Return to Transcripts main page

Erin Burnett Outfront

GOP Breaks With Trump; Primaries & Runoffs In Four States Today; Nancy Guthrie New Details. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired June 23, 2026 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:22]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:

Breaking news, Republicans break with Trump. The Senate tonight voting to end Trump's Iran war, in a major rebuke to the president, as key parts of the agreement with Iran are in total doubt tonight.

And, is Zohran Mamdani the new kingmaker? The New York City mayor facing a big test of races tonight, as Trump endorses both candidates in a runoff so that he wins either way.

Plus, more breaking news in the Nancy Guthrie investigation.

Let's go OUTFRONT.

(MUSIC)

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

And OUTFRONT tonight, the breaking news. Trump hit with a huge blow from Republicans. Today, Republicans joined Democrats. And they passed a resolution to check Trump's war powers, which is the sharpest pushback on Trump's 116-day war that's come from Congress.

It came up that the House had passed a measure to end Trump's war in Iran, but nothing like that's come from the Senate until now. And the White House is dismissing it. They're saying, I, quote, "Concurrent resolutions do not go to the president and have no force of law."

Rather formal response from this White House, a little bit out of character. And while it may be a symbolic vote, it is incredibly significant because up until now, as I indicated, the vote has failed every single time. So now you've finally reached a point. You've crossed a Rubicon, the majority of senators saying no, they've had enough.

And today's challenge comes as there are even more questions tonight about what exactly President Trump even agreed to when it comes to the so-called agreement with Iran. For one, the Iranian president today said that missiles, Iranian missiles, are not part of the agreement. He said, quote, "The discussion over our missiles does not exist in the memorandum of understanding, and it never will."

Well, that is a really direct thing to say, because it's also confusing, because Trump said when he launched attacks against Iran, right, one of the main reasons, when he came out and spoke to this country, when the war began, he said that limiting Iran's missile program was one of the core reasons for his choosing to go to war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our objectives are clear. First, we're destroying Iran's missile capabilities, and you see that happening on an hourly basis and their capacity to produce brand-new ones, and pretty good ones they make.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Now, even separate from the so-called agreement, Iran does still retain more than two-thirds of its pre-war missile stockpile. There's also Iran's nuclear program, and the question of whether Iran has agreed in all these memorandums and deals to inspectors.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Iranians are saying there's no scheduled visit for the IAEA inspectors. Is that part of your agreement?

TRUMP: They're wrong. They're wrong. They're wrong. They know they're wrong. They told us inside, and we have it down 100 percent inspection.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: But Iran's adamant that no agreement was made.

Now, Trump is also touting the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Now, while nearly two dozen ships have crossed the strait in the past 24 hours, according to marine traffic data, that's a fraction of pre-war levels, right? On average, before the war, 138 ships crossed the strait per day. And the reality is that now the strait is in flux and Iran controls it.

Iran even says it intends to collect fees for what it calls maritime services offered alongside Oman in the Strait of Hormuz once the waterway is opened.

Even as Trump is posting, there will be no tolls in the Hormuz Strait for 60 days during the ceasefire, and there'll be no tolls after the 60-day period has expired. Well, whatever you want to call them, he's saying tolls, they're saying, Sorry. Two totally different stories again.

But as Trump's agreement with Tehran does seem to be in jeopardy, the message from his fellow Republicans is clear. And that is end the war now.

Manu Raju is OUTFRONT live on Capitol Hill, beginning our coverage tonight.

And Manu, look, when you see this vote, they had never had the votes, never been able to do this until today. So symbolic or not, it does appear to be a significant rebuke to Trump from his own party.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, and it's coming from both wings of the Republican Party, some of the more moderate members joining with Democrats today to especially say that Congress needs to have a say in order for this war to continue, especially if Trump wants to escalate things with Iran. Moderate members like Senator Susan Collins of Maine in a difficult reelection race, Senator Lisa Murkowski, someone who breaks with the president periodically, also Senator Rand Paul, more conservative member, a libertarian-minded member, someone who breaks with his party on issues of foreign interventionism.

And then Senator Bill Cassidy, someone who Trump effectively out of the Republican Party by supporting his primary challenger just last month, sending a message to Trump.

Then you're hearing criticism from the more hawkish wing of the GOP, people who don't think this deal cut with Iran, this MOU, will lead to anything good for the United States, including on the question of easing sanctions.

[19:05:04]

What one congressman told me today could make Iran even stronger.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DON BACON (R-NE): I'm concerned about it. They're getting money that they can use. Y'all money's fungible. And this money can help support their terrorism. I feel like, in this case, it appears to me that the president wanted a deal really bad before the November election. I get it. But in the end, I think Iran's getting the better end of this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And that's a concern from a lot of Republicans on both sides of the Capitol, House and Senate Republicans. And tomorrow, Erin, is going to be a day in which Trump will be in front of those same Senate Republicans in a closed-door lunch where he will be discussing a range of issues, and undoubtedly, he'll have to defend this deal that he cut with Iran.

Will any of those Republican senators actually challenge him behind closed doors? That's going to be a big question because there is a lot of concern about his handling of this war, and some of them now want to have Congress have a say. if he decides to escalate things -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right, Manu, thank you very much.

And everyone's here with me. S.E., I mean, it's 106 days in -- 16, I'm sorry, days in. So, I mean, any day prior to now would have been a good day for Republicans to decide how they felt about the war and stand out for it.

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Sure. BURNETT: But we'll take day 116 is when it happened. How significant do you think it is that they -- it's a symbolic step, OK? Let's be honest, the White House is correct about that, but they did it.

CUPP: Well, I think it's an acknowledgement of a few things. I think when you have two parties in an agreement saying opposite things, there's not an agreement. There's no agreement to be had.

For another, I think Republicans are remembering their objections to the JCPOA, some of which were that it didn't deal with its ballistic weapons, that it didn't deal with Hamas, Hezbollah, its proxies. This doesn't really either. I think they're worried about that.

And then thirdly, I think the acknowledgement of the political environment in which this is happening and the polling around this war. Very few people wanted this war once we were in it very few people wanted it to continue very long now that it's, quote/unquote, "over", very few people are happy with the deal we got and think we're in a better position than we were.

All of these people are acknowledging that because it's a midterm election year and I think they are very aware of the calculus here.

BURNETT: I mean, 78 percent of Americans say Trump should end the conflict now.

LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah.

BURNETT: Surprise is that low.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, is it over? Is it not over? Are -- I mean, I don't know where we are anymore. I don't Trump knows where we are anymore.

BURNETT: I don't know what to agree on anything. I don't know what they signed.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, they're not an agreement because every part of this agreement seems to be disputed. Are there tolls? Are there not tolls? Is it? Is it straight open? Is it not open?

CUPP: Inspectors, no inspectors.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Inspectors, missiles, no missiles. I mean, I don't -- I mean, at this point there is no clarity at all about what it is that this is supposed to be about. And so I think what you see in Congress is a few GOP senators getting some spine because Trump has upset them.

And then beyond that, an acknowledgement that this is a lame duck Congress, and this is more -- I think this is more about that, that there is really nothing that they can pass at this point except these sort of symbolic things. But it is a warning to Trump that his hold on his own party is ebbing.

BURNETT: I mean, Karine, I guess that's one thing you can take away from it. And again, it's for Republicans, that's what you need, and that is standing up to him. But it isn't as if you suddenly saw this tsunami, you know, where everyone's running for the exit.

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY & SENIOR ADVISER TO BIDEN: I mean, look, this is Trump's doing, right? Because a lot of these Senate Republicans are being pushed out by Donald Trump. So this is of his own doing.

And let's not forget, Congress, it's supposed to be a co-equal branch of government. They're supposed to have a say on what the president is doing. They're supposed to do it together. This is why the constituency that they have hired them to do.

But again, we see four senators. They have some spine. It'll be very interesting to see how this lunch goes with Senate Republicans and Trump tomorrow. And, you know, the other part I would say is when Trump was running in 2024, one of the things that he said there no new war. And as you just stated in the polling, people do not like this.

Now we are in the middle of the midterm election, and this is a problem for Republicans. It just is. And this is Donald Trump's doing.

BURNETT: So do you think they're going to say anything tomorrow? And also, just to be clear here, the spine is often coming from people who have been spurned.

JEAN-PIERRE: You know, it's true. It's true, yeah.

PAUL RIECKHOFF, HOST OF THE INDEPENDENT AMERICANS PODCAST: Or shamed into it by the voters. I mean, about damn time, better late than never. But it also comes with an asterisk because two Republicans didn't vote today. McConnell and I think McCormick weren't there. So it was a 50-48 vote.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: And Fetterman voted on the other side.

RIECKHOFF: Right, as he consistently does. But the important part is the sea change that's happening. The politicians are catching up to where the country is. And it's an overwhelmingly unpopular war.

And I think they also recognize this has been the worst ceasefire ever, and this is potentially the worst deal ever.

[19:10:02]

And this is a really stinky mess that everybody wants to get away from almost more than the reflecting pool. But we've got a bigger situation, which is you can't trust anything Trump says, and you can't trust anything the Iranian regime says. And that's what makes this so dangerous, and I think underscores it, no matter what Trump says, no matter what Congress does, this is very far from over.

BURNETT: By the way, what you just said there, I think is really profound. It is true that we know the Iranian government has always put out propaganda.

CUPP: Yes. BUIRNETT: You used to know that there was a spin coming from a White House, but you could trust certain facts or certain things that they said.

CUPP: Yes.

BURNETT: And now that is not true.

CUPP: It's such a deleterious position to be in. We've never trusted Iran. We shouldn't trust Iran. And what they're saying has their particular audience, right?

BURNETT: Yep.

CUPP: We should be able to trust what we are saying. And we don't. I don't know many people who trust the information that we're putting out.

That leaves the American people in a really precarious position in an election year. Who do we believe? We can't believe our government. We don't believe the bad actors because we never have. There's no one with sort of the adult voice in the room to say, here's what's real. Here's what we know, and we're not going to get ahead of what we know.

Here's where we are. No one's saying that.

RIECKHOFF: Congress can pull the plug on the funding. They're not entirely lame ducks. They will have a defense budget to authorize at the end of the year, which includes a $500 billion plus up. And now we find out $80 billion for the year.

We also can't trust them on the money. They said $29 billion. Now it's $80 billion.

But Congress can pull the plug on the funding. They can ask harder questions. They can demand hearings. They can put Pete Hegseth in the hot seat every single day until our troops come home. There's a lot more they can do.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, that's what I was about to say. There has always been a lot more that they can do, and they have consistently shown that they are not willing to do that. And I think the most interesting thing that you can see now is Majority Leader Thune, ahead of this meeting that they're supposed to have tomorrow with Donald Trump on policy issues, he has told his members, why don't y'all speak up?

Y'all should just talk to Trump and tell him face to face what you think.

I mean, that does not show a sort of robust cohesion in the Republican conference, in my view.

BURNETT: Is that like when your boss says, you know, go into the CEO and tell him what you really think? Go ahead, you do it. Please, say it. JEAN-PIERRE: It's a political grenade for them, right?

RIECKHOFF: Trump also doesn't care. He's going to keep going. He's all gas no brakes unless he's forced to stop and nothing has forced him to stop.

BURNETT: Well, also, okay, and I'm curious to people the way they get when they're in a room with him and in that you know we kept getting more and more information from Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan's book which is really incredible. I mean, do they just have people wearing wires and cameras in the drawers.

I mean, there's just incredible --

CUPP: He talks willingly to them.

JEAN-PIERRE: No, he talks to them --

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: But some of these things that they have are just details coming from all sorts of people. I mean, it's incredible. But this one, Trump's executive assistant, Natalie Harp, who began working for Trump at Mar-a-Lago in the first months after he left the White House, the book writes about her. Okay, it says, Harp wrote Trump adoring letters that she left in his personal spaces, including one that read, quote, "You are all that matters to me."

Okay, what do you make of this, Lulu, in the context of all the things -- I'm not asking --

(LAUGHTER)

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Take this first, take this first.

BURNETT: But I guess what we're asking here, okay, is the way that Trump can exert control over people around him that continues to surprise people.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: So, I don't want to talk too much about this young woman because I think there's a real power differential there, and I don't know what that relationship actually looks like. What I can say that this anecdote does show is that President Trump requires and admires that kind of complete blind --

BURNETT: Complete fealty --

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Fealty and complete. That's right. It's like, I think most people, if you were, if you had an employee, because that's what she is, leaving you letters in your personal space telling you that you are the most important thing in your life, you would say, You know what, hon, I think you need to take a vacation.

But he instead finds this to be incredibly affirming and that says more about him than it does about her.

BURNETT: Right, right. I think that's an interesting point about it though.

RIECKHOFF: It's --

BURNETT: That you would expect this and demand this.

RIECKHOFF: Yeah. It's on brand and I think it's -- it's even more troubling because it shows that he's surrounding himself with people who adore him, there are no contricting -- conflicting ideas there's no one challenging him. So if he wants to do something like bomb Iran or he wants to do something like use a nuke or he wants to do something like take out Venezuela, there's not a single voice around him that can offer any of contrast or challenge all the way down to his assistant.

Everyone is in this circle of sycophants, which is very, very dangerous.

JEAN-PIERRE: And it's, you see that more in this administration, this second administration that he's in than the first, right? The loyalty around him is just insane.

Look, I have been part of two administrations. I have never seen a role like this. It is unusual to have someone basically be a human printer and only put in front of you stories that you like.

[19:15:06]

Make sure you keep all the bad stuff away from him. It is so -- it's a disadvantage to the American people because it is important for the president to hear both sides, the good stuff and the bad stuff. It is -- it is insane. And I have never seen anything like this.

But again, it plays to what Trump likes, pure, complete loyalty. And you see that more around him this time around, certainly than you did in the first time.

BURNETT: All right. All of you staying with me.

Next, breaking news. We're primary night here. Final note votes being cast in a primary that is testing the Democratic star, New York Mayor Mamdani. Can he oust longtime incumbents?

Plus, polls in South Carolina are just closing. Trump was worried about another loss. So to make sure that he wins, he endorsed both candidates in the runoff for governor.

John King at the wall with results.

And new details of the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie as we hear today from her daughter Savannah.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:20:23]

BURNETT: Breaking news, an epic battle within the Democratic Party playing out in New York City tonight, where polls are closing shortly in several closely watched places. Mayor Zohran Mamdani is now trying to oust two powerful Democratic incumbents. He's also trying to capture a third House seat.

These are races that are pitting Mamdani against the top Democrat in the House, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. And they embody the struggle, civil war, some are calling it, inside the Democratic Party that is being waged across the country. And this is Democratic Socialists, okay? That's as they are calling themselves, trying to expand their ranks by taking on the party's establishment, kicking out their own incumbents.

And their message is resonating with more and more voters. Harry Enten recently pointed out that Democratic Socialists have a higher net favorable rating right now than Democrats do in Congress.

And Jeff Zeleny is OUTFRONT at a polling location right here in New York City.

And, Jeff, the races in New York tonight are crucial for this reason, right? It is the far left flank taking on incumbents and trying to clean their own house. It could set the direction of the Democratic Party.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, that certainly is Mayor Mamdani's hope to try and attract more left-leaning candidates to serve in Congress. And the prime example of that are the endorsements, as you said, that he has made here, really extraordinary when you think about it, endorsing rivals to Democratic incumbent members of Congress. Dan Goldman in the 10th district here, and Adriano Espaillat in the 13th district, longtime incumbents. Mayor Mamdani has endorsed their left-leaning challengers.

So we shall see what the voters say. But Erin, it really is an example of what we're seeing playing out across the country. These are not majority makers, if you will, because these blue districts are likely almost certainly to send whichever Democrat wins the primary to a Congress in November. But this is not how Democrats hope to win back the majority. That is through more moderate Democrats across the country by winning over some suburban voters.

But this is going to be potentially an issue for Hakeem Jeffries. As you said, he is the, of course, Democrat, the Democratic minority leader. If Democrats win control of the Congress in November, he would be speaker. And this is pulling his conference to the left, but that is sort of getting ahead of things.

I mean, the reality here is voters will make these decisions, but it is really driving the party and it's a precursor to the 2028 presidential race as well. Just what types of ideology are fueling the Democratic Party here? But other questions also are hanging over this.

This a race where I am to fill a Jerry Nadler seat. He's been in Congress for 17 terms, 34 years. Will Jack Schlossberg make the cut? Of course, he's the grandson to a President John F. Kennedy. There is some skepticism of that. But A.I. has also been front and center in this race as well. Israel, of course, has too, so a lot of ideological themes here that are playing out, but it's a test for the mayor. There's no doubt about it. We often talk about these endorsement, a test for President Trump, but for tonight it's one for Mayor Mamdani -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right, thank you very much, Jeff Zeleny. So, you know, Lulu, how important is it for Mamdani's future? I saw someone the other day talking about a speech at the Knicks, saying Republicans are really glad this guy wasn't born in the U.S., that he can't be president because his powers, his speech, his communication.

But what's at stake tonight is his ability to pick somebody, put his hand on the lever, and have it work against his own moderate Democrat Party.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: It's a big risk. What he's betting on is that the surge of insurgent anger that you saw propel him to power, that there is just a general feeling that things aren't working and that they want to see something different is going to propel some of these same types of people and that he can claim credit for it. I mean, what I have heard from progressive Democrats is that they need to expand their numbers and that has been part of AOC's project, that has been part of many other people's project on the farther left because they want to have a civil war in the party and there really hasn't been one up until now.

I mean, frankly, their numbers have been small. So Mamdani is really staking a lot of political capital on this, and it remains to be seen what happens. But it could be a lose-lose for him, because it's going to have a lot of anger in the sort of traditional Democratic circles over what he's trying to pull off here.

So I'm not sure how for him, because it's going to have a lot of anger in the sort of traditional Democratic circles over what he's trying to pull off here. So I'm not sure how this is all going to play out.

BURNETT: It is interesting, though, Karine, to the extent that he succeeds and where he succeeds, that is pulling the Democratic Party further and further left.

[19:25:06]

Not towards the kind of, you know, moderate center where people say independence or what people are.

JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, Mamdani, Mayor Mamdani has a lot to lose, and he has a lot to gain tonight. And we are going to see how this is going to play out. But you are correct.

We're seeing a primary, especially in New York, but across the country where it is certainly going to have a say on what the Democratic Party looks like moving forward. I mean, look, the Democratic Party is supposed to be a big tent party. That is what it -- you're supposed to have different -- you're supposed to have different ideologies, and you're supposed to do it in a way where you're respectful of each other.

And I think one of the things that we saw with Mamdani in 2025 is, you know, the establishment was not happy that he was the Democratic nominee. And instead of bringing him in, they pushed him away and supported people who did not win the primary and did not back him. And I think that was a big mistake that the establishment made.

Now what we're seeing is progressive versus moderate. You're seeing these establishment versus new voices.

BURNETT: Yeah.

JEAN-PIERRE: And, you know, it's going to, and then you have special interest groups in there, whether it's AIPAC or A.I. interest groups. And so this is a battle within the Democratic Party, and we will see how it plays out.

But I would say this one last thing. It is not surprising this is happening now because there was a major loss. Democrats had a major loss in 2024. And so when those things happen, regardless of the party, there has to be a conversation of who that party is and what happens next and how do we move forward. BURNETT: And this kind of thing had had that conversation.

JEAN-PIERRE: I agree. I agree. And they did not. And I totally, I totally agree. And they did not. And it didn't play out in 2025. And now this conversation is playing out at the ballot.

(CROSSTALK)

RIECKHOFF: But something significantly different is happening here also. This country has a primary problem. And New York City is ground zero for our primary problem. You're going to have less than half a million people as of six o'clock who voted in this primary to determine what's going to be the fate for five million voters in New York City.

What's actually happened here is a great battle plan. Mamdani's already won because he's mayor, right? The question is, can he run the table? And it looks like he can, because what he's been doing is riding on the infrastructure that's been built for years in New York by the DSA, by the Working Families Party, to run the primaries and drive turnout, and they'll do that tonight. They will drive turnout.

Moderates aren't going to vote. Independents like me, a million of us, can't vote at all in this primary. This is the most close primary in the country, and what happens is, the far left is going to run it because they can do turnout, they can mobilize people, they've got charismatic leaders like Mamdani and AOC. But this is New York.

JEAN-PIERRE: And they're relying on people, people power, right? That's exactly it.

RIECKHOFF: But they're also relying on infrastructure. And there's been a lot of effort put into building for this moment.

JEAN-PIERRE: But I would also say he's not on the ballot. So it'll be interesting how they -- if that infrastructure is able to do.

CUPP: Remarkable --

JEAN-PIERRE: I'm just saying.

CUPP: -- Mamdani is doing. Because he's not -- he's mayor. He's injecting himself into federal elections. He's been here six months.

He's not just endorsed. He has -- he's shown up at ad shoots. He's fundraised. He has helped recruit candidates. He has two top aides running the campaigns of two candidates.

He is incredibly involved. If I'm a New York voter, which I was for a long time, I'd be asking, what are you doing for me? This is about, you're here to solve my problems, not remake the Democratic Party. That's one part of this that's remarkable.

BURNETT: But the Knicks won, S.E.

CUPP: But the Knicks did win. But the other thing I'll just say is --

(CROSSTALK)

RIECKHOFF: He had nothing to do with that.

CUPP: The other thing I'll just say is, I have been here before. I have been here in the early 2000s when Republicans took on Republicans and tried to purify and purge our own party.

Let me tell you what happened. It led to a rise of insurgents and Tea Party people, some of whom were not very qualified, some of whom weren't even conservative. And eventually, it broke the party apart. It led to 17 people running in 2016, and someone like Trump coming in and exploiting the weakness of the Republican Party at the time.

I am watching this happen to the Democrats. It is healthy to have questions about what happened in the last election. It is not healthy to go down the purity test and say, do you support Israel? Do you support AIPAC?

Then you're not welcome in this party. And breaking up the party and weakening it, which is exactly what's happening.

BURNETT: So can I, so I --

(CROSSTALK)

RIECKHOFF: It's the rise of the extremes on the left and on the right. This is an example of how the far left --

(CROSSTALK)

CUPP: But when someone --

(CROSSTALK) CUPP: -- deportations, no prisons. That is but clowning the Democratic people. That is an unserious solution to a very real, both practical and political problem.

JEAN-PIERRE: Look, I think these conversations need to happen. They need to happen in a respectful way. That just has to happen in a respectful way.

But in the general election, it's not going to be about this. The American people care about the economy. They care about how they're going to pay their rent. They care about their health care costs. So it's going to be interesting to see --

CUPP: Why are they only just talking about AIPAC?

JEAN-PIERRE: Because we're in the primary right now. We're in the primary.

[19:30:00]

CUPP: This was incredibly done.

RIECKHOFF: This is not a general election strategy. This is not a general election --

JEAN-PIERRE: But I am saying -- I am saying the same thing. In the general election, it's going to be interesting to see what is going to be the message for the Democratic Party because voters are watching. They're watching this.

RIECKHOFF: But most of them aren't actually voting. Only 500,000 are going to vote. And Mamdani, I think, is going to roll tonight. It's going to solidify his power.

He'll have more power in city government. He'll have more power in Congress. But that power will be limited. It will still be limited.

JEAN-PIERRE: Well, it remains to be seen. It remains to be seen. I mean, he has the most to gain in the most --

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Interesting race is the one which Chevalier against Espaillat because when Espaillat came in 2017.

BURNETT: Manhattan, Bronx.

GARCIA-NAVARRO: Manhattan Bronx. But when he came in 2017, he's the head of the Latino Caucus and he was touted himself as this new person coming in that he wasn't, you know, he had been born an undocumented immigrant had come and he was this fresh breath of fresh air. He's now 71. It's nine years later and he's looking like the past and now he's -- this woman is coming in at 32, 33 years old, running to his left.

I mean, what this says is that this is about not only some of the issues that we've been discussing, it's also generational. There is a feeling that people are too old and that they want new solutions, people that represent them. And you saw that when Mamdani got voted in. He got voted in on the youth vote.

So you can't ignore the generational shifts that we are seeing.

RIECKHOFF: But that doesn't always apply. If you look at New York 10, where Brad Lander's likely going to take out Danny Goldman, they're both roughly the same age, same demographic. But the difference is Goldman doesn't have the Mamdani AOC DSA machine behind him and Lander does. And that's what he's like --

GARCIA-NAVARRO: We'll see what happens.

BURNETT: That's going to obviously be fascinating to see. It is the Petri dish for the country here, New York.

And next, I'll talk to one of the candidates in these crucial races in New York, State Assemblyman Alex Bores, a man who has found himself at the center of a proxy war in this election between two of the biggest A.I. companies in America.

Plus, the breaking news polls have closed in South Carolina. We're about to make a projection.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:36:58]

BURNETT: Breaking news, CNN is now projecting that Alan Wilson will be the Republican nominee for governor in the state of South Carolina leading out Lieutenant Governor Pamela Evette in the primary runoff.

Now, Trump had endorsed Evette, but at the last minute, he added Wilson to his endorsement list, perhaps seeing some early polling because he did just come off two failed endorsements in governor's races in Iowa and Georgia. Obviously, did not want another loss here, so by adding Wilson to his endorsement list at the last second, he avoided that. Otherwise, obviously he would have been the loser.

John King is OUTFRONT live at the magic wall.

So, John, now it's pretty clear we now know why Trump made that last minute endorsement of Wilson. So what are you seeing in the results here?

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Just a conservative sweep by -- you have two conservative candidates, lieutenant governor, but Wilson is the statewide. He's the attorney general. He's won statewide. He's the favorite of the conservative base.

And you just see in the early numbers, maybe they change a little bit, but this, Erin, is a blowout from the beginning here. So you see why the president will now tell you he had it right all along when of course he didn't. The president's initial bet was on the lieutenant governor, but as he has done in some other races, and as you noted, he's had a couple of scars on his otherwise pretty good record in Republican primaries this year.

But of late, he has had a couple of hits. So the late -- I'm for either one of them from the president of the United States, the Attorney General, Alan Wilson, like I said, in a runaway right now.

He's a conservative. He's well loved by the Trump base. He's a Trump person. But the president made the wrong call in the beginning, and he's going to say he got it right in the end.

BURNETT: So, OK, I guess he got it. He got it right. I mean, when you endorse both, you can't go wrong.

Okay, there's also the race to fill Congresswoman Nancy Mace's seat that you're watching. And that's a Democratic runoff that faces a three-star Navy Admiral, Nancy Lacore, who was fired by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth without reason. She's been on this show. She's not been shy about how she was fired by Hegseth.

How are voters responding tonight?

KING: You see Admiral Lacore losing at the moment by almost 10 points. This was tight out-of-the-box as we've moved up to 23 percent of the vote in. We had to wait and see how the con comes in. As you see the vote count, it's a runoff election. One of the issues in runoffs is to how do people come out a second time in an election?

Pretty low turnout at the moment, 464 votes is the margin. So that looks like a huge point, right? It looks like a huge swing. Looks like almost 10 points, but it's 464 votes.

So we need to wait there to see how this plays out. This is a district that includes Charleston. It includes the coast. You mentioned Admiral Lacore, fired by Pete Hegseth. This is a district where you do have a lot of military traditions, a lot of retired military in this area as well.

This is a likely Republican seat. There's also a runoff, by the way, on the Republican side right now that is very close, just as well. Also very close. This is a likely Republican seat in November anyway.

But, Erin, you know, in this year where you talk about, if you look at the fundamentals, it would take not a blue wave, but a blue tidal wave for this seat to be in play. But it is a seat the Democrats watch because at the moment, at the moment, the Democrats think maybe you can expand the map. Now, are they optimistic they can win here? Absolutely not. But you want the strongest candidate just in case there is that that big wave?

[19:40:00]

BURNETT: All right. So let me ask you about New York. You know, as you were getting ready, we were having a conversation here, and they were pretty fired up about what's going on here.

KING: Yes, they were. BURNETT: Zohran Mamdani, right? The Democratic Socialist political superstar of the moment, who's endorsing three congressional candidates against incumbents. So this is party on party, you know, internecine warfare.

How big of a test is this for Mamdani's power over Democrats, his drive to redefine the party as a Democratic Socialist Party?

KING: I think your panel had it right very early in his term as mayor. He is making a national flex here. Now, he's making it in the state of New York and in New York City, where a Democratic Socialist may be. Dan Goldman is the incumbent. Brad Lander is Mamdani's choice here against the Democratic incumbent. That's a shot at the Democratic establishment.

Then you come up here. This is the 12th District. And then you come up here again. Espaillat is an incumbent, a prominent Democrat, and his candidate is the top. We don't have votes here till after 9:00. Again, it's a shot at the Democratic establishment.

There's also a third race down here in the 7th District where the incumbent, Congresswoman Velazquez, is retiring, but the borough president was her choice, and the mayor said, No, I have my own choice. You're a Democratic Socialist. So this is an anti- establishment, anti-Washington establishment play by New York City's mayor, running against some power brokers in New York City, also some national power brokers, saying he wants to influence the party in the city tonight, and then nationally as we head into 2028.

Will it work? We will see, but it's certainly a big effort by the new mayor to flex.

BURNETT: So can we talk about this nationally? Because, you know, we were referring to Harry Enten and looking at polling about Democratic Socialists being more popular than Democrats when you look at Congress. But you travel all over the country, John.

So this idea of Democratic Socialism, which is, by the way, a very amorphous concept and doesn't really seem to have a clear definition, you know, depending on who you talk to. But is it limited to just big blue cities, places like New York, or is this something bigger?

KING: It is most powerful in blue cities. Washington, D.C., where I'm standing right now, likely to have a Democratic socialist mayor. She won the primary, is heavily favored. Possibly in Los Angeles, where you're going to have a Democratic socialist running against the incumbent Democrat, Karen Bass, in November there, possibly there in a city.

But here's what you do see. Graham Platner once identified as a socialist in Maine. He doesn't use that label anymore, but listen to him. He runs on Bernie Sanders' agenda. He talks about revolution.

Abdul El-Sayed, one of three Democrats running for Senate in Michigan, favorite in the polls right now, says he's not a Democratic socialist, but he's certainly a very left-liberal Democrat. He runs on the Sanders agenda.

So we're seeing more of this across the country, and some Democrats are worried what you can sell in New York City, you cannot sell in the heartland. We're going to see, Erin.

BURNETT: Yeah, we certainly will.

All right, thank you very much, John King. And next, new details in the search for Nancy Guthrie, as Savannah Guthrie has a new message for her mother's captors tonight.

And we are counting down until polls close. And one of the biggest and most expensive house races ever, New York State Assemblyman Alex Bores, facing a JFK grandson and other big names. He's going after A.I. He's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:47:18]

BURNETT: Breaking news polls closing soon in one of the most closely watched races in New York, where $26 million has been spent in a primary, the second most expensive this year. Eight Democratic candidates are competing for an open House seat.

And a lot of that money has been spent in really a proxy war between two A.I. companies, OpenAI and Anthropic. And the majority of that money, the majority of that whole war is focused on our next guest, a former engineer at the tech company Palantir, who has centered his campaign on safeguarding against A.I.

And he is OUTFRONT now, the Democratic candidate for Congress in New York State Assemblyman Alex Bores.

And, Alex, I appreciate your time. So obviously, all eyes are on New York and so many important primaries tonight, perhaps none more so than the one that you are in the midst of. And obviously, there's been early voting, but people have been voting throughout the day. Today, polls are about to close. How do you feel right now?

ALEX BORES (D), NY STATE ASSEMBLY: We feel great. We've had enthusiasm and excited voters all throughout this district. People are realizing that the old ways aren't working and are excited to try something new. And we are building this big tent coalition of people throughout the district. Nearly all of labor, every LGBTQ group that's endorsed in this race has endorsed us. We have an incredible coalition. We're feeling really confident going into 9:00 p.m.

BURNETT: All right, so you talk about big tent. We just had a ferocious conversation here about the Democratic Party and big tent, and at the same time that you have this battle going on within the Democratic Party for the soul of it.

Now, the mayor didn't endorse in your race, okay? He did endorse in several other races in New York for Democratic socialists, not for Democrats, okay? Just to be clear, you are a Democrat, you are not a registered Democratic socialist.

But this is a schism in your party. Do you think that the rise in Democratic socialists and Democratic socialism as a concept is a good thing?

BORES: Well, I think democracy is a good thing, and that involves having people advocate for different views. I don't agree with DSA on all that they advocate for, but I welcome activists becoming a part of this process and having these conversations.

You know, the mayor hasn't endorsed in my race, but he is a voter in this race, and we had a really friendly conversation before he went and he cast his early vote. But our race is focused much more, as you mentioned, on the role of A.I. and the impact that that's going to have on people's lives, and that's not a left right issue. It's sort of a different paradigm than we're reviewed politics, but more people getting involved in a variety of different views, I think that's a good thing.

BURNETT: So, you mentioned A.I. Obviously, it's been the core of your campaign, but your campaign has also become a proxy war in the A.I. war.

[19:50:03]

So, specifically between OpenAI and Anthropic. So when you just look at advertising dollars alone in your race, Alex, OpenAI-linked funding has spent $3.6 million against you. Anthropic-linked funding has spent far more than that for you, right? It's multiples of that, nearly $18 million.

Jack Schlossberg, who is running against you for the seat, was on the show last night, and he said this to me about you and A.I.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JACK SCHOLSSBERG (D), NEW YORK CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: This is going to be the second most expensive House primary ever, and that is because of a bunch of AI money coming in on the one side for Alex Bores. He's funded by Anthropic.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Okay, just to be clear, by the way, I said 18 million spent for you. It was eight million, so I wanted to correct that. But what do you say to Jack Schlossberg, Alex, and people like him, who say that you're not going to be able to stand up to an industry that has been so central to your career and to financing your campaign?

BORES: I think there's been a lot of misinformation spread both by some of my opponents, but more than that, by the super PAC that's attacking me. The timeline here is quite clear. Three Trump mega- donors, Ben Horowitz, Marc Andreessen, and Greg Brockman, the president of OpenAI, who in the last filing was Donald Trump's single largest mega-donor, last summer before Jerry ever retired, founded Leading the Future with the goal of stopping any A.I. regulation whatsoever.

Congressman Nadler retired in September, I declared in October, In November, they named me their number one target, their number one enemy in the country. And in December, they pledged to spend at least $10 million against me, a promise they are making good on.

In response, basically, the entire Democratic Party responded. As I mentioned, every nearly every labor union that's endorsed in this race, progressive activists, policy experts, and yes, some people that work in tech as well that want there to be more regulation. But that hasn't affected how far I want to go in terms of actually protecting people. Last year, I passed the strongest AI safety bill in the country over Donald Trump's executive order. I followed it up this year with the strongest bill to protect kids from A.I. chatbots.

Both of bills were opposed by the entire A.I. industry, including by Anthropic. It's just that the battle lines in this race in particular are whether we can regulate AI at all. And for that question, most people are on the side that we need some regulation.

BURNETT: All right, Alex Bores, I appreciate your time very much. Thank you.

And of course, obviously, polls about to close and we will see the results very shortly. Thank you.

And next, new details tonight about the search for Savannah Guthrie's mother.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:56:50]

BURNETT: Tonight, an emotional Savannah Guthrie wiping away tears, begging anyone with information about her 84-year-old mother to speak up. As we are learning new details about a note in the disappearance of her mother, Nancy, which claims she had died.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC "TODAY SHOW" HOST: This is a moment to tell you that we need your help.

We're begging for your help, and I'm not going to miss that opportunity. And so, please, if you're watching, no matter how small the reward is there, you can tell us. It can be anonymous. Please do the right thing for us, for our family, for our children, and we love our mom, and we'll never stop looking for her, never.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: The contents of that note, the second reportedly sent by Nancy Guthrie's abductors was kept secret for months by investigators as they were working the case.

John Miller's OUTFRONT now, our chief law enforcement and intelligence analyst.

So, John, just to try to understand here, what are police telling you about why the contents of this letter, which was received just days after Nancy Guthrie's abduction, why the letter was held and why it is now public?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, they had a number of reasons to not go out with the message that note contained, which was Nancy Guthrie was dead, that she died in the course of the kidnapping, that it wasn't intended to be that way, and that you won't hear from us again.

And the first was they couldn't verify that they were working on verifying that that.

BURNETT: They didn't know if it was true at first, right?

MILLER: But they were also working on verifying that the second e-mail came from the same place that the first e-mail did, because the first e-mail had information about things in the house that arguably only the kidnappers or someone who was there would have known.

The other reason was there were also getting a lot of tips on that tip line, and if people thought Nancy Guthrie was dead with without knowing whether that was true, That could just cause people to say, well, it's over now, and not to be thinking about, I did see something, and maybe I should call it in.

And finally, if somebody was arrested and said, I'm the kidnapper, and they said, all right, well, what did the first note say? What did the second note say? They like to hold things back that only the kidnapper --

BURNETT: Only the kidnapper would know.

But as we're here, five months later, police have not been able to verify Nancy Guthrie is dead because they don't -- they don't have a body. I mean, that seems incredible at this point. No arrests, no nothing. Nothing.

MILLER: It's true that it seems incredible. And you know, what they knew from the night of the kidnapping from the next day was there were blood spatters on the front door. That blood was matched to Nancy Guthrie. They knew that there was some kind of struggle, that she was likely injured in that.

She's 84 years old, was kidnapped without access to her medication and held somewhere, so it's not surprising or even unlikely that she might have died as a result of that, as the kidnapper's letter said.

But while there's no main suspect in this case right now, and I've spoken to sources who are briefed up to the moment, while there's no particular person of interest, there's still work being done. Videos that are being gone over, A.I. that's been applied to look for certain things through thousands of hours, people that they looked at before that they're looking at again. But the case isn't not active. They're just hoping that, because this

is now back in the news, there's that one person out there who does know something.

BURNETT: Or maybe will say.

MILLER: You know, the reward's over 100,000.

BURNETT: And maybe someone will hear, you know, the pain and the anguish in Savannah's voice and do the right thing.

Thank you all very much.

"AC360" begins now.