Return to Transcripts main page

Erin Burnett Outfront

Guthrie Pleads For Public's Help As Ransom Deadline Passes At 7 P.M. ET; New Details From Epstein Files As Lawmakers View Unredacted Docs; MAGA Feuds Over Trump's Trashing Of Bad Bunny. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired February 09, 2026 - 19:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[19:00:33]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:

Breaking news, the search for Nancy Guthrie entering the, quote, "hour of desperation". Savannah Guthrie pleading with the public to help before a 7:00 p.m. deadline.

As TMZ's Harvey Levin has new details about the bitcoin account, which Guthrie's captors may be using. He's our guest.

And breaking news, lawmakers revealing for the first time what Trump's DOJ blacked out in the Epstein files. Some of it. So, what exactly were some of the most outrageous redactions?

One of the members of Congress who's just viewed the unredacted files is our guest tonight.

And MAGA voices pushing back on Trump after he called Bad Bunny's performance, quote, "absolutely terrible". Our John King is in southern Texas. Is slamming Bad Bunny, bad politics?

Let's go OUTFRONT.

(MUSIC)

BURNETT: And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.

OUTFRONT tonight, the breaking news of a cry for help. Savannah Guthrie in a new video for the first time, making a plea to the public. She looks into the camera, begging for tips, not addressing her mother's alleged captor, as we have seen in all other previous videos from Savannah and her siblings.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC NEWS ANCHOR: We believe our mom is still out there. We need your help. Law enforcement is working tirelessly around the clock trying to bring her home, trying to find her. She was taken and we don't know where. And we need your help. We are at an hour of desperation, and we need your help

(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: Guthrie's desperate plea coming 3-1/2 hours before the second deadline, which was given as 7:00 Eastern tonight obviously, just a couple of minutes ago. That's according to the original alleged ransom note. A note which demanded $6 million by 5:00 p.m. local time. That's 7:00 Eastern, according to our affiliate KGUN.

But according to TMZ, the bitcoin account referenced in the ransom note still has a zero balance over the weekend, Savannah Guthrie and her family did respond to the ransom message, saying that they would pay to have their mother returned to them. It's all coming, as investigators were seen examining a septic tank near Guthrie's home, as well as visiting Savannah's sister's home, where Nancy Guthrie went for dinner the night of her disappearance.

Now, in just a moment, we're going to be joined by TMZ's Harvey Levin who received that original ransom note. First, though, let's go to Tucson, Arizona, and our own Ed Lavandera.

And, Ed, what are you learning there on the ground? Savannah calling this the hour of desperation. And of course, we're now past what? That alleged letter said was the final deadline

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. As the news kind of focuses on this ransom situation and trying to make sense of what that could be, investigators here in Tucson say they will be returning back here to the home area around where Nancy Guthrie lives to continue their search and that that search could also continue into tomorrow as well but its not clear exactly what they're looking for.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: We believe our mom is still out there.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): Savannah Guthrie, sitting alone, makes a direct appeal to the public for help in the search for her missing mother, Nancy Guthrie, nine days after she was taken in the middle of the night from her home in Tucson, Arizona

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: We need your help. Law enforcement is working tirelessly around the clock, trying to bring her home, trying to find her. She was taken, and we don't know where.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): It's been three days since the alleged kidnapper sent a ransom note to a local tv station after demanding $6 million. The latest note did not include a deadline.

The FBI and the local sheriff's department have searched Nancys neighborhood day and night, scouring her home, her rooftop, even an underground septic tank near her property. Searches by air and ground of the nearby foothills and desert. And still Nancys no closer to coming home.

Savannah and her family are reaching out again this time for more than prayers, asking people to look for their mother wherever they can.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: No matter where you are, even if you're far from Tucson, if you see anything, if you hear anything, if there's anything at all that seems strange to you, that you report to law enforcement.

[19:05:00]

LAVANDERA (voice-over): Expressing gratitude in this horrific moment as she appeals to everyone concerned about her mother's fate.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Thank you so much for all of the prayers, because we believe that somehow, some way, she is feeling these prayers and that God is lifting her even in this moment and in this darkest place.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): This is the fourth video the family has posted to social media including two from all three of Nancys children and one video just from her son. Previous posts were aimed at the kidnappers.

CAMRON GUTHRIE, SON OF NANCY GUTHRIE: First, we have to know that you have our mom. We want to talk to you, and we are waiting for contact.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): And even directly to their mom.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Everyone is looking for you, mommy, everywhere. We will not rest.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): On Saturday, the siblings again reached out to the kidnappers, offering payment

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: We beg you now to return our mother to us so that we can celebrate with her. This is the only way we will have peace. This is very valuable to us and we will pay.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): With each message, another glimpse into this nightmare that Nancy Guthrie's family is facing, seemingly with no end in sight.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: We are at an hour of desperation and we need your help.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LAVANDERA: That sense of desperation is something that not only is the Guthrie feeling the most intensely of all, but I think a lot of their neighbors here in Tucson and friends who are desperate for an explanation as to what has happened here, continues and they do know -- they do know that neighbors are helping as best they can.

And investigators have been back out here, Erin, recanvassing the neighborhood, re-talking to neighbors, asking them for any kind of clue and video that might help them and investigators. I topped off with here this evening. They say that they're coming back once again this evening and could be here into tomorrow as well again -- Erin.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): All right, Ed. Thank you very much.

And let's go now to Harvey Levin, the founder of TMZ, who received the initial ransom note for Nancy Guthrie. So, Harvey, you know this bitcoin account and, you know we are now,

what, seven minutes past the deadline and the original alleged ransom note which you received. And so, you know, you've been looking at the bitcoin account. What are you reporting?

HARVEY LEVIN, FOUNDER OF TMZ: There's nothing there. It has not been deposited.

Erin, I was thinking of something that you raised on Friday when you spoke to the reporter from KOLD and asked about the second note, and you asked her if this was a ransom note, and she kind of carefully said that she doesn't think authorities would characterize it as a ransom note. The only other thing I can think of what if and I don't know this, but I'm just raising this. What if there was another bitcoin address in that second ransom letter that doesn't align with the one we received?

I don't know why they would do this, and it doesn't make sense to me because if Savannah did pay this money, I don't know that its in her interest to do an APB for everybody to look out for somebody who might have her mom, or to find her mom if they paid the money and they're waiting for the return of their mother. I don't know that she would go out with a call like that.

So, on a level, I don't see why there would be another bitcoin account, but I think it's possible it was in this letter. I want to read you. Just. I'll read you one line from the ransom note we received. And they say it is in the best interest of everyone to have this completed as soon as possible.

So, you know this was way back when the first ransom note was issued. And days passed. And on Saturday, Savannah said, we are going to pay this so it's baffling to us. We just don't understand what has transpired. But the account we're looking at does not show a deposit.

BURNETT: And so, you said the original sentence was, it is in the best interest of everyone to have this completed as soon as possible.

LEVIN: Right.

BURNETT: All right. So now I understand exactly what you're saying, right? It was interesting that the way that that reporter who had seen the second letter did, you're right, did characterize it as not a ransom note, but so we don't know if there was an additional address in it or not. But when you talk about the bitcoin address itself, my understanding is, Harvey, it's not hard to check it. I mean, you're checking it frequently, right? That bitcoin address.

LEVIN: Not hard to check it but almost impossible and maybe impossible to find out who's who -- who is -- who is it going to. That's the issue. But we're not seeing a deposit and we've been looking obviously all day and we looked at 4:00 our time, 5:00 Tucson time, and we're not seeing it.

[19:10:06] BURNETT: And, you know, we were talking to a crypto expert, John Griffin, he was saying, okay somebody whoever set up this particular bitcoin account does show a basic level of crypto knowledge, which is certainly consistent with everything else, right? No one has been able to find out the whereabouts of Nancy Guthrie so there's nothing basic about the activities here. But then he added, if there are sophisticated crypto operator that they will move the funds he said, in such a way that it will go to other cryptocurrencies and then the tracks will disappear.

Because, you know, we all hear bitcoin is supposed to be all transparent, although then we hear but no one will have any idea on God's green earth who account whose account this is. But you know that they could. The fact that they could transfer this from bitcoin into other cryptocurrencies.

Are you hearing this also, Harvey, from your experts?

LEVIN: Yeah. I mean, look, what were hearing is that it should show up at least at some point. I mean, we're checking this every minute. It should show up at some point in this account. And we just haven't seen it. But again, Erin, I'm just puzzled that Savannah said on Saturday they were going to pay the money and clearly they were responding to something in that letter when she said, we understand and we will pay. So, it meant that they hadn't yet, but will and we're not seeing it.

But if she did pay, why this new video? Wouldn't this be kind of biting your nails and waiting to see if she safely returned the way the letter says she will be? And not to necessarily go out and say we are begging the public because we don't know.

Just one other thing that and we talked a little bit about this on Friday but I am -- the more I think of this, that this is somebody within the range of the Tucson television market because they are tied somehow to these local stations. And, you know, they could go to NBC, which is Savannahs employer, but they are going back to these local stations, and it just feels like it is an intelligent person the way its written and I think the reporter from KOLD on your show, Mary, kind of said the same thing. It's an intelligent person who wrote a well-constructed letter with perfect grammar, seems sophisticated when it comes to tracing where it's coming from. And then you have this bitcoin address.

So what I would ask, and I'm assuming the authorities have done is Savannah said that anybody in a wide range, I wonder if anybody in that general area of Tucson has noticed somebody who is MIA who fits a description like that over the last week, because I'm assuming whoever that is isn't around now.

BURNETT: Right. Well, exactly. That is what you would think.

It's interesting because in her most recent plea, which is different than anything we've seen thus far, right? This one is her by herself, and she's not addressing the kidnappers, right, or the alleged abductors. She's addressing the public, right? She is speaking as, as she can do, right, because that's -- she knows how to do that to the public and asking for their help.

I am curious about something, Harvey, though, that, you know, you said at the very beginning, which is that the original ransom note that you received said it would be the only contact. Okay? Now, Mary Coleman from KOLD, she got the second one and the first one. She said they were consistent with each other, right? But obviously, no one knows whether one is real and the other isn't or whether both are not real, right? We just -- we just don't know.

I'm just curious, though, Harvey, is it is it possible in your mind. And I know you didn't get the second ransom note, but do you think it's possible that the second one may not be authentic? Only in the context of, they said, the first one, there would be no other contact. And from the way that Savannah and her family are communicating, as in also through the media, it doesn't seem that there's direct contact between the two.

LEVIN: I don't think there is direct contact. I read this first ransom letter as almost braggadocious, that its sort of, you know, you're not going to find me. The police aren't going to be able to help you. I am not going to get -- I'm not going to give you any more information. Don't bother trying to find me.

You know it feels almost like you are not going to. You're not going to figure out who I am and the reason I think a second letter may have been sent is something that Mary said. Remember what Savannah said? Was we need proof of life. And you asked Mary, from KOLD was, there any proof of life? And she wouldn't say directly. There was, but she said that the second letter addresses the statement of Savannah, and the statement of Savannah was about proof of life.

So what I'm thinking is there was something in that letter that addressed proof of life that this person felt was necessary in order to get the $6 million.

[19:15:07]

I mean, that's kind of the way I see it when you kind of put the -- put the pieces together and it's really based on your interview with Mary.

BURNETT: So, Harvey, you know, in the letter that you received and I -- you know, I guess it's just it's chilling to hear it right? It is in the best interest of everyone to have this completed as soon as possible. Is there anything else in there in terms of sentences or anything that that you think is worth sharing at this point, given that we're, you know, where we are?

LEVIN: Well, I mean, we talked about the second deadline and there is a direct, stark statement about consequences if they didn't get that money. That's all I will say but it is chilling when you read that sentence, it is short and to the point.

BURNETT: So, one final question to you, Harvey, then, are you surprised? I know you're raising a very fair point which is there could be another bitcoin address. We don't know what we don't know. But if this really was the only communication between the kidnappers and Nancy Guthrie's family, right, was happening through the media that we are well past that deadline and that bitcoin account is empty. I'm just stating the very obvious here.

LEVIN: Yeah. That's kind of the way I see it, too and, you know, I raised this issue of maybe the second letter has a second bitcoin address. But it doesn't make sense to me because why would Savannah -- you know, look, Erin, we didn't talk specifically, but I'll tell you now. The letter says that she will be returned within 12 hours in the Tu -- back in the Tucson area. And then if you look at 12 hours, that's a radius of about 700 miles.

BURNETT: That's how you calculated -- yeah, the map.

LEVIN: That's right. But if they're just playing the waiting game, if they paid the money, I don't understand why you then go out and just throw a Hail Mary and plead with people anything, you know, please help us. Law enforcement is doing everything they can. That doesn't feel like they've set the ball in motion to get her back based on the ransom demand.

So, you know, I've raised it as a possibility, but the logic of it escapes me that why they would. You know why they would pay and then come out with a statement like this.

BURNETT: Yeah. It is -- it's hard to understand. I don't understand it either.

All right. Harvey, thank you very much. I appreciate you.

LEVIN: You bet.

BURNETT: Harvey Levin there from TMZ.

And John Miller's OUTFRONT.

So, John, you know, you hear -- Harvey had a lot of new information there, by the way. He said it was, you know, within 12 hours from now, if they pay the original note said that Nancy Guthrie would be returned, okay? So that would be by 7:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow morning. But again, he keeps refreshing the bitcoin account that was in that letter. And it still says zero.

Okay. This bitcoin account is publicly visible. I mean, that's the point Harvey is making that, you know, anybody would be able to see if Savannah Guthrie put money into that. And then that in of itself has raised questions.

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Anybody who had the alphanumeric number behind that account --

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: The APB, as he referred to it, yeah.

MILLER: Right, would know that, which means it's publicly available to somebody who has that. But that's not generally available.

And we also have this gap which is we know the communication that Harvey's aware of. We know the two communications that Mary Coleman at KOLD, the TV station, has been privy to. We don't know if there's an additional communication that neither one have seen. And we certainly haven't heard the full contents of the second note from the kidnappers.

They could have provided a new bitcoin address. They could have changed --

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: Right, as Harvey indicated, yeah.

MILLER: They could have done a number of things. So we're in the dark, which on details like that we probably should know.

BURNETT: No, we absolutely should be we can only go with what we know though and I guess just to ask you on the very basis of it, if we are past the deadline of the first letter, which we are, we don't know if the second letter we were told actually didn't change anything about deadlines. But maybe it had another bitcoin address, is what I'm saying. But we don't know that.

So, if it had a deadline and it had an account and were past the deadline and were looking at the account and nothing's in it, what does that say to you?

MILLER: Nothing. And I'll tell you why. Let's assume for the purpose of this discussion right now --

BURNETT: Yeah.

MILLER: -- that the kidnappers are real kidnappers, that the ransom demands are real ransom demands, and the deadlines are real deadline. There's no such thing as a real deadline to someone who's interested in $6 million.

Kidnappers and I have a little experience here in kidnap for ransom, kidnappers generally set these deadlines with threats to keep things moving because the victim is a hot potato that keeps them exposed. They want to get rid of the victim and get them out of there. They want to get the money in there, and then they want to disappear.

[19:20:00]

So that's what deadlines are for. But if it means waiting a little longer to get their money --

BURNETT: They'll do it.

MILLER: -- the -- we've talked our way through every deadline and every negotiation on the idea of logistics. It's hard to raise that much money, especially in cash, in a way that you can move it into that account. It's hard to do this and that, and you can get past the deadline.

BURNETT: All right.

MILLER: And by the way, let's say for the purposes, again, of this discussion and we don't know this, that the threat was if we don't have the money at that point, we're going to kill the victim -- well, for someone who's looking for millions of dollars, what is a victim that they murder worth? And the answer is, to them, nothing except they've now gone from kidnap to kidnap and murder. So, I think a lot of this is just part of this terrible, terrible game.

BURNETT: Yeah. All right, John Miller, thank you very much.

And our breaking news continues. New information just coming in from the Pima County sheriff on why investigators are at the Guthrie homes tonight.

Plus, Jeffrey Epstein's former accomplice deposed by the House Oversight Committee today, refusing to talk unless Trump comes to her rescue. The congressman who was part of that deposition and just actually got access to the unredacted files coming out of that viewing to us.

And MAGA divided over Bad Bunny. Trump trashing the halftime show. Others though, loving it. So how is it playing in a key southern Texas county where 89 percent of the population is Hispanic? Our John King is there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:25:40]

BURNETT: Breaking news, new information from the Pima County sheriff tonight in the search for Savannah Guthrie's mother, Nancy. The sheriff saying in a statement a moment ago, quote, "Many of you observed an active law enforcement presence at the Guthrie residences over the weekend. That activity will continue tonight and into tomorrow as part of the ongoing investigative process, including the expansion of the search and follow up on new leads.

Now, we saw the search of a septic tank at Nancy Guthrie's home over the weekend, and at least three deputy sheriffs were seen at Savannah's sister Annie's house as well. Officials left with a bag and one deputy sheriff was seen wearing blue latex gloves.

OUTFRONT now, Mary Ellen O'Toole, former FBI senior profiler, and Michael Alcazar, retired NYPD hostage negotiator.

I appreciate both of you.

So, Michael, you know we were told Nancy Guthrie's home had been turned back over to the family last week, and that happened pretty early on. Since then, though numerous searches. Right? They found a device on the roof that that a neighbor had alerted them. Something might be up there. They had that. Then we saw them at the septic tank. We've obviously, you know, seen them go back and forth many times. The

crime scene tape went up, but not for a couple days after the initial alleged abduction. What does all this say to you?

MICHAEL ALCAZAR, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE; HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR: To me, it seems like they probably rushed in releasing the crime scene. Probably they didn't process the crime scene to the best of their ability. I don't know what was the rush and releasing it. And now they're getting more information, now have to revisit it.

And of course, we saw in the past that people have been in the crime scene. News outlets have been in the crime scene, which has now contaminated the crime scene, which just makes it a little bit harder to process because now you have more DNA, more fingerprints, more footprints in the crime scene. So, I think they made probably dropped the ball a little bit in releasing that crime scene too early.

BURNETT: Mary Ellen, we just got a new statement in here from the FBI, and I want to note the context here. Of course, it's about half an hour after the first ransom notes final deadline. And the FBI statement says the FBI is not aware of any continued communication between the Guthrie family and the suspected kidnappers, nor have we identified a suspect or person of interest in this case at this time now, Mary Ellen that fits with what would be publicly known, right?

But if anybody thought that there was anything private that we weren't aware of, this tries to disabuse us of that notion how surprised are you at this point that they would say, no suspect, no person of interest, no communication?

MARY ELLEN O'TOOLE, FORMER FBI SENIOR PROFILER: That is surprising, because the point of either not saying that or saying something to suggest that they're looking at a number of people, which essentially would be correct. They're not ruling out anybody, really keeps the pressure on the offender, on the kidnapper, the kidnappers.

And that's an important thing to do to keep pressure on them, because when there's pressure on the person that's responsible, they will make mistakes or they'll say something to somebody else that that will just blurt it out like, don't they know what they're talking? They have no idea what they're talking about. This is ridiculous. Or something else.

And that may -- that information, that comment could then be relayed to law enforcement. So I'm not sure I understand the rationale behind saying we don't know anything about any suspects at this time. You really do want to keep the pressure on the community.

BURNETT: And, Michael, what about the phrasing from the FBI? We're not aware of any contact between the kidnappers and the family. Does that -- should anyone put any emphasis on the word "aware"?

ALCAZAR: Again, that might just be employed. It might just be keeping their cards close to their vest. That could signal maybe that they're close in apprehension, I don't know. But, you know, we're not privy to all the information they're working with. And you know, at this point, we're just really speculating.

BURNETT: So, Mary Ellen, you know what -- what are they looking for at this point? I mean, you know, they go back into the crime scene as Michael saying, maybe they had kind of ended it as a scene too early, right? When they were going back and searching again, going on the roof or going to the septic tank. But what do you think they are looking for at this point? I mean, is there is there a specific process and sort of how to list that they're following right now, or is it feel a bit more scattershot?

O'TOOLE: I doubt -- I doubt that there's a specific checklist that they're looking for, but if they're going -- if they're basing it on prior cases of violent crimes that have involved kidnappings and not for necessarily for money, but for sexual purposes, like a sexual assault or a serial murder case, the offender has been in the home of the victims home before the crime occurred. So, checking it out, looking around, seeing what the layout is. And during that first visit to the home, they could have left forensic evidence behind. Whether it's fingerprints, whether its DNA something like that.

So that would not be -- you know, that would not be unusual, to be honest with you. So that may be part of the reason that they're inside the home right now, not looking for what was left a week ago but on prior occasions.

BURNETT: So, Michael, the FBI statement that I read, there is one other part of it that I want to share. They say the FBI, someone has that one piece of information that can help us bring Nancy home. We need that person to share what they know. By the way Michael, I'm going to say that is very consistent with what Savannah said in her video statement today, where she didn't address the captors but addressed just the public and said please, we need your help, right? It's very consistent with what Savannah said.

What do you hear, though, from the FBI when they are reaching out in such a way?

ALCAZAR: I think similar to what Savannah saying, they're relying on the public at this point if in fact, they don't have any suspects or any persons of interest, they're relying on someone out there that might have the information that wants to help solve this case. So I think they're putting it out there so that people are aware that you know, they might be motivated by money and they hopefully they will contact the FBI with any information that could lead to the apprehension of these kidnappers.

BURNETT: Yeah. All right. Well, thank you both very much. I appreciate your time.

And next new details just in about what Trump's DOJ redacted in the Epstein files, a congressman who just had access to the unredacted files is our guest. So, what did he learn?

Plus, our John King takes us to a crucial county in Texas that's almost entirely Hispanic. But it backed Trump in the last election so how are Trump's attacks on Bad Bunny going over there? (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:36:49]

BURNETT: Breaking news new details emerging about what the justice department chose to redact in the Epstein files. Members of Congress receiving brief access to the unredacted files today. And Congressmen Massie and Khanna, who led the charge to get these documents released to the public, say they've already found names of at least six men who should never have been redacted.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): In a couple of hours, we found six men whose names have been redacted, who are implicated in the way that the files are presented. At least one is a U.S. citizen. At least one is a foreigner and the other three or four have names I'm not sure if they're foreign or U.S.

REPORTER: And which field do they work in? Is it finance? Banking? Political?

MASSIE: One is pretty high up in the foreign government.

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): And some are -- there -- one of the others is a pretty prominent individual.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: All right. It comes as the House Oversight Committee just released this video. You're looking at it here. It is of Epstein convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. She appeared virtually pleading the Fifth, but she says she's ready to talk and say what she knows and clear President Trump of wrongdoing if he grants her clemency.

Her attorney saying, quote, "Both President Trump and President Clinton are innocent of any wrongdoing. Ms. Maxwell alone can explain why." Well, of course, she had plenty of time to talk to Todd Blanche, she did not take the Fifth when she testified to Trump's deputy attorney general. And of course, she was moved almost immediately thereafter to that cushy women's prison camp, an unprecedented move.

OUTFRONT now, Democratic Congressman James Walkinshaw. He spent 90 minutes today viewing the unredacted Epstein documents and he's a member of the oversight committee which held that hearing with Maxwell today.

Congressman, a lot to talk to you about tonight but let's start with what you saw in that time that you were in there with the unredacted files. And, I mean, we're talking about millions of pages of paper. So there's only so much you could see. But I know there was one email to Epstein that did really stand out to you today.

The redacted version is on the DOJ website, which I'll show everyone. It says Trump's attorney arranged a 20-minute phone conference with Trump and, quote/unquote, Brad and then everything else is blacked out. All right? A lot of blackout there.

What did you see that stands out to you, Congressman Walkinshaw?

REP. JAMES WALKINSHAW (D-VA): Well, over the course of the 90 minutes that I spent reviewing redactions, I saw a lot of redactions that I couldn't explain, at least not in a way that's consistent with the law and this is one of them. This email details Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys describing a conversation they had with Donald Trump in 2009, in lieu of a formal deposition, they had a phone conversation with Donald Trump.

And in this email where they're recounting that conversation, they describe Trump conceding that Jeffrey Epstein was never, quote, "kicked out" of Mar-a-Lago as Trump has claimed even relatively recently, that Epstein was not a member of Mar-a-Lago. He was a guest. He was never kicked out.

Trump was asked if he had been on Epstein's planes, and he gave kind of a non-denial denial.

[19:40:05]

And he said, well I've been on a lot of planes. We now know the truth is Trump was on Epstein's planes many times in that time period. So, it describes according to Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys at the time, Donald Trump, in my view not being fully transparent and honest in that conversation back in 2009, I don't understand why that would be redacted. There were no mention of the names of any survivors or any victims in that particular email or that file.

BURNETT: And of course, you know, since it's redacted as far as where we can see, right? I -- we obviously can't confirm it because we haven't seen the -- I haven't seen everything that isn't in black all we know, of course, is that Trump hasn't been accused of wrongdoing, but it is incredible from what you say, Congressman, that this would all be redacted. It obviously is very, very significant information that you are describing it.

So, you know, in terms of the names, you're talking about, the names of victims, what was supposed to be redacted, not the names of anybody else. And your peers who were in the room today also, they had a brief window of time, as you did, to look at some of the documents. Congressmen Massie and Khanna say they found the names of at least six men that they describe as being, quote, likely incriminated by their inclusions in the files.

And Massie just posted some more details of those email exchanges in the files on social media. He says a sultan or maybe it's unclear, maybe someone named sultan seemed to send the email to Epstein that said quote, I loved the torture video and then says a well-known retired CEO is on an FBI document that says coconspirator.

Congressman Walkinshaw, I mean, these are stunning things that he is saying he saw. Did you see anything that led you today to believe that other men should be criminally charged? WALKINSHAW: Well, first, it's important to note there are three

million files, hundreds of thousands of redactions literally impossible for the 435 members of Congress. We could do 24 hours a day reviewing. We couldn't get through all these redactions, so we didn't necessarily see the same files today.

I can say that I saw many names, including names and emails to and from Jeffrey Epstein, that suggests these individuals were involved in crimes or at least knew about crimes. And again, I'm not able to explain why they were redacted in a way that's consistent with the law.

The Department of Justice has a legal requirement to explain those redactions to the Congress. They haven't done that yet. And one of the things we're going to do as a result of these reviews is push them to explain in a way that's consistent with the law, why so many of these names were redacted.

BURNETT: Well, I think you know, speaking as just a member of the American public, it seems absurd and that the names should all be out there, right? That the goal was to protect the victims and the people that you're describing would not have been in the category of victims.

All right. Congressman Walkinshaw, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.

WALKINSHAW: Thank you.

BURNETT: And next, Trump at odds with many inside MAGA over Bad Bunny's halftime show. He slammed it epically. Could that backfire?

Plus, a special report on how the "Today Show" family is rallying around Savannah Guthrie.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HODA KOTB, NBC NEWS ANCHOR: We are a family. I'm part of the family. I'm happy to be with you because we show up for each other.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:47:38]

BURNETT: Tonight, MAGA defending Bad Bunny on the heels of Trump calling Bad Bunny Super Bowl halftime show, quote absolutely terrible and an affront to the greatness of America. One of the president's influential supporters, WWE wrestler Logan Paul, tweeting, Puerto Ricans are Americans and I'm happy they were given the opportunity to showcase the talent that comes from the island.

Kash Patel's girlfriend, Alexis Wilkins, praising Democrats support of Bad Bunny writing, "Republicans need to unite and get on better messaging because this branding is fantastic and allows all Dems to get behind it." And the Trump campaigns former deputy Hispanic communications director Bianca Rodriguez, warning Trump supporters, "Way to go alienating your Puerto Rican conservative base."

But Trump has not stopped, not backing away from calling the performance one of the worst, all caps, ever. It makes no sense is an affront to the greatness of America. Nobody understands a word the guy is saying. This show is just a slap in the face to our country.

Now, it is worth noting that Bad Bunny is the top rated artist on the planet, rivaled only by Taylor Swift in recent years, according to Spotify. He had 20 billion streams on the platform in 2025 alone.

Well, John King is OUTFRONT in Raymondville, Texas, which is a very important place, John, because it is in Willacy County, one of the most southernmost counties in Texas, almost 90 percent Hispanic according to the last census estimate but Trump won it. He won it by three points. That is the swing that went to Trump from Hispanics, but also a swing district.

So, what -- what does it mean when he attacks the most popular Latino musician in the world?

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Erin, Trump won this county and he won this district in 2024, Texas 34, which is why you just listed the president's MAGA supporters, whether they're nationally known or whether you find them in local politics, they think this is yet another example of the president pouring more kerosene on a crisis fire of his own making to begin with.

Latino vote was critical to Trump in 2024. Let's just look at his history. This is where Republicans think Trump's progress with Latinos. Can we translate this away from Trump to the entire Republican Party. In 2016, this is in Texas, 34 percent of the Latino vote. In 2020, that grew to 41 percent. In 2024, that grew to 55 percent.

Now, some people are saying, well Texas is a red state. It makes his win even bigger. But so what? The president had similar numbers nationally. That's why he won all the battleground states.

[19:50:01]

And that's why Republicans were somewhat optimistic going into what they know will be a difficult midterm election year, that there were places like this with a lot of Latino voters where they could pick up some districts to offset Democratic gains elsewhere. Now, they already had a policy problem created by Trump. Even Hispanics who say, let's have a stronger border security, let's have a uniform, organized immigration process.

You see it in the polling. It's not just Latinos. You saw Trump's numbers and other numbers crater after people see what's happening in Minneapolis. That's a policy issue.

This is more personal, more cultural. Nobody understands what he's saying. Well, here in Texas, most of the Latinos trace their heritage back to Mexico, not to Puerto Rico, but a lot of them speak Spanish a lot of bilingual homes, a lot of really proud people who, when they hear the president of United States say that a lot of them think, that's a guy who doesn't respect me.

BURNETT: Yeah, well it could easily come off that way there's something else about this district. You talk about Texas 34 that I know you're watching closely, John. What is it?

KING: Right. So that -- we are here for a reason. Republicans know it's a midterm election year and they're in charge. Therefore, you tend to lose. History says you lose seats.

They also know they have the tiniest house majority. I can hold up a hand and have a few fingers left over. When you get to the size of the Republican House majority right now.

BURNETT: Yes.

KING: They know they are at risk of losing that majority, so they need to pick up seats. That's why this district is so important. Vicente Gonzalez is the Democratic incumbent but he won -- he won by just a couple points Trump won this district by six.

This was part of the redistricting. Texas Republicans redrew the lines. If the 2024 lines were in place the new lines were in place in 2024, Trump would have won it by ten. Republicans redrew this. You see this candidate behind me, we don't know if he'll win the primary, Eric Flores, but he's the Trump-endorsed Republican. They redrew this district so somebody like him could win among Latino votes and now they're worried that its ticket splitting is so rare in American politics, which is why Republicans targeted those districts as essentially trade-offs.

The Democrats are going to pick up somewhere. We need places to pick up. And so they think anytime Trump complicates his standing and the Republican Party standing with Latinos, he's making this race harder.

BURNETT: Yeah, well, that's absolutely fascinating. As you -- so just Texas 34, what, every single small place makes such a big difference at the end of the day.

John King, thank you very much in Raymondville, Texas, tonight.

And next, a special report on how the "Today Show" is coming together for Savannah Guthrie.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:57:07]

BURNETT: And finally tonight, Savannah Guthrie's "Today Show" family acknowledging on air how difficult it is to cover the story of her missing mother.

Brian Stelter is OUTFRONT. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CRAIG MELVIN, CO-HOST, "TODAY": Folks, we are asking for your grace, as we continue to do this.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST (voice-over): Sometimes it sounds corny and contrived when TV executives claim that morning TV teams are a family. But not these days, not at the "Today Show".

HODA KOTB, FORMER CO-HOST, "TODAY": You know what, Craig? We always talk about our show as a family. We are a family.

MELVIN: Yes.

KOTB: I'm part of the family. I'm happy to be with you because we show up for each other. So --

MELVIN: Yes.

STELTER (voice-over): Former co-host Hoda Kotb back on the show on Monday, filling in for her friend Savannah Guthrie.

Kotb also visited the show last Friday.

KOTB: This whole thing is breaking my heart and I'm happy to be sitting here with you I've been, like wandering around going like where do you go?

SHEINELLE JONES, CO-HOST, "TODAY": Because we're your family. We're here.

STELTER (voice-over): Kotb read aloud messages from viewers.

KOTB: Our "Today Show" viewers really are family. One writing, I have not stopped thinking about this. And from another, my heart is breaking for Savannah and her entire family.

STELTER (voice-over): Viewers can sense the affection on the set and that connection is invaluable while covering a story that's unbearable.

JENNA BUSH HAGER, CO-HOST, "TODAY": Savannah and Nancy have always shared an incredible bond, and over the years she's become a second mom to me and to all of us.

STELTER (voice-over): As one conservative media critic put it, no offense to other shows, but you can really tell that on the "Today Show", they really do not just like each other but love each other.

Back in the '90s, NBC spent millions billing today as a true family.

(MUSIC)

STELTER (voice-over): And viewers bought it, leading the show to an epic 16-year winning streak in the ratings. In 2012, Guthrie was promoted to co-anchor. ANNOUNCER: Live from studio 1A in Rockefeller Plaza.

STELTER (voice-over): Guthrie helped start a new winning streak, and colleagues credited her with giving the show a family-like vibe. The hosts are genuine friends outside of work. They sometimes even pray together.

BUSH HAGER: Savannah and I actually went to the same church -- go to the same church here in New York.

STELTER (voice-over): The relationships have been forged through heartbreak. Kotb recalled Guthrie's support when her daughter was sick.

KOTB: I'm looking at us and I was thinking like, who was first in the -- in the hospital room when Hope was sick, Savannah.

Who hopped on a plane when your parents --

CARSON DALY, CO-HOST, "TODAY": Oh my gosh, first person.

KOTB: Savannah.

Who was sitting by Uche? How about when you're -- when you're -- when your brother passed?

MELVIN: Right.

KOTB: I mean, she was there.

STELTER (voice-over): And they are paying it forward now, galvanizing a nation into searching and praying for Nancy Guthrie.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

STELTER: And I'm told Savannah has been staying in touch with her co- host friends, texting with some of them throughout this nightmare. As one NBC source said to me today, were all just taking this hour by hour, hoping against hope for some glimmer of good news -- Erin.

BURNETT: Brian, thank you very much.

And law enforcement, you heard the FBI tonight, you heard Savannah tonight, asking anybody who has any information, no matter how far away from Tucson, anything Savannah said please call the FBI, 1-800- CALL-FBI.

Thank you for joining us.

"AC360" begins now.