Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Bondi House Oversight Hearing Erupts Into Shouting Matches; TMZ Founder Says New Note Offers to ID Guthrie Suspect in Exchange for Bitcoin. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired February 11, 2026 - 12:30   ET

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

[12:30:00]

REP. JAMIE RASKIN, (D-MD) RANKING MEMBER, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: -- she's embarrassing you.

PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: Shame on you.

REP. JIM JORDAN, (D-MD) CHAIRMAN, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: The time of the gentleman has expired. I would remind the Committee that last Congress, Secretary Mayorkas was here numerous times and he wouldn't answer our questions even when we sent them to him ahead of time in writing. So that's what we've had to deal with. I think the attorney general is doing just fine. We have votes shortly.

I will go to the gentleman from Virginia and then we will take a break to head to the floor.

REP. BEN CLINE, (R-VA): I thank the Chairman. Attorney General Bondi, thank you for being here. And I wanted to thank you for your work at DOJ in restoring the rule of law, encouraging transparency surrounding Jack Smith's partisan investigations into President Trump, declassifying information --

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT AND ANCHOR OF 'INSIDE POLITICS': OK. We are watching a very, very intense, acrimonious hearing between the Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi, you see her there, and members of the House Judiciary Committee. I want to bring in our panel and we're going to talk about this sort of atmospherics in a minute.

But first, M.J. Lee, you are here. You have been covering the Epstein crimes. And more importantly, given what we just heard from not one, but two members of Congress, the victims and how they feel they have been treated or mistreated with the release of these files. Talk about what we heard from both Jamie Raskin in the question and answer the question -- the question because she didn't answer it -- and Thomas Massie, the Republican who has been probably the one who has spearheaded the release of these files more than any other Republican, much to the chagrin of Donald Trump.

M.J. LEE, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL ENTERPRISE CORRESPONDENT: And actually, may have been the only Republican to focus his questions in this hearing to Bondi about Epstein, unless I missed it earlier in the hearing. The strategy for the lawmakers who have been questioning Bondi about Epstein largely seems to be to do the greatest hits of redaction failures by the DOJ, whether it is victims' names that were not properly redacted, co-conspirators and other bad actors whose names were redacted, 302s that were just completely blacked out.

The aim appears to be to sort of paint the DOJ throughout this process as having been completely incompetent or sloppy or corrupt. And I think the visual of the survivors actually sitting in the audience right behind Bondi was quite powerful. And it's no surprise that some of these lawmakers directly pointed to the survivors, asking them at some points to stand up so that everybody could see and that Bondi would be forced to reckon with the fact that those women represent women who have been victims in the past and whose lives have been turned upside down.

I'll tell you, Dana, one sort of refrain from Bondi that has really not sat well with the survivors is her repeated assertion that if you know something about Epstein, come to the FBI. We want to hear from you. We are eager to hear your story.

BASH: She said that several times, including her opening statement.

LEE: She said that -- yeah. She said that several times. And one survivor in the room texted me, we have gone to the FBI for almost 30 years!!!!! I mean, they find such irony in the fact that the FBI now is saying anyone that wants to give us information about Epstein, we are here to listen to you when they feel like we are, at this moment in time, precisely because the FBI and law enforcement didn't listen to the reports that we made. And some of these women are even looking for their FBI files still.

BASH: We're going to sneak in a quick break. We're going to have a lot more to talk about and to show you and to explain, give context around what we have heard in this hearing. Don't go anywhere.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:38:18]

BASH: We're following Breaking News in the desperate search for Nancy Guthrie, Savannah Guthrie's mother. This morning, TMZ Founder, Harvey Levin said that TMZ received a new note in relation to the potential kidnapper.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARVEY LEVIN, FOUNDER, TMZ ARIZONA: We got kind of a bizarre letter, an email from somebody who says they know who the kidnapper is and that they have tried reaching Savannah's sister, Annie, and Savannah's brother to no avail. And they said they want one Bitcoin sent to a Bitcoin address that we have confirmed is active. It's a real Bitcoin address. And as they put it, time is more than relevant.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: TMZ says it handed the new note over to the FBI. The FBI says it has no updates to share at this time. You see there, CNN's John Miller is here to help us understand this as best we can. Again, we have a communication to TMZ. It appears not to the family, not to law enforcement. When you heard this, what went through your mind?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, what goes through my mind is this is the new wrinkle of technology in the old art or game of kidnapping for ransom, which is people are able to use these tools, whether it's hidden email addresses or Bitcoin, for that matter, that provide that kind of anonymity where they're changing the rules of the game.

And the rules of the game are there's a $50,000 reward from the FBI if you provide information that either leads to the kidnapper or to Nancy Guthrie, you get the $50,000 reward.

[12:40:00]

This individual is saying give me one Bitcoin, which today I think is worth about $68,000 and I'll give you the information. Pay me first and then the information. So if the information is no good or it's a scam, you're out the money and you've been had. Is it worthy of discussion? I think it's very much like the ransom demand, which is you're going to have to front something and show that you either have a way of knowing this or a piece of information that verifies what you're about to tell us. But short of that, this would -- he said he wrote to the family.

Remember, the last guy who wrote directly to the family, texting them, asking for Bitcoin, claiming to be the kidnapper, ended up being arrested as a complete fraud. So, it's unfortunate that we're seeing this.

BASH: Yeah, and John, this obviously comes after the events that we saw overnight East Coast time in the evening in Arizona. A man was detained, questioned, and then released. There is clearly a mix of leads coming in for lots of reasons, but I would presume, first and foremost, because of the images that we're showing on the screen right now that they released yesterday.

MILLER: So interestingly, what I've been told is that that individual was the subject of a lead that they had been working on prior to the release of the video.

BASH: Interesting.

MILLER: And that information was developed to the point where they felt, let's get him in, let's sit him down and have a conversation. And that happens in a case. Suspects rise, suspects fall, depending on the approach. And the approach is generally, let's get to this person, start talking to them, and let's figure out if we can prove they're not the suspect. In that case, the difference was it was under the glare of the worldwide media.

But it's a normal process in a case. The fact that they were able to get a search warrant for the house shows that both they're dealing with exigent circumstance, but also that they had enough to convince a judge to sign it, which means they had at least probable cause. BASH: John Miller, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it, always. Thank you so much. I'm sure we'll be talking very soon.

MILLER: Hopefully with good news.

BASH: When we come back -- let's hope so. Let's hope so. And we are, obviously, it goes without saying, praying for Savannah and her family. And if you do have any tip or any recognition of the individual that you have now seen on those images in that video, please call this tip line you see here, 520-351-4900. That's Pima County. 1-800-CALL-FBI is the FBI tip line.

When we come back, we're going to have more on the other Breaking News that we have been watching live here on CNN, the explosive hearing on Capitol Hill. America's top law enforcement officer shouting insults at Democrats who are trying to give it right back. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:47:50]

BASH: Right now, the House Judiciary hearing with Attorney General, Pam Bondi, is in a short break. It has been a fiery, heavy on personal insults hearing, particularly focused on DOJ's handling of the Epstein files. Let's just listen to two notable exchanges.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RASKIN: You can let her filibuster all day long, but not on our watch. Not on our time, no way. And I told you about that Attorney General before you started.

BONDI: You don't tell me anything, washed-up --

RASKIN: Yeah. I did tell you because we saw what you did in the Senate.

BONDI: -- loser lawyer, not even a lawyer.

Within 40 minutes, you asked me a question. Within 40 minutes, Wexner's name was added back.

REP. THOMAS MASSIE, (R-MA): Within 40 minutes of me catching you red- handed.

BONDI: Red-handed.

(LAUGH)

BONDI: There was one redaction out of over 4,700.

(CROSSTALK)

BONDI: And we invited you in. This guy has Trump derangement syndrome. He needs to get -- you're a failed politician. (END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: OK, I'm joined now with our panel. I'll start with somebody who is the opposite of a washed-up loser lawyer.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Thank you.

BASH: You're welcome.

(LAUGH)

BASH: I want to get into a lot of the specifics because so much of sort of what is bubbling up in news and controversy goes through the Justice Department right now, across the board, Epstein files, and on and on and on. But I just want to, for a second, talk about the tone and tenor of this hearing.

Yes, we saw Pam Bondi do this the last time she testified. She had her list of insults that somebody caught a picture of. She knows what she feels that she needs to do, so that the president sees her fighting back. She also wants to deflect on a lot of these issues where she is in the hot seat. As somebody who worked at the DOJ, your thoughts on what we've seen so far?

HONIG: This is a fiasco. I wish I had a nicer way to put it, but this is the Attorney General of the United States. This is the top law enforcement official in the country. This is the same job that was once held by Robert F. Kennedy Sr., by Elliot Richardson, by Janet Reno. And there are vital questions that the American public needs transparency, needs substantive answers on.

[12:50:00]

Instead, what do we get? Accusations of Trump derangement syndrome, name-calling, you're a loser lawyer, this and that. I mean, coming from the AG of the United States in the U.S. Senate, did we get any meaningful clarity on the Epstein investigations, on the Epstein files? To your point, do the victims feel, M.J., to what you were saying earlier, like they've been given any transparency, any clarity on any of this?

Have we learned anything new about what DOJ is doing to investigate in Minnesota? Have we learned anything new about the search warrant in Fulton County? Have we learned anything new about the fact that dozens of judges across this country have found that this DOJ lacks credibility? No, it's been name-calling, it's been amateurish, it's an embarrassment to the Justice Department, what we're seeing from Pam Bondi.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT AND ANCHOR: I mean, plus one, I guess, at some level, but from the non-lawyer, washed up or otherwise. I think, I'm not some stuffy institutionalist. I love a good back-and-forth in a hearing. I'd point you to Scott Bessent, who's had some really great one-line retorts that he didn't have to prepare for or have his staff prepare in a very lengthy book of opposition research before his hearing. I think that's a great part of the game and lawmakers are just as guilty of this as administration officials and have been from every single Congress and administration you can think of. This is farcical and it's embarrassing, and it is also extraordinarily juvenile in the approach.

And to Elie's point, which I think is important, as we've seen kind of the congressional role in the branches of government continue to diminish year after year after year across several administrations, but in particular in the last 13 months, like this is an oversight committee of this agency.

There was a moment where a Democratic lawmaker asked the AG, can you please submit this document that I'm talking about since you won't answer questions to the committee, which the answer has to be yes. And she said, I'm not going to commit to anything because I don't like how you're answering or asking these questions.

Like that's -- it's just should not be a plausible option for a cabinet official, period.

BASH: And there are so many important questions, which, you know, there's so a lot of people who are left to ask questions, including, like you said, I mean, one of the things that we've been talking about a lot on this show is the elections coming up. First of all, the fact that the DOJ released the evidence that they gave to allow for and to get permission for a search warrant in Fulton County, Georgia.

There were a lot of sort of washed-up, to borrow a term from Pam Bondi, conspiracy theories that were used and somehow the magistrate judge said yes. There is the lawsuit that DOJ is involved with about 24 states to try to get really sensitive personal information from them on voters.

And so, these are critical issues for the American people and for the Congress to do their constitutional duty for oversight and sort of owning the libs and showing the conservatives in -- conservative media that you're not going to sort of answer questions of Democrats and even some Republicans. That does undermine what this is supposed to do.

And, you know, look, I mean, to be fair, there are theatrics on the Democratic side too. There's theater, at least bad theater, like not getting good reviews theater across the board.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think one of the most striking things to me about these hearings is they've really devolved over time. And I wonder if a member just asking a question plainly without sort of the hyperbole going into it, I don't think it would change anything for Pam Bondi in this hearing.

But it does get to the whole underlying issue, which is there was a time where even if it was a Republican administration, if a Republican witness was acting that way, the Republican side of the aisle, at least someone, and not Thomas Massie in this case, because we know how he and the president feel about each other, but someone else would say, you know, as a reminder in the course of this hearing, and that just is not happening.

This is just a free for all. This is for clips. This is for the president, and obviously for the audience of one that we've been talking about.

LEE: It's mostly for the president, right?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah.

LEE: I mean, the number of times that she sort of unprompted, brought up the president's record, the moment where she was being asked about Epstein-related issues and then brought up the Dow breaking records --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

LEE: And I think it was a Democratic Congresswoman who just shouted into the ether, what does that have to do with any of this? She clearly is keenly aware of the audience that she most needs to win over, including on the Epstein stuff, which --

BASH: Exactly, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we're almost out of time, but I want to just pull something out of you, which is especially on the Epstein stuff.

LEE: Especially, yeah.

BASH: Because there's a lot of criticism of her the way that people believe, conservatives believe she bungled at the beginning of the administration on this.

[12:55:00]

LEE: Right, I mean, how many times have we played the clip of her talking about this so-called client list and saying, it's sitting on my desk right now? That sort of set off this entire firestorm of controversies and she's not been able to shake that off. And you know, we've wondered Todd Blanche has sort of been the main face of the DOJ when it comes to Epstein issues is that because she bungled it so badly initially that she couldn't be trusted to be the face of this really important and politically explosive issue.

BASH: All right. Everyone, thank you so much. Don't go anywhere because this committee is going to come back from a break and CNN is going to continue to take it live. Thank you for joining "Inside Politics." "CNN News Central" starts after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)