nancy Guthrie lives.
They haven't yet offered any comments on this from the authorities today. It's still unclear if they think it's actually the same glove that was worn by the armed individual, who approached Guthrie's front door in that surveillance footage. But it does come as we know, investigators have been sifting through more than 4,000 tips in just the last 24 hours alone.
The former FBI Deputy Director, Andrew McCabe, is back with me.
And I think a big question is, when you're looking through so many tips, and people may not know what's a good tip, what's a legitimate tip, how do they figure that out? How do they know if they're credible or helpful to what they're already looking through?
MCCABE: Sure. So, the first -- the first answer to your question is, you have to have professionals doing this work. And fortunately, the FBI has those resources at a place called the Criminal Justice Information Services Division, which is located in West Virginia. And so, these folks man the FBI tip lines every single day. So, this is all they do, is triage incoming information to the FBI, and figure out how to prioritize that information and where to send it.
And in a moment like this, where we have this incredibly intensive case that requires additional resources, they're able to surge multiple people to this effort to kind of keep up with that volume. 2,000 tips. We've seen numbers along the lines of 18,000 tips in the last 48 hours.
So, those folks are going through those. These are human beings that review every single one of these tips, whether they come in on telephones or email, and they make those sort -- they do some preliminary work. They check the names that are referenced in the tips. They check things like addresses and phone numbers to see if those pieces of information already exist in FBI files. And they send those tips on to the investigators who will be responsible for them.
In this case, of course, all the tips relating to the Guthrie investigation will go out to the Phoenix Field Office and the Tucson suboffice, where those tips will be assigned to investigators in the field immediately.
COLLINS: Does it surprise you that we haven't heard or had any briefings held by authorities, in about a week? Not even when that video came out yesterday. Does that say anything to you when you see that?
MCCABE: Yes, it's a little concerning, to be perfectly honest, particularly in a case where part of your strategy, a big part of your strategy, is maintaining public awareness of what you're doing. And by doing -- by maintaining that awareness, you are further encouraging the public to reach out and call in with information that they have.
So, it's a pretty easy way to continue to pump up that public recognition and involvement, by getting out there and conducting press conferences on a regular basis. Even if you don't have a lot of information that you can share, you can still get up there, give a brief update, and answer questions.
I think it's questionable why FBI leadership hasn't engaged in that level, particularly since we know that the FBI Director has been, personally, has been in Arizona, in the last few days. He might not be there any longer, but he's been there, but we haven't seen him in that traditional FBI Director leadership role.
COLLINS: Yes, a lot of questions about what they know.
And he was, of course, the one sharing the images, posting them. So, some said it was surprising not to hear from him directly.
Andrew McCabe, thanks so much for updating us on that.
We'll continue to check to see when and if they will hold a press conference.
We have another update. We'll be right back just after this.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES VAN DER BEEK, ACTOR, "DAWSON'S CREEK": (As Dawson Leery): Last year, you had the opportunity to go to Paris and study, and because of me, you didn't.
KATIE HOLMES, ACTRESS, "DAWSON'S CREEK": (As Joey Potter): Dawson, that wasn't your fault.
VAN DER BEEK: (As Dawson Leery): Yes, it was my fault, because I should have made you go. But I was selfish, and I didn't want you to go. I wanted you to stay here with me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Tonight, friends, family, fans, all mourning the death of the actor James Van Der Beek, who passed away today at the age of 48. His role as Dawson, on the hit show, "Dawson's Creek," launched him into stardom, leading to huge screen roles, like the ambitious backup quarterback, Jonathan "Mox" Moxon in "Varsity Blues."
And during his battle with Stage 3 colorectal cancer, Van Der Beek opened up, at times, about his own mortality.
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN DER BEEK: If I am just a too-skinny, weak guy alone in an apartment with cancer, what am I?
And I meditated and the answer came through. I am worthy of God's love.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I should note, he leaves behind his wife and his six children. And of course, they are in our prayers tonight. May his memory be a blessing. Thank you so much for joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
