JD Vance softens his message to Israel after a strong warning | On Balance Full Show

Good evening and welcome to the program. I'm Bhatia Ungar-Sargon in for Leland tonight. Bill O'Reilly is moments away on why he says the success of President Trump's Iran deal may come down to who is America's next president. But first, our Why It Matters segment. The war in Iran is over. Our great military destroyed their navy. We decimated Iran's economy. We obliterated Iran's ballistic missiles. And yet we lost. This is painful to admit, especially on the eve of our 250th birthday. Yet what Iran got out of this conflict was beyond their wildest dreams, because Iran now knows no one will stop them from controlling the Strait of Hormuz. No one can, which means Iran will start charging tolls as soon as the interim ceasefire agreement is up. And that's in just 58 days. Now, again, it gives me no pleasure to say this. I supported this war. I believe the Trump administration when they told us that Iran could be defeated without boots on the ground, which I, like most Americans, do not support. I believe the Secretary of Treasury when he said over and over again that Iran was on its last legs, that its oil storage facilities were filling up and that they were weeks away from financial ruin. I believed them when they said that they had prepared for the Strait of Hormuz to be closed. Now, that doesn't seem to have been true. And we're beating a hasty retreat from a war that we won militarily. And that's the truth that is so difficult to stomach. No matter how much of their military infrastructure President Trump wipes out, Iran and the rest of our adversaries now know that they can foil the mighty United States of America with a few minds. The administration and their allies don't like when you say this. There is a big campaign out there to bully people who point it out. But as a journalist, it is my job to tell you what I think is true. And as an American, it is my God-given right. So where do we go from here? Well, we will need to prepare for another closing of the Strait of Hormuz. It's unlikely that this MOU will hold. The vice president seems to think it's a huge coup to have gotten the same empty promises out of the Iranians that Obama did. It's not. But the real message to me about the Iran war and my own soul searching in its wake is that nothing can be achieved with this level of divisiveness. The administration's and my biggest mistake was underestimating the importance of the will of the American people. There was no real effort to convince the public that this war was worth it, which is why the president ultimately had to cave and sign this MOU. I, like the administration, felt that no matter what happens, half of the country won't support this president, even when he's doing obviously positive things like trying to keep Iran from achieving a nuclear weapon. So it's useless to try to get that support. And that, I now believe, is the real unforgivable error on my part, at least giving up on my fellow Americans and giving into that despair. Here to tell me why I'm wrong about everything is the great Bill O'Reilly, anchor of No Spin News, author of Confronting Evil and host of the Will Do It Live podcast. Bill, I've never wanted to be more wrong about something in my entire life. And I'm really hoping you will help me here. Well, I don't know if I can help you, Batya, but I can give you perspective. So I wrote a column on Sunday, yesterday, and I'm having trouble with this dopey machine. So if you hear somebody go, O'Reilly's an idiot. It's coming out of this machine. Can't turn it off. I can't do anything. So I wrote a column and it said, look, things change in war. And that's what everybody is is missing here. So when you start a war, as we did, and it was a noble gesture to try to protect us and the world from a nuclear weapon that a terrorist state almost surely had. OK. Now, some people don't believe that. All right. Our pal Chris Cuomo doesn't believe they had it. But the evidence is so overwhelming that they were close that a guy like Trump is basically to say, look, we're not going to take the chance. We want this regime changed anyway. So we're going to start a war. And they did. Once you start a war, and I said at the very beginning, unintended consequences roll in things that you never anticipated. One major error by the Pentagon was they did not war game the Strait of Hormuz. I can't explain it. Nobody knows why they didn't. But certainly that should have been taken into account when you say, well, if we don't get regime change, if the mullahs tough it out, they're going to try to strangle the world economy by screwing up the Strait of Hormuz. What do we do? And then we do. You know, that's a strategical error. And we make them all the time. We made them in Vietnam. We made them in World War two. We made them in Korea. Anybody in that war scenario is going to make them. And again, I'll go back to our friend Chris, who is commentating on the school that the girls were killed in. All right. In the beginning of this conflict. Well, every single modern war has casualties like that. A guy in the Pentagon did not wake up that morning and said, I'm going to kill schoolgirls in Iraq. That didn't happen. What happened was there was a mass bombing to destabilize the infrastructure of that country. And it's going to happen again because President Trump has two options now. He's trying to save his legacy. Excuse me. And he's trying to write the economy so that the Democrats don't win in November. So that's his accomplishment. He's got two options. One is that inspectors go in to look and see what the new situation is. And that's what Vance was saying today. And the president backed it up on social media and said, look, this is a negotiable. We're going to either do that or we're going to launch more military action. That's it. There's nothing else. OK, so the Moseley will let the inspectors in or we're going to have to bomb them again. If we bomb them, more school girls are going to be killed. This is what war is. I don't justify it. It's horrible. But if you think in this age where you're using the most powerful weapons on Earth, the civilians aren't going to be affected. You're crazy. They are. And so the mullahs have been presented with that. This is it. This is this is your take. You know, let the weapons inspectors in. And why you wouldn't do that is beyond me. OK, even if you have nukes, nobody's going to do anything to you. It's going to take them away. OK, would you still want your people to go through this? It's unfathomable. So that's where we are right now. It's not a matter of right or wrong or I misassess in the beginning. It's a matter of war is fluid. But let me just let me just push back on this for a second, OK? On this question of the inspectors, there were inspectors there as recently as Operation Midnight Hammer, right? These inspectors do absolutely nothing as far as I can tell, because they were able to keep enriching uranium. But I think more importantly, the thing that I think is so horrifying to me about this MOU and what I think just happened is that Iran has moved the theater of war from the question of ballistics and nukes to the economic front. It has realized that the Strait of Hormuz is even more powerful, dare I say it, than a nuclear weapon, because there's no mutually assured destruction. It has shown the world it can withstand that pressure because it doesn't care about its schoolgirls and it doesn't care about its citizens and it doesn't care about economic collapse. But we do. We can't even sustain a dollar more a gallon for gas. And so it has moved the whole theater of war to the place where it has complete supremacy. And I just don't see what do we have left to negotiate with? Because they don't care about being bombed. They don't care about having the strait closed. And I don't see what we can offer them that is better than what they realize they already have, which is the ability to charge tolls on the Strait of Hormuz. And nobody will fight them on that front. I don't know about that toll business, but you're right. They don't care about their own people. But Trump will obliterate their infrastructure. That's what's going to happen. And that'll be almost impossible for the mullahs to recover from that. It'll be done from the air. It'll it'll be blown up and it'll be a savage response. As far as the weapons inspectors, the last time they were even close to examining uranium was 2019. OK. Trump was in office. And he didn't like the Obama deal anyway for that very reason. There was no verification in 2019 when the Austrian inspectors got in. They saw that Iran had violated the Obama deal. And it was public. They published it, OK, that they mullahs violated the deal with the United States. That drove Trump nuts. And that's why this whole thing happened, because Netanyahu of Israel said, look, we got a chance to get their leadership all in one swoop and maybe they'll get overthrown if people rise up. People didn't rise up because they were killing them at a rate that was horrifying, the mullahs are killing their own people. And so that didn't happen. So then you got to switch to plan B. And then plan B was, OK, what Iran has figured out is they can probably cause a worldwide depression by all this stuff in Hormuz. And I don't know the extent of the Trump administration's knowledge of that potential before they took the initial action. I don't know what the correct way to prepare for that have been. I keep asking people this. What would the right way have been to prepare for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz? Because we're going to have to deal with this again in 60 days or in six months or whatever. They're never going to make a deal with us. What what is the right thing to do in future? Well, I think they'll make a deal with us, but they probably won't uphold the deal because there's a lot of money attached to it. And the Iranians need money to rebuild their country, which Trump can take out in 48 hours. And Trump knows that in hindsight, I would have sent Marco Rubio, secretary of state, to all the EU countries, to China and to India and in a high level meeting, say this is going to happen and we need your support. And then you you couldn't pinpoint to the American people, hey, we're going to bomb the mullahs tomorrow because then the mullahs wouldn't be there. That was a secret mission. That was a mission nobody knew about. You can't publicize it. But in the run up to it, you could have sent Rubio over there and say something big is going to happen. When it happens, we hope you're on our team. We're going to need you. And, you know, you give them a little information, but not a lot. But people don't understand war. And I don't know about you. And if it's going to go wrong, it's like Murphy, OK? The Irishman is going to go wrong. It's going to go wrong. OK. And that's what happened in Iran. They didn't war game the Hormuz. They could have. And now we got to deal with that. But I'm I'm more confident tonight than I have been because the window is so tight on these mullahs now. They are going to let the inspectors in or they're going to get blown to hell. Trump would use another profanity, but he'll do it. I hope you're right, because he's promised to do it many times and hasn't followed through. I know that. God bless you and protect you. One more thing. One more thing. The reason the reason that he promised so many times because he doesn't want. I know. I agree with that. And I think that that's noble. I also don't want him to do it or have to do it. Bill O'Reilly, thank you so much for joining us. God bless you. J.D. Vance has returned from Switzerland and declared victory. They are almost there. Just a few more negotiations and they will have the makings of Obama's Iran deal. That's next. The vice president has returned from his negotiations with Iran, declaring success, telling reporters proudly that the Iranians have agreed to invite the IAEA inspectors back into their country. The Iranians have agreed to invite IAEA inspectors back into their country. That is a major milestone for the American people. And the first step in permanently denuclearizing or permanently ending a nuclear weapons program in Iran. Congratulations. You're 50 percent of the way there to re-signing Obama's Iran deal. Vance was also asked about Israel this morning, a subject on which he expounded at great length last week. Does the U.S. want Israel to withdraw forces from southern Lebanon? Well, we want Israel's security to be protected, and we also want Lebanon's sovereignty to be protected. That's going to require some coordination with the Lebanese armed forces. And also, it's going to require the Iranians to rein in Hezbollah. It was quite the change in tone from last week. Remember how he ended a lengthy press conference? Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world. Anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the president of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation that country is in. With us now, Montana Republican Senator Tim Sheehy, member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and former Navy SEAL. Senator, thank you so much for your service and thank you so much for being here with us. Thanks, Panti, great to see you. You too. So what grade would you give Vice President J.D. Bantz on his performance last week and this week? Well, listen, I think the vice president has obviously been empowered by the president here to make a deal. The president has unleashed the most aggressive campaign against this murderous regime that you and I know too well. And we have to give the administration credit for that. It was a huge political risk. It was a huge risk to our troops and their families, of which, of course, we lost 13. But this was an incredibly aggressive campaign. And I credit the president, the vice president, the whole administration from Midnight Hammer all the way back to Soleimani in the first term to the most recent pressure campaign. So obviously, the negotiation this week's are going how the negotiations with Iran normally go, which is they string us along. They lie. They don't negotiate in good faith. And I hope the vice president is successful in convincing the Iranians to give up the nuclear weapons and convincing them to stop trying to wipe Israel off the map and stop murdering Americans. But I think you and I both know that's probably unlikely. I think the vice president is leading this delegation, you know, with the best skill available to say Iran come to the table one last time, because I think they're aware, as President Trump is showing them, if they don't actually negotiate in good faith in this round, I think the next round of strikes is going to be equally ferocious and probably be more catastrophic than the last round. I think something a lot of people are wondering is, where is the secretary of state in all of this? We haven't heard from Marco Rubio since this MOU was signed. What do you think is going on there? Well, I think it's no secret that in the administration, I think you have a little bit different ideologies with how we're going to approach this problem. I think you have some, like Stephen Woodcock, who said very clearly, he's like, I'm a deal guy. I'm a real estate deal, man. I'm going to try to make a deal anywhere I can. And that's his mission. That's why the president's brought him on a special envoy is to make deals. Secretary Rubio and, of course, Secretary Hexeth and others are in the camp of you can't deal with Iran. And quite frankly, as you well know, I don't think you can either. For 47 years, they haven't said things that are evil. They just do them every single day. We don't have to wonder what Iran's designs for America and our Western allies in Israel are because they show us every day and they tell us every day. It's not theoretical. They say death to America, death to the Jews, death to Israel. And their designs don't stop at the Persian Gulf or Israel, Batia. They want a global caliphate. They want to kill you and me and our entire families and wipe our civilization off the map. That's what success means to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. That's what success means to these radical clerics who truly believe that we should be wiped off the face of the earth. And I think we have failed as leaders in America to educate the American people over the past 40 years that that's the threat we actually face. Six dollar gasoline. Listen, nobody likes it. Nobody wants forever wars. Nobody wants our troops in the Middle East forever. But you know what's worse than our troops in the Middle East for the next 40 years is fighting those terrorists right here on our own streets at home, which is where the Iranians want to put this war on our front step. They want you dead and me dead and everyone else. That's their intent. They don't just say it. They do it every single day. So I genuinely, truly hope as an American who's fought in these wars that we can find a peaceful solution here. I do truly hope the vice president is successful in finding a way to defuse this. But I think the chances of that, unfortunately, are probably pretty slim. And we're going to have to go back to a kinetic pressure campaign and eventually, hopefully take this regime out in its entirety. Was there a way to better wage the kinetic part of this more successfully without boots on the ground? You know, of course, we can armchair quarterback the whole process. And I think there's always ways you can look back and say, what could we have done better on the margins? But I think it is pretty incredible success. Our air campaign had how capable our naval and air forces are. The American people have made very clear they don't want 500000 American boots on the ground, at least anymore. And that's fair. They're tired of it. After 35 years there from Gulf War one against Saddam Hussein through, of course, the Iraq and Afghan campaigns that I participated in. They said loud and clear, we don't want sending American armies into the Middle East anymore. We're done with that. And as elected officials, we have to respond to that will and say, OK, message received. But we still have problems we have to deal with. We may be done with the Middle East, but it's not done with us. Far cry. They have a lot more unfinished business they want from us. And we have to support our allies in that region. Israel, first and foremost, UAE, of course, and Saudi. These are nations that are on the front line of this conflict. They understand the murderous nature of this regime better than anybody. And they know that if we allow them, if we give them billions of dollars, they're not going to spend it on schools and highways and infrastructure. They're going to spend it on bullets and bombs and missiles to murder us and murder Israelis. And they're going to take that war all the way to our front doorstep. If we give them oil revenues or unfrozen assets, we have to have hyper constricting controls to ensure where that money is going and what it's being used for. Because as you well know, they're going to take that money. You're going to use it to kill us with it. Right. And Vice President Vance announced very proudly that some of this money was going to be spent on American farm foods and products. But the Iranians immediately contradicted that and said, actually, no, they had not promised that at all. Well, as you well know, we're not negotiating. They are not negotiating good faith. And I think it's also important to remember that there's also not a monolithic bloc we're negotiating with in Iran. And I think it's important for Americans who are generally used to functioning government and united government. When we're dealing with some of these foreign countries, there are factions in each of these countries and Iran's no exception where you have moderate factions, you have extremist factions, you have militant factions, and the messaging will differ between those from the parliament of Iran to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, to the mullahs, to the religious right. There's a different sections of power bases within the Iranian regime that will have different viewpoints. And I think what we're seeing now in this negotiation is the frustration from our side, who's used to stepping to the table with the United Front. And now we're dealing with multiple factions who have different definitions of success in these negotiations. So it's going to be a tough road to hoe. I wish the vice president and Steve Whitkoff and Kushner the best of luck and hopefully getting a deal that is meaningful. I'm skeptical we can get there just because our counterparty and, of course, our intermediaries are not the best intermediaries. I mean, Pakistan's shield have been laden for a decade from us through ISI funded insurgencies against American troops in Afghanistan that I personally fought. Obviously, the Qataris, who we have a great military relationship with, but they've also been bankers for terrorist groups from Hamas to Hezbollah and other groups all over the world. So, you know, I feel a lot better if UAE and Israel and Saudi were structurally at the table as part of this negotiation. That's a hard thing to do with the Iranian government. I understand that. But, you know, these negotiations are hard for a reason because they've been trying to wipe us off the face of the earth for a long time. So I think we've got to be very skeptical for this round. And I think they're trying to suss out what the way ahead looks like. And, you know, we'll see where they end up here in the next few days. I think everybody hopes that they succeed despite whatever skepticism we're bringing to the table. Senator Tim Sheehy, God bless and protect you. Thank you for your service. And thank you for joining me. Thanks, Patia. Senate candidate Graham Platner is the gift that keeps on giving for political reporters why wildly imperfect politicians have become the norm in America. The radical left is on the ascent in primaries across the nation, but not just primaries. A spate of socialists are closing in on the establishment in New York and in Michigan. Tomorrow, we could see this candidate who wants to end all deportations and abolish prisons. One step closer to Congress. Meanwhile, Graham Platner, the Democrats embattled pick for Maine, is now neck and neck with Republican Senator Susan Collins. Platner infamously has a Nazi tattoo on his chest, hastily covered up with another tattoo when his totenkopf, that's what he called his tattoo to his ex-girlfriends. They said my totenkopf was discovered during the campaign. Now, one of those exes also accused him of throwing her around, leaving bruises on her and locking her in a bedroom. The Collins campaign is trying to make the election a referendum on character. I never expected to have an opponent like Graham Platner. He is very different from me. He's the antithesis of the steady leadership that I provide in Washington. Yet somehow nothing seems to stick when it comes to Platner. His polls have only mildly fallen as a result of his many scandals. Are Nazi tattoos and battered girlfriends the new authenticity on the left? Let's bring in our super panel, former Democratic advisor Dan Turrentine, former Republican Congressman Charlie Dent and former Democratic strategist Evan Barker. I'm so thrilled to have all of you. Evan Barker, let's start with you. Tell us about the great authenticity that is Graham Platner. Well, you know, it's interesting, but I really do think the Overton window has somewhat shifted in American politics since the rise of Donald Trump. You know, while there is some relevancy in knowing all these details, all these personal details about someone who's running for U.S. Senate, I think that what the polls are showing is that it's not really landing. It's not really resonating with voters. And that goes for both sides of the aisle. You've got Graham Platner in May. You've got Ken Paxton in Texas. And so I think people are feeling really, really broke right now. And what they want to hear about is pocketbook issues. And I think that's why it's not landing. That's very well said. So, Charlie, it's Evan brings up a really good point. The right has its share of deplorables as well. Tell us a little bit about Ken Paxton, the accusations against him. And is a similar thing happening to where Republicans feel very drawn to someone even though they have all of these issues? Well, it seems to me that what once was considered disqualifying conduct is no longer disqualifying. I mean, Nazi tattoos. I mean, come on. That would have been a nonstarter. Ken Paxton, again, a nonstarter. But I'll tell you, though, I think the Democrats have themselves a little bit of a predicament here where they were Republicans. I remember when we had a guy named Roy Moore running for the Senate in Alabama and Republican Senate Republicans walked away from him and they gave up the seat and Doug Jones won and they won it back. They didn't they didn't endorse him. I don't think any did. A lot of Republicans are not really getting behind PACs and at least Republican senators that I can tell. But Democrats are finding a way to rationalize Graham Plattner against Susan Collins, who is probably the least objectionable member of the Senate, in my view. I mean, very mainstream, very moderate, very steady, as she said. And but that's where we are today. If you know, if my side does something terrible, that's OK. If your side does the same thing, that's a human rights violation. So that's where we are. It speaks to the tribalization. It speaks to the tribalization of American politics. Unfortunately, it's really sad that we aren't really looking at character anymore like we should. Dan, speaking of, you know, members of the House, members of the Senate backing Plattner, some of them are doing it despite believing his accusers. Take a look at this from Congressman Ro Khanna. Well, I do believe those women. And I have said that his past conduct was shameful and I totally condemned it. He did two or three tours of duty in Iraq. He came back with a PTSD. That's not an excuse. But he said that he had a problem with alcohol. He had a ugly period in his life, and he believes that he has transformed and he's had redemption. Your reaction? Look, I think the best thing here is the national media thinks this is what voters in these states or districts should care about. But the voters are telling you we care about other stuff. How many times in 2024 did I hear focus groups in all the swing states where you would have women who would cry in the focus groups? When Ro was overturned, my heart was broken. But I'm going to vote for Donald Trump because I care more about immigration or, you know, DEI in my kids' schools. Who are we to tell voters what matters? If you listen to focus groups in Maine, it's about Graham Plattner saying you can't be a fisherman anymore without taking a job at Starbucks to get health care. That resonates a lot more than Susan Collins talking on the Senate floor about deliberations on a bill to recommit a bill to recommit a bill over 30 years. I can see why Graham Plattner is being successful. Now, Dan, you had a substack today. Why? The New York primary is a must watch. This is happening tomorrow. Tell us what you wrote about. Yeah, I mean, look, there are three candidates that Mayor Mondani has endorsed against. Two of them are against incumbents. One is the Congressional Hispanic Caucus chair, a close ally of Hakeem Jeffries. He went the opposite and endorsed a socialist. Another, Dan Goldman, a strong supporter of Israel. Mondani went the opposite. Nydia Velasquez is retiring. She is supporting the Brooklyn Borough president. Mondani went the opposite direction. If he wins, it is Nancy Pelosi's power isn't given. It's earned. But if he loses, you swing for the king and miss. Mondani is going to have some trouble in his own neighborhood. Yeah, Evan, we have this data that socialism is just unbelievably popular. Now, when you look at the Democratic Party, 50 percent have a favorable view of it, 22 percent unfavorable. This is a huge shift in a very short period of time. I mean, you alluded to why this is. I think in your earlier remarks, people are just broke. What is the answer if either party wants young people to feel that they don't have to pick socialism? Well, I think the first step is just the acknowledgement that we have a problem. So, you know, I think the Trump administration talking about that a lot right now ahead of the midterms would definitely go a long way. You know, but I was one of these people that became so turned off by the far left cultural views that took over the Democratic Party so turned off that I left. And I really, really thought that, you know, in the aftermath of the twenty twenty four election, the Democrats would figure out that they needed to moderate a little bit. And that's not at all what we're seeing. And I think the reason why is because the establishment has been empty. They don't stand for anything. They don't believe in anything. So you've got the progressives, Zoran Mamdani, Graham Plattner, all these progressives, and they've got energy. They really do believe in things. It's just that the things that they believe in are not going to win over people like my family in the Midwest. Uh huh. All right. In the minute we have left, Charlie, do you think that the president can turn it around before the midterms? And if so, what would you advise him to focus on? Well, I think it's very hard to turn around the narrative right now. I think the die is kind of cast for for the midterm. But if I were giving advice to the president about what to do, I would not talk about the ballroom. I would not talk about the reflecting pool. I would not say that Americans I would not say that Americans economic conditions are of no concern to me. I would not do a lot of things. I would not start a war without proper consideration. So I he's done a lot of things that I think if I almost get the sense he's trying to harm Republicans in the midterms with some of his rhetoric and some of his actions, I just can't. So contrary to what Republicans need to be talking about, which, of course, is the cost of everything and the issues that people really are focused on. And they're not focused on these vanity projects in Washington, D.C. I can assure you of that. Evan Barker, Charlie Dent, Dan Turntine, God bless and protect you all. Thank you so much for all of that insight. Thanks, Batia. Thank you. The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool saga is far from over. The president today threatening criminal charges for the so-called vandals, who he says damaged the pool. Let's bring in Kelly Meyer live at the White House. Kelly, it's so great to have you. Tell us the latest. So good to see you, Batia. So President Trump says five people are under arrest tonight and more are being investigated for what the president claims was vandalism at the new Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. And he says he has proof. Now, weeks ago, President Trump undertook plans for a 14 million dollar renovation to the D.C. landmark. In recent days, the American flag blue color turned swampy green from algae. And after pouring hydrogen peroxide into the water to turn the color back to blue, chunks of the coating separated, experts said the mixing of the chemical with the newly applied paint caused the loss of adhesion, which was likely the cause of the paint lifting. But President Trump claimed the damage was done by vandals. Listen to this. So President Trump said he had proof of the vandalism and said the photos would be shown in court just last month. He said nothing could destroy the American flag blue surface. So we reached out to the Park Service to ask for evidence of the vandalism that the president mentioned today and have yet to hear back to Kelly Meyer. Thank you so much. That was great. Ahead, a stunner in the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie. The second ransom note sent to media back in February contained a shocking claim that has been kept from the public until now. That's next. Breaking news tonight and what is possibly a devastating update in the kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie, mother of today's show, Savannah Guthrie. Nancy Guthrie was last seen the night of January 31st after being dropped off outside her home in Arizona. Within hours, her disappearance became the biggest story in America. Days later, several ransom notes were delivered to media outlets, including KOLD TV in her native Tucson and TMZ. The first reportedly contained ransom demands, a ransom to be paid in Bitcoin. And now News Nation has learned details on the second ransom note delivered to KOLD. That note, if reports are true, wasn't a ransom note at all. It was an update to the family that confirmed their worst fears. The second note said Nancy had died and was buried with nature. Now, a source close to the investigation told News Nation's Brian Enten. The note indicated Nancy's death was not intentional, but did not offer a direct apology. Shortly after receiving that grim note, Savannah Guthrie went on to social media, delivering this message to her mother's killer. We received your message and we understand. We beg you now to return our mother to us so that we can celebrate with her. This is the only way we will have peace. This is very valuable to us and we will pay. Joining me now to discuss is our own Jesse Weber, anchor of Jesse Weber. Tonight, Jesse. Jesse Weber live. I'm so sorry. OK. Jesse Weber live. That's the whole point. We're live. Jesse, this is shocking, shocking news. What was your initial reaction to hearing this? First, it's incredibly upsetting. Incredibly upsetting to be thinking about this. Incredibly upsetting, because now we know what the Guthrie family has been living with and we know. And I mean, you go back to that message from Savannah. It makes a lot more sense now. But what it also does is provides a piece of to the investigation. What do I mean by that? So if we take these two notes as they're true, I think they say a lot of things. You're looking at multiple, potentially multiple people involved in this. You're talking about kind of a sophisticated operation. You're also talking about people who had intimate details about the scene, about their house. I mean, the idea that there are aspects of the note where they talk about an Apple watch and they talk about the back porch light. Who would have had those details? How do they know about it? So it talks about the legitimacy. But when they say that these two notes potentially came from the same people, the same IP address, the same computer. Now, I'm wondering proxy servers. Are they doing a full investigation about where this might have been sent from? But I'm talking to you about this in June. This is about notes from February. And so for me, I look at this and it's just incredibly distressing and upsetting, to say the least. But it is a piece of information. Now, of course, it's not confirmation that she's no longer alive, but it is a note that contains that information. Do you think that when Savannah Guthrie recorded that video that we all saw that she believed her mother to be dead? I have to believe that. I have to take that as a possibility. You also couple that with the interview that she did on The Today Show where, you know, she thought that these notes seem legitimate. And there was a and people were saying this at the time. It seems like she was saying her mother passed. We just want her body. We want her remains. We want that sense of closure. And look, I also have to say I'm not surprised by this. You know, one of the reasons when we were first covering the story, time is of the essence when you have a missing persons case. But time is of the essence when you have an 84 year old woman who had a number of health issues. And there was a big concern that if she didn't have her medication immediately, there was a risk to her life. And if you take this, it's true. You can put two and two together and see what might have happened. Fancy. Why is this only coming out now? It's a great question, I think. And I don't want to speak for the media outlets, but I believe they were instructed by authorities to not mention the details of this because it was an ongoing investigation. They didn't want to reveal too much. And that's understandable. We're right now in a position where we're so many months out. And, you know, look, I still believe that the public is the best resource right now to get answers. You know, I think it was Savannah who said it's never too late to do the right thing. I don't know if more information in this case is better, but it is another piece now the public knows or someone knows. And somebody has information. Somebody has answers out there as to what happened to Nancy. And again, to speak to what Savannah said, it's never too late for somebody to come forward. Does this make it more or less likely that someone will come forward? I mean, it's hard to tell. At this point, there was so much pressure put on. There were rewards put forward by the Guthrie family, which you don't always see in missing persons cases or abduction cases. And yet, you know, remember the wallet, the crypto wallet, the Bitcoin wallet was essentially no one claimed it was empty. So it was never tracked to anybody. Look, you have to be optimistic. But at this point, it's just becoming increasingly dire. And in the 30 seconds we have left, I mean, legally speaking, the note changes everything, right? Because they're the abductors are perhaps admitting that this is now a homicide case and a kidnapping case. Right. Allegedly holding for ransom. So, look, I've always said this, too. And I'm going to have Mark Geragos on my show tonight. Even if there was an arrest here, even if there was an arrest, there's been so many problems in this investigation. Wow. Crime scene. I wonder what evidence would actually be included or excluded and whether it would be a slam dunk case. But that's a conversation for a different time. Right now, it's trying to find out what happened. Jesse Weber, thank you so much. You got it. Thanks for having me. Make sure to tune in to Jesse Weber live. You'll have more on this investigation at 11 Eastern, 10 Central, right here on News Nation. And when we come back, one thing for tomorrow. Welcome back. Leland Vittert returns tomorrow night. And here is Katie Pavlich. It's so good to see you on a Monday. I know it sure is. Who do you have on? We have a lot on Iran, of course. As you know, we have Senator Rick Scott and we're talking about a number of other topics. So we will get started with Batya. Great to see you. Great show. We'll see you on Saturday night. See you soon, Katie. See you soon.