Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Ex-Prince Andrew Arrested Amid Epstein Files Revelations; Trump Holds First Board of Peace Meeting on Rebuilding Gaza; Families React to Zuckerberg Testimony on Social Media Addiction. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired February 19, 2026 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Happening now we're following two major breaking stories. Former Prince Andrew arrested. The accusations against him and how they could tie back to Jeffrey Epstein.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: And right now, President Trump is holding the first meeting of his Board of Peace, notably missing some key U.S. allies. We're going to keep monitoring this event. We'll bring you any news.

We want to welcome our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer with Pamela Brown, and you're in The Situation Room.

And we begin with the stunning news this morning out of the United Kingdom. The bombshell arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former Prince Andrew, he's in custody on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Andrew becomes the most senior member of the British royal family to be arrested in more than 300 years.

BROWN: And it comes after the U.S. government released a trove of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents, some detailing Andrew's ties to the late sex offender.

King Charles was spotted just a short while ago in London. You can see that right here. He responded earlier to the news with a statement saying he, quote, learned with the deepest concern about the arrest. Though notably, he does not refer to Andrew as his brother. And he added, the law must take its course.

CNN Royal Correspondent Max Foster is in London right outside of Buckingham Palace. What more do we know about this arrest, Max?

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it happened this morning. The king wasn't informed about it. The police went into Andrew's house on the Sandringham Estate, which is owned by the king and was arrested by Thames Valley Police, which oversees Windsor, the Windsor area where Andrew used to live. He was evicted from that house, sent to Norfolk.

And this is in relation to misconduct in public office. So, this is not about any sort of sexual misconduct. It's about Andrew's position as a trade envoy where he would represent the U.K. on trade missions, and allegations that emerged out of the Epstein files that he was sharing sensitive -- market-sensitive government information secrets effectively with Jeffrey Epstein.

So, he can be held for 12, 24 hours, typically. He could be held longer if a magistrate approves it. And then we'll wait to see whether or not he'll be charged. But there's clearly something in this investigation that happened that escalated the case and felt made the police confident enough to go in amidst all of this media attention, and present Andrew, Prince Andrew as he was, with some new findings of some kind, and we'll wait to see what they are.

But at the moment, very limited information, but we have, of course, had this statement as well from the king offering wholehearted support to the police investigation, as you say, not describing Andrew as his brother, trying to do as much as possible to distance himself and indeed the monarchy from this absolute scandal that appears to be unfolding as we speak.

BROWN: Absolutely. And, you know, one of the big questions, Max, is, of course, what did the royal family know, if anything. Tell us about that and just how significant this is for the royal family.

FOSTER: No indication that they knew anything about Andrew's relationship with Epstein beyond what he told that BBC interview a couple of years ago where he said he'd broken off this friendship the year before in around 2010, 2011, around that time. But the Epstein papers showed that the relationship continued for a long time beyond that.

So, the question now, what did Queen Elizabeth know when she ran the monarchy? Is there anything that indicates that she may have known more?

King Charles, when he took the throne, was much more forthright with how he handled it, stripping Andrew of his titles, evicting him from his house in Windsor. And it's interesting that he says he's offering his full and wholehearted support and cooperation with the police and emphasizing that the victims come first here.

It's a real challenge now for the monarchy to try to function with all of these allegations swirling. And they're not going to go away anytime soon because this is a very complex, historic investigation. There's going to be a constant drip, drip of information and the monarchy, every time it tries to do anything, is hurled these questions about Andrew.

[10:05:05]

So, it's a huge challenge, but also the king making it very clear that he's just going to keep calm and carry on, as it were. That's the great slogan of the monarchy, currently holding engagements in Windsor today, not letting this interfere with his diary. But he went out of his way to get a statement out as quickly as possible to show that he was on side with the police. BROWN: And just to follow up with you. As you're there on the ground in London talking to people, Max, what has the reaction been like?

FOSTER: I think the reaction is Andrew needs to be held accountable. And I think you see that from the prime minister down, him saying the police must be allowed to carry on their work. And this is a much bigger police investigation, I have to say, than just Andrew because there's multiple police forces looking into the Epstein files now, launching low level inquiries at this point, but they're being coordinated nationally. Quite a stark difference, I think, to what you're seeing in the United States right now, where you're not seeing this progress, this accountability. And it's interesting seeing the Epstein survivors really praising the U.K. for what it's doing today and trying to get ahead of this.

This investigation is not about any sort of sexual misconduct. It is about misconduct in public office, if you like, but they just want to see accountability for anyone that may have enabled Epstein in any way.

BROWN: And the family of Virginia Giuffre just released this statement in response to the arrest, saying, at last, today, our broken hearts have been lifted at the news that no one is above the law, not even royalty. On behalf of our sister, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, we extend our gratitude to the U.K.'s Thames Valley Police for their investigation and arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

Max Foster, thank you so much. We'll continue to follow this. We appreciate it.

BLITZER: And there's more breaking news we're following here in The Situation Room. Right now, President Trump is holding the first meeting of his Board of Peace to discuss rebuilding war-ravaged Gaza. It's the board's first meeting since it was formally announced last month in Switzerland.

BROWN: The White House says more than 20 countries are attending and billions of dollars are pledged. But many of America's European allies have declined invitations to join the board. Some are there now just as observers.

Minutes ago, the president spoke about its mission.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: What we're doing is very simple, peace. It's called the Board of Peace, and it's all about an easy word to say, but a hard word to produce, peace. But we're going to produce it and we've been doing a really good job. And some of these leaders that are with us have helped me very much during just this first year.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: We're covering all the angles. CNN National Security Correspondent Kylie Atwood is at the U.S. Institute of Peace, where the meeting is underway, and CNN's Jeremy Diamond is in Jerusalem for us.

Kylie, what's expected do you think, to emerge from this morning's meeting?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, what we're hoping for are some more sensitive details on what this Board of Peace is actually planning to do over the course of the next weeks, days, and months here. Obviously, as you guys said, President Trump said that the member nations have pledged $5 billion to reconstruction and humanitarian efforts in Gaza. That's a substantive amount, but, of course, it's a fraction of the some, you know, $50 billion that the United Nations says is needed to reconstruct Gaza.

When it comes to a stabilization force inside of Gaza, there have been some commitments from Indonesia that they could commit some troops, but that's not a final decision. We'll watch and see if any other countries are going to put troops forth towards that effort.

So, so far, the president has been speaking here for more than half an hour. He has not given any substantive updates on those specifics that I just referenced. And as you guys said, there are a number of countries who are not a part of this board, who declined to join the board because there were concerns about it trying to compete with the United Nations.

Some of those countries, however, we should note, did send representatives here to Washington to be effectively observers, to see what is going on. Because when you talk to diplomats from the region, they say, even if the Board of Peace is not necessarily the best vehicle to bring peace to Gaza, it is effectively the only game in town right now. So, they do feel like many countries, even if they're not on this board, are going to want to be involved.

I do want to point out, Wolf, that this happens amid the dramatic backdrop, obviously, of the U.S. military buildup in the Middle East. And one thing that President Trump just said in his remarks with regard to potential U.S. military action against Iran, is that they would be finding out within the next ten days what the United States would do there.

[10:10:001]

So, he's giving us a new timeframe for his decision making. We know that the military is going to be in a place where it could launch those strikes against Iran as soon as this weekend. But officials at the White House have told our colleagues that President Trump has not made a decision over whether or not he's going to authorize those strikes that could take place obviously alongside Israel. He said, President Trump, today that there would need to be a meaningful agreement with Iran to save that off. He didn't provide details. So, we'll watch and see what more he says as he continues speaking here. Wolf, Pam?

BLITZER: It's a very tense moment right now. All right, Kylie Atwood here in Washington. I want to go to Jeremy Diamond, who is in Jerusalem for us. Jeremy, Israel has agreed to join the Board of Peace after opposing various elements of it. What is the Israeli government's view now as this inaugural meeting gets underway?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right, Wolf. And we saw Israel's foreign minister, Gideon Sa'ar, standing for that family photo moments ago before the president's remarks right alongside the Qatari prime minister, which was a very interesting choice of order there, given how critical the Israeli government has been of the Qataris and the Qatari influence in the next phases of this Board of Peace and this peace plan in Gaza.

But that is kind of the dynamic that is now unfolding. Israel has very much been kind of dragged along into this process despite its misgivings about the possibility of this Board of Peace actually being able to change the situation on the ground in Gaza, and namely with regards to its stated mission of the next phase of this ceasefire agreement, which is indeed the disarmament of Hamas.

We heard President Trump moments ago offering a little bit on that, saying that Hamas, he said, I think, they're going to disarm. They promised that they would. If they don't, he said they will be very harshly met. And that is our understanding. In terms of the conversation between President Trump and the Israeli prime minister is basically, Hamas is going to be given a set timeframe, a deadline to disarm. And if they don't meet it by then, then the Israelis have made very clear that they will carry it out that disarmament unilaterally via military force, which basically means a return to the war in Gaza. Wolf?

BLITZER: All right. Jeremy Diamond and Kylie Atwood, to both of you, thank you very, very much. Pam?

BROWN: And still ahead here in The Situation Room, Wolf, Mark Zuckerberg under oath, the Meta CEO pressed about his company's impact on children, an Alaska mother whose teen son died after a social media challenge about the testimony.

BLITZER: And later, more dangerous conditions in the middle of the country, wildfires raging across Oklahoma and Kansas.

Stay with us. You're in The Situation Room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:00]

BROWN: Happening now, parents who say their children were harmed or worse by social media are getting ready for another day in a landmark trial. Mark Zuckerberg, who helped create that online world, testified for more than five hours yesterday. Facebook, YouTube and other platforms are accused of intentionally getting kids hooked and causing damage to their mental health. The Meta CEO says his company strives to protect young users and rejects the allegations. Joann Bogard became an advocate on this issue after her 15-year-old son Mason died, trying to replicate an online challenge video that he saw on YouTube. Before heading to the trial, she spoke to CNN affiliate WFIE.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOANN BOGARD, SON DIED ATTEMPTING SOCIAL MEDIA CHALLENGE: Whether it's about self-image, eating disorders, predators, challenges, things that the kids aren't even looking for, they're feeding it to them unsolicited, knowing that it's harmful content, but also knowing that they're addicted to the screen and that they will keep scrolling and finding those things.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: And Joann Bogard joins us now from right outside Superior Court in Los Angeles. Thank you so much for coming on.

I first just want to get your reaction to Mark Zuckerberg's testimony so far.

BOGARD: The reaction is just -- it just makes your stomach sick when he tells the lies. I know he kept going on and on about they don't profit from teens, but that's just so not true because they're just like big tobacco. They design their products to be addictive so that they can create these lifelong users. And when you create lifelong users, you're creating that monetary chain that carries through adulthood.

BROWN: Why do you blame social media for your son's death?

BOGARD: Well, with Mason in particular, and most of the children, they are getting these harmful content unsolicited. They don't search for these things. It's the design of the algorithm that creates that addiction and feeds them whatever content will heighten their emotions and keep their eyes on the screen, again, to keep them addicted for that lifelong use. So, they're getting harmful content, whether it's connecting them with a predator or a drug dealer or sending them a challenge that looks, you know, innocently fun, maybe, but it's not. This is harmful content. They know it. They purposefully design their products that way. So --

BROWN: And if you would just tell our viewers who weren't familiar with this case, what was the challenge that your son did?

BOGARD: Mason was fed the choking challenge or the blackout challenge by YouTube.

[10:20:02]

Their algorithm sent it to him. There was nothing in his search history. It was sent to him unsolicited, and he tried it and recorded himself and that's how we know what it was.

BROWN: During the, the testimony, Mark Zuckerberg said that once there was a goal in the company to keep people on for time, they were looking at the time on on these platforms. And then he said that evolved and shifted the focus to utility and value. What do you think about that?

BOGARD: I think, you know, he made a lot of claims yesterday that you just -- it was hard to keep composure and, you know, you just want to roll your eyes or shake your head. But him claiming those things are just pure lies.

I was in the Senate hearing two years ago, and it was the same then. He just -- he skirts around answers. He uses -- he says things that are simply not true. Yes, they're making profits off of our kids.

BROWN: And let me just follow up with you on that because Meta issued a statement about this case in particular where he's testifying about, in which a woman now 20 years old accuses Meta and YouTube of harming her mental health by designing these addictive features. Meta says, quote, the question for the jury in Los Angeles is whether Instagram was a substantial factor in the plaintiff's mental health struggles. The evidence will show she faced many significant difficult challenges well before she ever used social media. What do you think about that statement?

BOGARD: I think, you know, it doesn't matter if a child like Mason was living a healthy, well-balanced lifestyle, or if you have someone who has maybe an unhealthy lifestyle, it doesn't matter. When they try to heighten that with whether it's beauty filters or whatever it is to keep them online, they are trying to addict the children. They're creating whatever keeps them online longer.

I know one thing that came into evidence was they did a study with University of Chicago. Meta paid the University of Chicago to do a study. 18 experts, 18 out of 18 experts warned them that the beauty feature would be harmful to young female users, and they opted to use it anyway. So, they know what they're doing.

BROWN: And on the beauty filters, he talked about that as well, saying, I thought the balance of free expression should allow people to make those filters, but that we shouldn't create those filters ourselves. He added that experts in free expression were also consulted on that decision, but said he didn't know their names and hadn't met with them. That is what he said.

Joann Bogard, thank you so much for coming on, and, again, I'm so sorry about the loss of your son.

BOGARD: Thank you

BROWN: Wolf?

BLITZER: And, Pamela, coming up more on the breaking news, former Prince Andrew arrested this morning. We'll have the latest on the investigation. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:20:00]

BLITZER: We're back with breaking news. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former prince, arrested this morning on suspicion of misconduct in public office,

BROWN: And this follows the U.S. government's release of documents that revealed his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Andrew has denied any and all wrongdoing in his dealings with the late sex offender.

CNN Legal Analyst Elliot Williams and CNN Royal Commentator Sally Bedell Smith joins us now.

Sally, just put this into context for us. As someone who has been following the royal family for so many years, you've written so many books, how significant is this?

SALLY BEDELL SMITH, CNN ROYAL COMMENTATOR: I think it's an astonishing development. The last member of the royal family, a prominent member of the royal family to be arrested was King Charles I in 350 years ago. There have been other things, incidents since then. But I think in, you know, to sort of looking at it in a wider picture, his -- the drumbeat of revelations about him has been damaging the royal family as it has gone along.

The king recently said that Andrew is not above the law. He should be subjected to police investigation. When the arrests were made this morning, he said this was the proper thing to do. But I think it is a real threat to the monarchy because we don't know. We know what's in the Epstein files, but we don't know how the royal family reacted, for example. How was the settlement with Virginia Giuffre's family arrived at? Who contributed to it? Is it possible that the king could be questioned? There are just a lot of implications that flow from this.

BLITZER: Elliot, listen to what one U.S. lawmaker had to say just last weekend. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): We want to actually talk to Prince Andrew, and it's not just Prince Andrew, former Prince Andrew.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

GARCIA: And what's happening right now, you know, over in the U.K., it is pretty stunning and it's actually a show of what is -- of what happens when the government listens to the public. There are actually things happening to those that have been involved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: So, Elliot, why do you think we've actually seen more fallout abroad over these Epstein related revelations compared to here in the United States?

[10:30:05]

Do you expect that to change?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: That's a wonderful question.