Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
New Epstein Release Has References To Trump, Powerful Figures; "Outrageous": Survivors Slam DOJ's Latest Epstein Files Release; DOJ Opens Civil Rights Investigation Into Alex Pretti's Shooting Death. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired January 30, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360 (voice-over): --and Michael McKean, who with his wife, Annette O'Toole, wrote the Oscar- nominated song, "A Kiss At the End of the Rainbow," for O'Hara and Levy, in "A Mighty Wind," said simply, Only one Catherine O'Hara, and now none.
Catherine O'Hara was 71-years-old.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: What an incredible life and legacy.
The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now. Have a good weekend.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: So, it turns out both Donald Trump and Elon Musk are in the Epstein files. What else we learned from the release of millions of pages of documents by the Justice Department today?
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, more than 3 million pages, 2,000 videos, and a 180,000 images. CNN teams are carefully sifting through the largest and what the Justice Department says is the last batch of Jeffrey Epstein files.
It's an enormous trove of documents, and it includes references to some of the richest and most powerful people on the planet. That includes the current President, a former President, Cabinet Secretaries, a former Prime Minister, billionaires, and the list goes on and on and on.
The Justice Department says tonight that its job is done.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: We complied with the statute. We complied with the Act. And there is no -- we did not protect President Trump. We didn't protect or not protect anybody. I mean, I think that we -- that there's a hunger or a thirst for information that I do not think will be satisfied by the review of these documents.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I should note that just because someone is mentioned in these documents does not mean that they have been accused of wrongdoing or did anything wrong. Many of these claims are unverified or they rely on secondhand information.
But these are the key findings our team has uncovered so far. And I should note, millions of pages have come out. We are still digging right now in this hour.
Donald Trump's name appears thousands of times in these new documents. In some, he's merely mentioned in emails that Jeffrey Epstein sent to other people. But the files also contain a complaint from a woman who accused Trump of raping her in 1994, when she was just 13-years-old.
According to the FBI document, this accuser, who is identified as Jane Doe, said that Jeffrey Epstein was, quote, "Angry that Trump was the one" to take her virginity, and that she was also raped by Jeffrey Epstein.
This woman had previously launched lawsuits against Trump and dropped them. The last one happened right before the 2016 election. The President has previously denied these allegations.
Also included in today's release was a list of sexual assault allegations related to the President, compiled by the FBI in August, many of which appear to have come from unverified tips. We don't know why, tonight, the FBI made this list, and there are more than a dozen allegations that are included in it.
But recall what the President has previously said about these documents, about the Jeffrey Epstein files. He said that they are a hoax and that the release of them could ruin people's reputations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I know it's a hoax. It's started by Democrats. It's been run by the Democrats for four years. You had Christopher Wray and these characters, and Comey before him.
I would say that, you know, these files were made up by Comey, they were made up by Obama, they were made up by the Biden -- you know. We -- and we went through years of that with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax. With all of the different things that we had to go through, we've gone through years of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Just to be clear, Christopher Wray was the President's pick for FBI director that he put into that job.
This also comes as we're learning for the first time about Jeffrey Epstein's contact with Elon Musk.
You may remember, Elon Musk dropped what he described as a really big bomb, last year, when he said Trump was in the Epstein files, and that was the real reason that they had not been made public.
Well, it turns out, based on what we saw today, Musk is also in the Epstein files. Emails show that he tried coordinating multiple visits to Jeffrey Epstein's private island. In one from 2013, Elon Musk asked Jeffrey Epstein, When should we head to your island? The year before, he said, What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?
Now, this is after Musk claimed in all-caps, I should note, last year, that quote, "Epstein tried to get me to go to his island and I REFUSED."
Musk's representatives did not immediately respond to CNN's request for comment, for explanation for those emails and that contact.
And speaking of distancing and denials, recall what President Trump's Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick said, just last year, about a 2005 encounter that he had with Epstein at his Manhattan townhouse.
[21:05:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD LUTNICK, COMMERCE SECRETARY: I say to him, Massage table in the middle of your house? How often do you have a massage?
And he says, Every day.
And then he like gets like weirdly close to me and he says, And the right kind of massage.
And in the six or eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: OK. So that was 2005. The files released today showed that Howard Lutnick tried to meet or call with Epstein several times after 2005, much longer after.
A 2011 email to Jeffrey Epstein from his assistant reads, Howard Lutnick will come see you at 5 p.m. That same year, the heading of an alarm message reads, Drinks w/Howard Lutnick.
And Lutnick also emailed Jeffrey Epstein's assistant, in 2015, inviting Epstein to a Democratic fundraiser for Hillary Clinton that he was hosting.
Asked for comment on these emails and the correspondence between the two, a spokesperson for the Commerce Department told CNN, Secretary Lutnick had limited interactions with Mr. Epstein in the presence of his wife and has never been accused of wrongdoing.
My lead source tonight, to start us off is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, and the former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Elie Honig.
And Elie, it's a lot of information that we were looking through today. I just wonder, right off the bat, what has stood out to you the most.
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: There is a draft indictment in these 3 million pages, about 55, 56 pages, from the Southern District of Florida, sometimes not dated precisely, in the mid-2000s, that would have charged Jeffrey Epstein with serious federal crimes, plus three other co-conspirators, their names are redacted.
And to me, that's the document that's most interesting to me. Here's a snippet from it. Because it points up the key question, which is, why was Jeffrey Epstein given such a sweetheart deal back in 2007 by the U.S. Attorney's Office?
And secondarily, how could it be that, still to this day, the only two people ever charged have been Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. How about all the other people who helped them run this operation? We still don't have those answers.
COLLINS: Well, so it's Jeffrey Epstein and three others. I mean, presumably, let's say -- we're guessing. We don't know this. One of them is Ghislaine Maxwell. Who were the other two?
HONIG: Right. A good question. And to that point, I've been stamping my feet about this, I'll continue to do this. DOJ has not abided by this law, the Epstein Transparency Act, the same law that passed almost unanimously in Congress, the same law that Donald Trump signed into law.
That law says, DOJ has to turn over their internal deliberative memos, their back-and-forth in-house. Normally, you wouldn't turn that over, but the law says they have to.
Yet, Todd Blanche has said, and he said it again today, We are abiding by what we call the deliberative process privilege.
Here's what the law says. The law says, DOJ must turn over internal DOJ communications, including emails, memos, meeting notes, concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates.
That's the law.
Todd Blanche has said, No. Thank you. We're invoking this thing called the deliberative process privilege, which exists. But the law says, you don't get to use here.
And, as a result, we are not seeing those behind-the-scenes memos.
COLLINS: Well, and Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna wrote this law, basically to make sure that they could not get through those loopholes.
HONIG: Exactly.
COLLINS: I mean, so they're not only behind on the law. They're way past the deadline. You're saying they're not complying fully.
HONIG: Yes, I mean, look, they missed the deadline by 40 days. They shouldn't have. That's embarrassing. But that's fine.
This is a bigger deal. Because, why do we have this law? Why is everyone so interested? What's the point? The main point to me is, who else could have been criminally liable and maybe who else could be still prosecuted now?
COLLINS: OK. So, when it comes to what I mentioned, this summary, basically, the allegations that were made against President Trump. Is it clear why the FBI would have put that together, last August?
HONIG: It's not.
I've asked FBI in these large, multi-victims cases, I've said, Hey guys, like, there's so much coming in, can you put it together for me in some sort of comprehensive way? But that's when I was trying to make a case.
If this was done, just this last August, I'm not sure why. I mean, interesting, that's the document that has a lot of the most inflammatory accusations, many of them uncorroborated, unproven. And of course, that is the document that was up on the website today, then down, then up, then down, I think it's up now. So, I'm not sure why they created it. But now we have it.
COLLINS: I mean, it's remarkable, when you go to the website to look at these documents, and if someone's watching, and they haven't done that so far, I mean, it asks you, if you're 18 or older--
HONIG: Yes. Yes.
COLLINS: --to look at these documents--
HONIG: You have to click on that.
COLLINS: --because of what's in here.
HONIG: Yes. And look, to their credit, they're late, but we now have most of the Epstein files, and you can word-search it. So, if you want to see Lutnick, to use an example you just led with, you can enter Lutnick, and it will give you the results that mention that name. So, there is some use to this. But I'm just pointing up one of the key omissions that still exists.
COLLINS: One big thing were these 302s, which, we kind of use that term a lot, but it's basically written documentation of an interview that someone has done. Because you mentioned unverified or secondhand.
HONIG: Yes.
[21:10:00]
COLLINS: I mean, I think back to the Farmer sisters who complained to the FBI about Jeffrey Epstein so long ago.
HONIG: Right.
COLLINS: And it went nowhere. It was basically just ignored. Even though we saw in the last release, that they did get it.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: I mean, when you say unverified or uncorroborated. I mean, my question is, did they even try to verify it?
HONIG: Exactly.
COLLINS: Or try to corroborate it?
HONIG: The Farmer sisters go back to 1996, if I'm remembering that right. We learned that from a prior drop.
Yes, the 302s are the official FBI written memos. And I think that's a very fair question that we need to ask. OK, you see what the allegations are. You can't necessarily take all of them absolutely at face value. But the question we need to ask is, OK, you've got not just this one allegation, but dozens upon dozens. What was the follow- up? And was there any meaningful effort, or was there willful blindness? Was there an ostrich burying its head in the sand?
I mean, there certainly was in '07, I think that's clear, when they got the softball deal. But how about since then, and what does that tell us about whether there's any realistic chance of charges moving forward?
COLLINS: Yes, one thing that we were talking about is Todd Blanche came out today, the Deputy Attorney General. Many people have been pointing out, it was not the actual Attorney General, Pam Bondi, who was there doing this.
But we just heard from them, not that long ago, saying they had released less than 1 percent. Now today, they came out with these documents, said, This is all we're going to be releasing. This is the last batch you're getting.
What did -- what did that say to you when you heard that?
HONIG: Well, two things.
One, I think Todd Blanche is serving as a bit of a heat shield here for Pam Bondi, because she has a dreadful record on this, including way back when she said she had certain files on her desk, that we'd be seeing them tomorrow. Over the summer, remember, July of 2025, Pam Bondi came out with an official statement that there's no more documents to be produced, no more charges to be had, nothing more to seeing here. So, she's all over the map on this.
The timing is bizarre to me. In early Jan -- three weeks ago, DOJ said, We've given you 1 percent of the documents. And now, three weeks later, they've somehow gone through the other 99 percent, I guess? I give them credit for accelerating this. But it's been an uneven process.
COLLINS: Yes, I mean, and Todd Blanche said today -- I mean, he was praising the work that they've been doing.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: He said, This idea that we're protecting criminals or protecting pedophiles is not true. They've been meeting twice a day on this.
We'll see what else we find in this.
Elie Honig, thank you.
HONIG: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Great to have you as well.
My congressional source on this tonight is a member of the House Judiciary Committee. Republican congressman, Kevin Kiley of California, is here.
And thank you, Congressman.
Because obviously, you are someone, our viewers will remember, you supported the total release of these files. Are you satisfied with what came out from the Justice Department today?
REP. KEVIN KILEY (R-CA): Well, currently we have a lot of files now. I haven't sifted through all of them to determine, to what extent there are redactions that should or shouldn't be there. I honestly -- you know, just heard from your own expert that he thinks that most of them are now out.
So, if there are some edge cases where there's disagreement as to whether they should be produced or not be produced, of course, we can have oversight in Congress, Attorney General Bondi will be testifying. They're required to issue a report stating the reason for redactions. There's always the possibility of going to court and reviewing these things in-camera.
But I think we can all agree, there's a lot of files out there. There's been a lot of transparency now. And I think it has been extremely important not to overproduce in a way that compromises victims.
COLLINS: Yes, and of course, it's forced transparency, because if this law had not been passed by Congress, this wouldn't be happening. Part of that law, as Elie just pointed out, does say that internal DOJ communications, deliberations should be produced as part of this law. And he mentioned the draft indictment that not only talks about Jeffrey Epstein, but has three other redacted defendants in there.
Do you want those internal communications released?
KILEY: Well, I certainly want some clarity as to what happened, because I think there are a lot of questions that remain. Back -- before he committed a lot of his most heinous crimes, but had already committed a number of them, why wasn't he given a more severe sentence, and why was there so much leniency?
The question of the deliberative process privilege and how that plays out in this case, I'm not really sure the answer to that. That's something that may have to be tested in court. Because, there is the provision in the Epstein Files Transparency Act that you quoted, the deliberative process privilege, which kind of originated in the common law, has been codified as well in statute. So, a court would have to look at how those two provisions interact, or if they do not (ph).
COLLINS: One thing that Todd Blanche offered today was for any member of Congress to come and view the unredacted versions of what they put out there. Is that something you plan to take the Justice Department up on?
KILEY: I don't know if I will or not. I mean, honestly, my purpose in supporting this -- and as you know, Kaitlan, I was one of the first people to come out in support of transparency here, and getting victims the answers that they deserve, and the American public, the transparency they deserve. I never really supported that, so that I can be the one to sift through and see exactly who's culpable. But I wanted the public to have that opportunity.
So, I think that the fact that they're making this opportunity open to members of Congress is a good thing. If there are questions about whether documents have not been produced, as far as the law requires, then, perhaps I would take them up on that opportunity, or at least make sure that other members of Congress have.
[21:15:00]
But I think the fact that they're willing to take that step and show people specifically, Here's the reason we didn't produce this particular document, here's why this will compromise this victim's privacy? I think that's a really positive step.
COLLINS: What does it say to you that the Attorney General wasn't the one who announced this today?
KILEY: I don't know. I don't know if you can read anything to it. She's got a lot on her plate. She will be coming in to testify before the House Judiciary Committee, which I'm on, on February 11th, I believe. And so, every member of that committee, on both sides of the aisle, will have the chance to ask her questions about this or any other topic. COLLINS: Do you plan to ask her about this?
KILEY: I don't know. There's so many things that we have to talk about going on in the country right now. And you get five minutes, which tends to go by really quick, even if you stick to one topic. So, we'll see what I feel like is most pertinent at the time of that hearing. But I'm sure there will be a number of people on the committee, not least of which is Mr. Massie, who will bring the topic up.
COLLINS: Yes, and many survivors who still have questions about this as well.
Congressman Kevin Kiley, thank you for your time tonight.
KILEY: You bet. Thanks for having me.
COLLINS: And speaking of those survivors. Some of them are furious tonight because their names came out unredacted in the files. One of them is going to join me right after this.
Also tonight, we're covering this, thousands of people in the streets today protesting ICE, not just in Minneapolis, but across the country. As Todd Blanche at that press conference revealed, they are actually conducting an investigation we weren't aware of, when it comes to Alex Pretti's death. It's something they have not done for Renee Good's death. That's ahead.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Some of the victims of Epstein have expressed frustration with the entire process. I want to give you the opportunity to speak directly to them.
BLANCHE: Well, I don't -- I don't know what you're -- what you're speaking to. I mean, if there's frustration with quote, the entire process, same here. I mean, you have a situation where for many, many years, nobody even breathed a word about Jeffrey Epstein, and then all of a sudden it was all anybody would talk about.
Listen, victims of Mr. Epstein have gone through unspeakable pain, and there's nobody that -- that should say anything differently.
I hope that the work that -- that the men and women within this department have done over the past two months, hopefully is able to bring closure.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And tonight, we are hearing directly from Jeffrey Epstein's survivors who are angry, some of them frustrated, that their names showed up unredacted in the files that came out today. Despite what we heard from the Justice Department about a pledge to prioritize their privacy.
More than a dozen of the survivors issued a new joint statement. It reads in part: This latest release of Jeffrey Epstein files is being sold as transparency, but what it actually does is expose survivors. Once again, survivors are having their names and identifying information exposed, while the men who abused us remain hidden and protected. That is outrageous. As survivors, we should never be the ones named, scrutinized, and retraumatized while Epstein's enablers continue to benefit from secrecy. This is a betrayal of the very people this process is supposed to serve.
One of the Epstein survivors who signed that statement is Jess Michaels, who says she was sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein when she was 22-years-old. And Jess joins me now.
And thank you for being here on a day like today. We've spoken with many of the survivors on this show before, and I know it's not -- it's not an easy conversation to have. So, I really do appreciate you joining us.
When you heard the Deputy Attorney General today talking about closure. Is that what you feel after this release?
JESS MICHAELS, EPSTEIN SURVIVOR: Firstly, thank you so much, Kaitlan, not only for having me on, but for continually having Epstein survivors on, so that our voices are heard.
There is -- there is not a single bit of closure today.
I actually brought a little show-and-tell for you, Kaitlan. You know how I --I heard you speaking with the attorney before this, about the 302s. And this is what the only 302 that could be found, so far, in the files, by someone that was combing the files for hours. It was seven pages, and four of them looked like this.
COLLINS: Wow.
MICHAELS: So, we know that the victim's name is here, right? And that's appropriately redacted. So, what is all of this?
So, there's no way for me to say to you that there's closure here. This is the exact opposite of transparency.
COLLINS: I mean, it must be so frustrating for you to look at that and to see just completely blacked out in the entire page.
MICHAELS: And then we've seen pages where they're blacked out, and the only thing not blacked out was a survivor's name. It's -- it's -- it is such incompetence. It is -- it is sloppy. I mean, if any one of us did our jobs, the way the DOJ did this job, we wouldn't be working humans. We would -- we would lose our job, we would lose our place, in a company. Because this particular job has been so egregiously done, horrifically done.
COLLINS: If you had been at that press conference today, at the Justice Department, what do you think you would have asked? MICHAELS: I would have asked, then what's this? What -- what is missing from this page?
[21:25:00]
Because one of the things that he said was about the fact that there are no -- There's no list of men, there's no treasure trove of men.
Then, what is this? What is missing here? This is not a survivor's name. There's no survivor's name that is this long.
So, what I'd like to ask any of them in the Department of Justice is, what is this? This is a victim's statement. The only thing that was supposed to be redacted, was her name. So, this is clearly, clearly protecting someone, something, many things.
COLLINS: Because what would be in there would be, theoretically, and what we've seen with other 302s is--
MICHAELS: Well--
COLLINS: --that's when they interview someone who has filed a complaint.
MICHAELS: Yes.
COLLINS: And that's their account of what happened to them.
MICHAELS: Exactly. And so, to say -- to stand on that podium and say, Well, you know, there's no names here. And to hear, for months now, There's nothing in this, there's no reason.
But then there should be no reason to have a black page. If there's nothing there, then what are you redacting? That's what I would have said to him.
COLLINS: I mean, that -- I mean, it just -- it's clear you don't think that they're complying with the law here if -- you know, when they're supposed to release everything--
MICHAELS: Yes.
COLLINS: --you're getting pages that are entirely redacted.
MICHAELS: Yes. I mean, I don't know how any American -- I see in my comments all the time, people are like, Oh, I feel so sad and sorry for you and all of the survivors. And I remind people, this isn't just about us. This is a Department of Justice that's showing the American people who they are, and everyone should be concerned about that.
They are -- they are defying a clear law, signed by the President, and it is now 41 days, and then they haven't even complied with the reasons for redaction. So, there's not even anything that comes with this big black box that says why this was redacted. That deadline passed weeks ago. COLLINS: You know, when we -- I spoke to some of the other survivors, after this law was passed, which, a lot of people never thought was going to happen in Washington. And Annie Farmer also said, we keep saying this is never going to happen, and then it does.
MICHAELS: Yes.
COLLINS: But I wonder if it feels frustrating to have to keep fighting and fighting, and then think that you've gotten this law passed, and then to see what you saw today, and how that feels.
MICHAELS: I -- Kaitlan, I wish I could tell you that I was shocked, but I wasn't. I don't think any of us were shocked. It is just this incredible, deep, visceral level of frustration and disappointment and sadness and grief. But none of us are shocked.
COLLINS: Jess Michaels, I'm sorry, I really am, because I'm sure it's frustrating, incredibly frustrating. I don't even know if that puts it, even sums up the feeling.
MICHAELS: Yes. I'd agree with you (ph).
COLLINS: But I am grateful to you that you're willing to come on and share that, and let people know how you feel about what came out today.
MICHAELS: Thank you for having me.
COLLINS: Jess Michaels, thank you for your time.
Up next here. We're going to go to the ground in Minneapolis. We've seen protests not just happening there. Several cities, across the United States today. Against the President's immigration crackdown, as he says he's not backing off of it. Here's what's happening live in Los Angeles, right now, as we learn a civil rights investigation has been opened into the shooting death of Alex Pretti.
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Across the country today, and braving below-freezing temperatures, in some cases, we saw massive anti-ICE protests. Thousands of demonstrators, from Minneapolis, to Los Angeles, to Phoenix, to Columbia, South Carolina, flooded the streets today, with many calling for an end to President Trump's immigration crackdown.
It's been nearly a week since Alex Pretti has been shot and killed by Border Patrol agents in Minneapolis.
And today, during that press conference on the Epstein files, the Deputy Attorney General faced questions about that, as Todd Blanche announced that they are going to conduct a civil rights investigation into his death.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REPORTER: Are you saying that the Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation into his death?
BLANCHE: Yes.
I don't -- I don't want to overstate what's happening. There's -- I don't want the takeaway to be that there's some massive civil rights investigation that's happening. This is a, what I would describe as a standard investigation by the FBI, when there's circumstances like what we saw, last Saturday, and that, that investigation to the extent it needs to involve lawyers at the Civil Rights Division, it will involve those.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I'm joined tonight by my law enforcement source, John Miller.
Along with my political sources, Jamal Simmons and S.E. Cupp, both here.
And John, I mean, as much as Todd Blanche tried to downplay that, it was news, because he also had come out right after Renee Good was killed and said, There's not going to be a civil rights investigation.
So, I wonder now what this means, what we should be paying attention to here.
[21:35:00]
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, first of all, it matters, because the investigations prior to today's statement, our understanding of it, was that it was being investigated by HSI, Homeland Security Investigations, and Customs and Border Patrol, CBP OPR, their Office of Professional Responsibility. One, theoretically doing the criminal investigation. The other, doing whether it was a shooting within the policies and training of the agency.
An agency, in a case like this, should not be investigating its own conduct, if there is a possibility that it's criminal. So, bringing the FBI Civil Rights Division in for an investigation is not only normal, but it's called for, in a case like this, so there's some outside entity looking at it.
One thing about the announcement was Todd Blanche basically undercut his own message by saying, I don't want people to think that this is some big investigation. I think he could have stopped at the line that, We've opened a civil rights probe.
Because remember what happened with Renee Good. The Office and the U.S. Attorney's Office opened a probe, a civil rights investigation into that. And before it was over? Four U.S. attorneys had to resign. The Supervisory Special Agent of the Civil Rights Squad in Minneapolis had to resign. Four people from the headquarters, DOJ headquarters, Civil Rights Division had to resign, when they were told to stand down on that. The last question we'll leave with is, why aren't they opening one now on Renee Good? It would be the same team at DOJ headquarters, the same team at the FBI office in Minneapolis, and looking at the same people, under similar enough circumstances, to at least allay public concern that nobody is looking at it.
COLLINS: Yes, it raises real questions about why one would justify it, but another would not.
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT BIDEN: There are serious questions, and there have been questions now for a couple of weeks.
What we have seen is Americans on the streets who have been killed by federal officers, according to local officials, at least by last week, there already have been three murders -- three deaths in Minneapolis, two of them were at the hands of federal immigration officers. It's a big deal.
In 1965, Viola Liuzzo was a white woman from Michigan who left Michigan to go to Alabama for voting rights marches. She was killed by the Ku Klux Klan when she was in Alabama. She was an American hero.
We now have other American heroes who have decided that in communities, where they don't have relationships, and where they don't have previous relationships, and places where they're not members of those communities, they're going to stick their necks out to try to defend people's rights. And the only thing, the only skin they have in the game are their souls, their morals. We have to celebrate these people, and we need as many investigations to find out what happened to them, as it takes, to get the truth.
COLLINS: Yes, but it comes as the President, I'm sure you saw overnight -- and this is what we were trying to ask him about yesterday when he refused our questions.
S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, HOST, "OFF THE CUPP" PODCAST FOR IHEART RADIO: Yes.
COLLINS: That new video of Alex Pretti that came out, a 11 days before his death, he kicks the tail light out of a car, seems to spit toward the officers who were getting in the car.
The President seemed to be suggesting overnight that he thought that that maybe justified it. I mean, he was -- he was posting, calling him an agitator, perhaps an insurrectionist, saying that he was crazed, out of control.
How that justifies what happened 11 days later, I'm not sure. But I wonder what you made of that.
CUPP: Well, actually, that would open the door to ask a question of whether Alex Pretti was targeted. If that's the case. So, that's actually a very bad legal argument for Trump and others to be making.
But I just worry, listening to Todd Blanche. I also heard Donald Trump say, There's no drawdown. I wonder that this is window dressing. This is a change in PR and not a change in strategy or tactic. I worry that bringing Tom Homan in and jettisoning Bovino and Noem is window dressing.
They've taken a different tone, they've obviously made some moves, because I think they see how bad the polling is on this, and how bad politically this is in election year. But are they actually going to make changes? That is yet to be seen.
SIMMONS: Kaitlan, my question is--
COLLINS: Yes.
SIMMONS: --what's up with these officers? Right? Because the day that he kicked the car window, you would expect, that would be the day he would be arrested, right? And on that day, they restrained him for a few minutes, the situation calmed down, everybody left, and nothing else happened.
The day that he was trying to defend another protester, he gets thrown to the ground and he gets shot. This is -- this is a real question, I would argue, for why these officers overreacted that way, the day they killed him?
COLLINS: Well, I mean, and when you see the CNN video analysis of it, it's pretty devastating to watch.
But Tom Homan, when he spoke publicly yesterday, for the first time, he very much was trying to strike a different tone, talking about his meeting. He did confirm, though, 3,000 agents are still on the ground, pretty much, give or take, in Minneapolis.
MILLER: And I think what you're looking at is, and I go with S.E. on some political dressing here is, also some face-saving, which is, they're not going to start to drawdown right away. They're going to focus on the targeted, worst of the worst, as opposed to random migrants without papers, work with the prisons, work with the jails, try to get those people out, in safe situations. And then I think they'll be able to start to do the drawdown by saying, We've now achieved the numbers. We're moving on to the next place.
But I didn't expect to see it this week.
[21:40:00]
COLLINS: Yes. Well, and also in Minneapolis today, what we saw happening overnight was our former colleague, Don Lemon, was arrested. Obviously, he had been covering that protest at a church in Minneapolis. There were questions of whether or not this was going to happen, after a district judge basically seemed to say that there was not enough to warrant this.
He was arrested. He was charged. He was released. And this is what he said when he left.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DON LEMON, JOURNALIST: I have spent my entire career covering the news. I will not stop now.
(CHEERING)
LEMON: In fact, there is no more important time than right now, this very moment, for a free and independent media that shines a light on the truth and holds those in power accountable.
And I will not be silent. I look forward to my day in court.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And Jamal, I think a lot of people were disturbed to see, the administration, one, posting memes about this, saying, When life gives you lemons. Pam Bondi, the Attorney General, saying, At my direction this happened. Don Lemon being arrested, and the others who were there in the church that day.
He says he was just acting as a reporter, talking to the people who were there, talking to the congregants, talking to the pastor.
What did you make of what happened today?
SIMMONS: Don Lemon and the President have been going back and forth at each other since Donald Trump has been in public life.
The question is, was Don Lemon targeted here? And the next question is, what does it mean for the rest of journalism? If people are not able to do their jobs, because they're standing near somebody?
I saw Jorge Ramos on the network, earlier tonight, talking about he was in a march today with his daughter, wondering, I wonder if I can get arrested at this moment because I'm covering this march, as I walk down the street.
There are real concerns, I think, for journalists who are trying to cover real stories.
COLLINS: Yes.
S.E., what do you think of it? And I should note, you wrote on this tonight, for people who want to read your full views.
CUPP: I did. Let me say something, to get it out of the way. Because it would be very disingenuous for me to sit here and say, Don Lemon and I are friends. Don Lemon and I were great colleagues.
We weren't. We're not. I don't like Don Lemon. I don't say that to be petty or gossipy. I say that because it's important that whether you have a personal grievance with him, you don't like him, you don't like his politics, you don't like his opinions, you don't like his journalism, is irrelevant.
Getting a tip from a group that they're going to do something newsworthy, embedding with that group, asking them questions, broadcasting it, and putting context into what is happening, is journalism. And that cannot be a crime.
Whatever you think of Don Lemon. And my relationship with him is complicated. Defending him is not. And I hope he would do the same for me one day.
I'll just end by saying, of course, if any evidence comes up that he was colluding with or conspiring with people to commit a crime? This story becomes very different. But to my reading of the indictment? That wasn't in evidence.
COLLINS: Yes, you read the indictment, and it's just citing what you can see on his livestream that he was doing--
CUPP: Yes.
COLLINS: --which, as you noted repeatedly in your Substack--
CUPP: Journalism.
COLLINS: --was journalism.
John Miller. S.E. Cupp. Jamal Simmons. It's so great to have all of you here--
CUPP: Thanks.
SIMMONS: Yes.
COLLINS: --to talk about so many of the top issues that everyone is talking about today.
And up next. When I mentioned the Justice Department dropping that final batch of the Epstein files. It has been a crazy week at the White House. We're going to take you behind the scenes to see everything we saw while we were there, next.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: The White House spent the week, scrambling, to contain the fallout after another deadly shooting happened of a U.S. citizen, at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis.
Here's a look at what we saw behind the scenes in Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRUMP: I don't like that he had a gun. I don't like that he had two fully-loaded magazines.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Monday, January 26.
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Saturday's shooting remains under active investigation by Homeland Security Investigations and the FBI. This tragedy occurred as a result of a deliberate and hostile resistance by Democrat leaders in Minnesota.
Two Minnesotans have now tragically lost their lives on the streets of Tim Walz's state.
COLLINS: There's a really notable phone call that just happened this morning, between President Trump and Governor Tim Walz. The President agreed to consider reducing the number of federal agents who were in his state.
On Saturday.
This has been a huge struggle for the administration to respond to this, whether that's in those public comments, or defending the actions of those agents, because no one has repeated what Kristi Noem said, that he came out and brandished a weapon. Something that none of the videos we've seen so far have shown any evidence of.
ALEX PRETTI, ICU NURSE: May we never forget and always remember our brothers and sisters who have served, so that we may enjoy the gift of freedom.
COLLINS: That was 37-year-old Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse who treated critically-ill patients at the Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, delivering a tribute there to a soldier who had died.
I just really appreciate you coming on to share this perspective about what Alex was like, and what it was like for you to have him as your nurse.
MARTA CROWNHART, FORMER PATIENT OF ALEX PRETTI: When he walks in your room, he was there for you.
[21:50:00]
It was heartbreaking to see the video. It was heartbreaking to know when I found out it was him.
What was worse was listening to Kristi Noem talk about him the way she did. That hurt worse than anything.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Tuesday, January 27.
REPORTER: Do you agree with the assessment from some of your own officials that Alex Pretti is a domestic terrorist or an assassin?
TRUMP: Well, I haven't heard that. But certainly he shouldn't have been carrying a gun. Very, very unfortunate incident.
COLLINS: The President is downplaying the staffing changes that are happening on the ground in Minnesota, the fact that Tom Homan is replacing Greg Bovino. But make no mistake, that would not be happening had the President not registered and understood the backlash that they were facing.
REP. ILHAN OMAR (D-MN): Kristi Noem must resign.
COLLINS: We start with breaking news that we're following out of Minneapolis, where Democratic congresswoman, Ilhan Omar, was just attacked while speaking at a town hall event.
This comes as the President is standing by the Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem.
My lead source tonight is one of the seven Democrats who voted to confirm Kristi Noem, but is now calling for her to go.
Why do you believe that Secretary Noem should be fired?
SEN. JOHN FETTERMAN (D-PA): The way things continue to deteriorate.
They've created a dangerous and ungovernable situation.
I do think you need a reset.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Wednesday, January 28.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Now Attorney General Pam Bondi is arriving in Minneapolis. And federal agents have arrested 16 people.
How does the plan to de-escalate the situation seem to be going?
COLLINS: I think it was always a question of whether or not that was actually going to happen and what that was going to look like.
You continued your town hall. They wanted you to go get checked out. You said, No, you wanted to finish speaking first. Why was that important for you?
OMAR: Whether it is the President's dangerous rhetoric, or this man attacking me, last night, their ultimate goal is to stop me from being a public servant.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Thursday, January 29.
TRUMP: I just wanted to let you know that.
And thank you very much everybody.
COLLINS: Mr. President.
REPORTER: Mr. President. On your request to Putin--
TRUMP: Thank you very much.
COLLINS: Why not take questions, Mr. President?
REPORTER: On Putin, Mr. President?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's go. Let's go. Start moving. COLLINS: Something extremely rare just happened in President Trump's Cabinet meeting. He didn't take any questions. I've covered Trump ever since he first got to the White House, and I'm not sure whether in his first term or in his second term, that he has ever finished a Cabinet meeting and not taken questions from reporters at the end.
Am I looking at it now?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
COLLINS: I'm looking -- OK.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hold on, guys. Hold on.
COLLINS: Mr. President, can you respond to the new Fox poll that says people think ICE's tactics are too aggressive?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, Press. Thank you guys. Thank you guys for reporting. Thank you, Press.
COLLINS: Republican lawmakers this week have not only called on the President to get rid of his Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. They've also said there needs to be a thorough and fair investigation into the shooting and killing of Alex Pretti.
When you listen to what Tom Homan is saying on the ground in Minneapolis, as we heard from him this morning. And then you hear the President tonight, and he says, No, they're not pulling back at all. Which one are you listening to?
SEN. ANDY KIM (D-NJ): We listen to Trump, because he is the one that's calling the shots here.
The American people are furious, and it's that pressure that is getting to him.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Up next here for us. Remembering Catherine O'Hara, who is best-known for her iconic roles, in "Home Alone," "Beetlejuice," and "Schitt's Creek."
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CATHERINE O'HARA, ACTRESS, "SCHITT'S CREEK": (As Moira Rose): Next step is to fold in the cheese.
DANIEL LEVY, ACTOR, "SCHITT'S CREEK": (As David Rose): What does that mean? What does fold in the cheese mean?
O'HARA: (As Moira Rose): You fold it in. LEVY: (As David Rose): All right, I understand that. But how -- how do you fold it? Do you fold it in half, like a piece of paper and drop it in the pot? Or what do you do?
O'HARA: (As Moira Rose): David, I cannot show you everything.
LEVY: (As David Rose): OK, well, can you show me one thing?
O'HARA: (As Moira Rose): You just -- here's what you do. You just fold it in.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Tonight, the entertainment world is mourning the comedic great, Catherine O'Hara, a figure who is a beloved across several generations for her roles in film and TV classics, like "Beetlejuice," "Home Alone," and "Schitt's Creek," as you just saw that classic clip from. Her agency says she died at her Los Angeles home, after a brief illness. She was 71-years-old.
She'll always be remembered for bringing two of Hollywood's most memorable moms to life.
Delia Deetz in 1988's "Beetlejuice," where she offered a masterclass in lip-syncing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(VIDEO - CATHERINE O'HARA LIP-SYNCING DAY-O)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And also, as Kate McCallister, who left her son home alone, not once, but twice.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O'HARA, ACTRESS, "HOME ALONE": (As Kate McCallister): Kevin's not here.
JOHN HEARD, ACTOR, "HOME ALONE": (As Peter McCallister): What?
O'HARA: (As Kate McCallister): Kevin.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[22:00:00]
COLLINS: And among the many tributes that are pouring in for her tonight, comes one from "Kevin." Macaulay Culkin, who played "Kevin" in "Home Alone," wrote this: Mama. I thought we had time. I wanted more. I wanted to sit in a chair next to you. I heard you. But I had so much more to say. I love you. I'll see you later.
Of course, all of our best wishes go to her friends, her family and all of her loved ones. Thank you so much for joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
