Renowned “Today” show anchor Savannah Guthrie is reportedly outraged over premature claims implicating her brother-in-law in the mysterious disappearance of her mother, Nancy Guthrie. These allegations surfaced through fellow journalist Ashleigh Banfield, sparking intense reactions from Guthrie, as disclosed by her former NBC colleague, Megyn Kelly.

Megyn Kelly, known for her conservative viewpoints, revealed that Savannah Guthrie’s anger was ignited by Banfield’s assertions that Tommaso Cioni, her brother-in-law, was somehow connected to Nancy’s kidnapping on February 1st in Tucson, Arizona. These claims have since been refuted by the Pima County Sheriff’s Office, which cleared the family of any involvement.

Kelly shared this insight while addressing rumors that Guthrie might pursue legal action against Banfield for spreading false information. “While I haven’t confirmed Savannah’s intent to sue, I can confirm that she is absolutely furious about the report and firmly does not suspect her brother-in-law,” Kelly stated during a recent episode of The Megyn Kelly Show on SiriusXM.

“Who can blame her?” Kelly continued, emphasizing Guthrie’s familial ties. “She undoubtedly loves her sister and brother-in-law and genuinely believes they had nothing to do with the incident.”

According to investigators, Cioni and his wife, Annie Guthrie, were the last individuals to see Nancy Guthrie before her disappearance, having dined with her the previous evening. This detail has only added to the emotional complexity of the situation for Savannah Guthrie and her family.

Cioni and his wife Annie Guthrie were the last known people to see Nancy after having dinner with her the night before she vanished, according to investigators.

Just days after her disappearance, Banfield went on air citing a single law enforcement source who said Cioni was possibly being eyed as a suspect.

The timeline of the disappearance of Savannah Guthrie’s mom:

Banfield later doubled down on her reporting — even after Sheriff Chris Nanos insisted there were no persons of interest in the case.