Return to Transcripts main page

S.E. Cupp Unfiltered

Biden Campaign Feeling Heat After A Week Of Flips And Fumbles; Missing The Moderates, Ideology Vs. Electability; Rep. Jerry Nadler (D) New York Private Push For Impeachment Inquiry Met With Resistance From Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D) California and Rep. Adam Schiff (D) California. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired June 08, 2019 - 18:00   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:00]

S.E. CUPP, CNN S.E. CUPP UNFILTERED: Welcome to Unfiltered. Here is tonight's headline. Say it isn't so, Joe. It's been a tumultuous week for the former Vice President and presidential candidate, fraught with campaign missteps and flip-flops galore.

First, there was the news that the Biden campaign had populated some of its climate change proposal by lifting freezes from think tanks. All that did, of course, was resurrect old charges of plagiarism that he likely hoped he'd long put to bed. Nope.

Then, there was his campaign aide's awkward attempt to explain a 1987 gaffe resurrected by The New York Times, his claim that he marched in the civil rights movement. He most certainly did not.

Finally, the two-step that was more like a three-step on the Hyde Amendment, the 1976 measure prohibiting federal funding for abortion, except in the case of rape, incest and endangering the life of the mother. Here's how that went. Back in may, he was asked in a rope line whether he would repeal the amendment, he said he would.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Will you commit to abolishing the Hyde Amendment, which hurts poor women and women of color?

JOE BIDEN, FORMER U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Yes. Yes. And by the way, ACLU member, I got a near perfect voting record my entire career.

UNIDENTIFED FEMALE: I heard you did, but I'm glad you just said you would commit to abolishing the Hyde Amendment.

BIDEN: Right now, it has to be. It can't stay.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: Well, on Wednesday, after that video resurfaced, his campaign backtracked, saying he misheard the question and still supports the measure. Facing a backlash from his democratic challengers and progressive activists, by Thursday, he'd flipped yet again, announcing in a speech in Atlanta that he no longer backs the amendment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: I make no apologies for my last position and I make no apologies for what I'm about to say. I can't justify leaving millions without the access of the care they need and the ability to exercise their constitutionally protected right. If I believe healthcare is a right as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone's zip code.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUPP: Talk about whiplash. The immediate question, of course, is why wasn't Biden or his campaign ready for this question? Abortion is always a hot button issue in presidential elections, but now especially against the backdrop of extreme new laws in predominantly southern states.

But there's a bigger problem here from where I sit. Now that Biden has caved to progressives on the Hyde Amendment, what's the point of his candidacy, exactly?

Here's the deal. I'm confused. I thought Biden's raison d'etre in this election was to occupy a moderate lane that far left progressives had abandoned over the past few years. I thought he was attempting to capture the forgotten democrats in the middle of the country. I was told he would speak to working class Americans that his party had left behind for coastal elites. In flipping on Hyde, he just made himself ideologically indistinguishable from the other 23 candidates.

But why? The Hyde Amendment survived three democratic presidents, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. A majority of Americans support it. And for the past four decades, Biden has been a vocal moderate on abortion, voting over and over again against federal funding for abortions, saying he personally opposes abortion, but that Roe is the law of the land.

Biden's sudden accommodation to a vocal progressive minority makes it very clear, moderates, you've officially been dumped.

Joining me now to discuss, former Senator from Illinois and Biden campaign surrogate ambassador, Carol Moseley Braun. Welcome, Ambassador. I'm so glad you are here, and I know you're supporting Joe Biden, so maybe you can explain to me his very abrupt evolution on this issue.

FMR. SEN. CAROL MOSELEY BRAUN (D-IL): Well, what I can tell you is I worked with Joe Biden for six years in the United States Senate. He helped me with my confirmation as Ambassador to New Zealand, and I have nothing but the highest regard and respect for him.

CUPP: Sure.

BRAUN: I support him because I know him to be an honorable man who has selflessly devoted himself, his career, to serving working people. And so, I say that as a predicate, because I was in the Senate with -- Henry Hyde was one of the congressmen from my state, from Illinois, when this bill passed. And I never voted for it. I'm very much for women having the right to choose and control their own bodies, but Roe has never been as challenged. Roe v. Wade has never been as challenged as it is now. We've got states passing bills that prohibit abortion, even before you know you're pregnant, that you have your rapist's baby or your uncle's baby.

And so in that light, in that context, I think what Joe Biden has done is the honorable thing as he always does and that's why I'm comfortable sitting here having this conversation with you.

[18:05:08]

CUPP: Well, Ambassador, all of that is true, of course, it was true before Thursday, when he adopted this position, the abortion laws have been heating up and getting, you know, too extreme over the past few months. And, obviously, I don't have to remind you, Joe Biden has long supported the Hyde Amendment. I'm wondering if this issue is so fundamental to you and millions of other women, why did you support Joe Biden when up until Thursday he backed the Hyde Amendment against what you say were your own personal, you know, feelings toward it?

BRAUN: Well -- and check my voting record. I have never voted for the Hyde Amendment.

CUPP: Right.

BRAUN: I voted against it, in fact, was laughed at one time when I got up to make a speech about it.

CUPP: Yes. And he has bragged that he's voted no fewer than 50 times upholding it.

BRAUN: But here's the thing. If you want to nitpick a lifetime of service, this man has been in the Senate for 20 something odd years, there's any number of votes that can become targets or can become targets in a game of got you, which makes it politics.

Joe Biden has never operated based on politics. He operates based on principle and trying to do the right thing and trying to do the right thing for working people.

And the Hyde Amendment, particularly, hurts women of color, working women who don't have access to health care, and so, it has -- it has far-reaching ramifications that just were really exacerbated or heightened in the last month or so with all the --

CUPP: No, no, no. I understand why you oppose the Hyde Amendment, Ambassador. I just really don't understand why Joe Biden suddenly does other than, to me, what's pretty clear which is the political backlash.

BRAUN: No, because you didn't have -- no, no, no, no, I disagree. You didn't have these bills passing at the state level all over the country forcing women to become incubators. You didn't have that before. So the circumstances have changed in that regard and, again, Joe Biden has always tried to do the right thing. And my view -- and I have not spoken to him, by the way, about this. I should and I will, but I believe in my heart that he is trying to do the right thing for working women, for working people, which is what he's always done.

And so what you have is a selfless public servant who is trying to do the right thing, and, again, with a long legislative record. And, you know, when you're in the legislator, you get to vote on any number of permutations of things.

And so, to have -- to become kneecapped in all these situations around his many votes is just, I think, unfortunate, but I'm sure he will be able to get through it because of his appeal.

CUPP: I think rather than nitpicking, I think abortion is a very important issue to a lot of voters on both sides of it. In fact, abortion is a single issue for a lot of voters. So I think it's really important to get to the bottom -- the crux of why Joe Biden --

BRAUN: It's vitally important. I agree with you.

CUPP: -- who has long been moderate on this issue is now really sort of flip-flopped way over to the progressive left. As you know, the Hyde Amendment is popular. It's popular among a majority of Americans.

BRAUN: But to talk about the progressive left is to talk politics. Joe Biden has always operated out of conscience and trying to do the right thing. And so when you consider that here is a man who is a devout catholic and he really, I think, was uncomfortable with the whole abortion conversation for a long time. And he's evolved. Leadership means you listen to people. You listen and he's evolved on this issue and I think it's right now, from my perspective, in the right place.

CUPP: You don't -- would you consider him a moderate or a progressive?

BRAUN: I consider him a good -- I think he's a good, selfless public servant. That's what I think. I mean, I don't get myself hung up on which lane are you in, personally, because, frankly, if you do that, you wind up just talking politics and that falls -- that leaves you open to people like, you know, the individual we have now in the White House --

CUPP: Yes, sure.

BRAUN: -- who is focused on their own agenda. It's about them. It's not about public service.

CUPP: I agree. I just think voters --

BRAUN: So Joe has always been in public service. CUPP: Yes, I agree. But I think voters want to know where their candidates stand, and Joe Biden has marketed himself as a moderate. And so I'm just -- I think we're all trying to figure out who he is at this point.

BRAUN: Let me say this. You've got 22 years worth of votes and positions on issues and activity and service to determine where he is. He's got more experience. He's got more capacity than just about anybody else. I love a number of the people in the field. Don't get me wrong. I mean, there's any -- Kamala Harris is the second woman of color to be in the Senate after me, Cory Booker is a nice guy, Elizabeth Warren is brilliant.

So, you know, we can go down the list, there's a number of other candidates, but I'm with Joe, because, again, I'm very comfortable that he wants to do the right thing for working people in this country, and that's what we need

[18:10:02]

CUPP: Okay. Well, I really do appreciate you coming on, Ambassador Moseley Braun, and trying to explain what's going on this week. I appreciate your time. Thank you.

BRAUN: It's my pleasure. Thank you.

CUPP: Okay. Now, let me bring in republican strategist, CNN Political Commentator, Doug Heye, and democratic strategist, Basil Smikle.

Basil, maybe you can answer my question. Is Joe Biden a moderate anymore? He's pro-choice. He is now overturning the Hyde Amendment, he's for gun bans, he wants free college. I mean, where is the moderation in his platform?

BASIL SMIKLE, FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NEW YORK STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: Ultimately, I think he does come out as a moderate because to go so far --

CUPP: Where?

SMIKLE: Well, ultimately --

CUPP: Just because he occasionally says nice things about republicans?

SMIKLE: We've got a little time, so I think throughout the campaign, ultimately, you'll reflect on his candidacy and say, you know, this is a guy who's actually presented himself as a moderate, that he's talked about being and has been over the past couple of decades, simply because I think that's his authentic self. To go so far to the left, and I think you move away from authenticity, and I think that's --

CUPP: Do you think that's what was happening here with the Hyde flip?

SMIKLE: Well, let me tell you what I think about this. The past is prologue, and he has, as the Carol Moseley Braun, as the Ambassador said, 20 some-odd years of votes that people are going to reflect upon without context, and he is going to have to provide that context.

Now, the problem is when he says, you know, go back and think about me as the Obama/Biden democrat, it's one thing to tell voters, look at the past and judge me based on that. But the problem is you lose -- you lose them because they can go back as far as they want. You lose control over that.

And so, at some point, voters are going to say, but what about that crime bill that I saw you debating so fiercely on the floor or things (ph) about that?

CUPP: I think it's different to go back to a bill that's 20, 30 years old, 20 years old at this point, and say, well, you voted for that, which, in context, I think, you know, a lot of democrats did, it was okay. There's a difference between doing that, Doug, and saying, wait a second, you've been very clear on this one issue for the last four decades. And suddenly, in a day, you have changed your mind on it. I think that's important.

DOUG HEYE, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I do too. And Carol Moseley Braun was a former senator, a former ambassador, said the situation has changed. It sure has.

Keep in mind, if you look at past democratic nominating processes, conventions, you would always hear the phrase safe, rare and legal about abortion. That's gone. It's gone from safe, rare and legal from Bill Clinton, Al Gore --

CUPP: That was literally stripped out --

HEYE: -- Joe Biden, and it's now basically abortion palooza, where it is not just a birthright, but when you get your birth certificate now, a free abortion ticket is stapled to your birth certificate. That's where this party has gone. And Joe Biden being not really in lock step with today's Democratic Party had to make that move, that it came with so many somersaults and staff intrusions, I think, is also a troubling sign.

CUPP: Basil, do you worry that Biden -- putting the crux of the abortion issue aside for a second, do you worry this makes Joe Biden look politically pliable?

SMIKLE: Yes. But voters are very good at compartmentalizing. We've seen them do that over and over and over again. We've seen a lot of voters do that with respect to Donald Trump. Remember, people said, don't take him literally, take him figuratively.

I'm not saying they'll go that far with Joe Biden, but I think, voters, if they feel like he's the one to get them to the promised land, so to speak, they will find a way to sort of figure out how they feel about these issues and sort of figure out how they can support him while still having concerns about some of these issues.

CUPP: Doug, I feel like there's been a bit of a con job, and the con job was that there's some moderate wing of the Democratic Party. You know, first it was supposed to be Amy Klobuchar. I have yet to see what parts of her platform are moderate. Then it was maybe Pete Buttigieg. Why? I guess because he's from Indiana. I don't think he's a moderate. It was always supposed to be Joe Biden.

But other than his rhetoric and, like I said, occasionally saying nice things about republicans, I've yet to see moderation in his platform. Is that idea of the moderate democrat, I don't mean voters, is that idea dead?

HEYE: Oh, it's absolutely dead. And if you go back and look at past votes of the Hyde Amendment, you would get up to 25 percent of House Democrats supporting the Hyde Amendment. This was not an unreasonable thing. Democrats have a kind of a safe space of where they can go with this, which is where most voters are. Most voters favor abortion rights, don't like it, want some restrictions, don't want to pay for it, imminently defensible for candidates to do so, but not in today's Democratic Party.

CUPP: Especially one like Joe Biden. That's what he was -- that was the whole point of him.

SMIKLE: But I would say, in his defense, that he is not saying that he is pro-abortion. He's saying he's pro-choice. And that's very important.

CUPP: Sure, sure.

SMIKLE: because we're not -- I do think there is moderation left in our party. You're not hearing a lot of those voices, and that's -- but that is also okay.

[18:14:58]

Because I think on both sides, you'll have probably the most intense feelings, the most extreme feelings, I don't mean that in a negative way, but the most extreme feelings, those are the ones you're going hear the most. But there's still a lot of folks out there that are moderate and then will support a moderate candidate.

CUPP: I'm listening for the moderate voice.

SMIKLE: I'm here.

CUPP: I am here.

HEYE: S.E., this is not just a Joe Biden issue. This is a Joe Biden campaign issue. The story about his flip-flop is about how staff had to intervene for him.

SMIKLE: Well, that's true. That very much is true.

CUPP: We've got to go. Doug, Basil, thank you so much to get your perspectives. I appreciate it. We'll do this again.

Okay, up next, some red flags are waving in the direction of the President's re-election hopes, but democrats seem to be ignoring how they could capitalize on them. I'll explain.

And a little later, stick around for my candidate of the week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CUPP: 19 of the 23 democratic hopefuls are in Iowa this weekend, but with no clear candidate in the 2020 democratic field, appealing to moderate voters, the party is potentially ceding millions of voters to Trump or third party candidates.

New research from a democratic voter targeting firm shows that the party's gains in the midterms were in large part due to larger than expected defections from voters who backed Trump two years prior.

[18:20:03]

Catalist calculated that nearly 90 percent of the democrats increase in their total vote last year came from flipped voters.

That should be a huge message for democrats, including Joe Biden. It means that swing voters are gettable, and the party shouldn't just focus on their far left flank. It should also be a huge red flag for Trump. It means his coalition can be broken, which may already be happening. Recent polls show Trump's numbers sliding in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina and even Texas. Suddenly, 2020 seems like a race to the middle.

Here to break this down for us is CNN Political Director David Chalian. Okay. So what are your key takeaways from those polls, both for democrats and for Trump?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, listen. As you know, S.E., in the world of politics, it's not an either/or proposition. It's a both end proposition. To be successful in the national election, you need both a very energized and dedicated and committed base and you need to try and win over the middle. And that's how you win elections. You just can't do it with with just one or the other.

And so, as you say, what I think a lot of these polls are showing is that the middle, which clearly, in the 2018 elections, was disenchanted with Donald Trump, is open to a conversation from democrats this time around. But as you know, it's going to depend on who that democrat is, how those people in the middle respond.

CUPP: Well, so, how do you think democrats should exploit those weaknesses and do you think they are doing that yet?

CHALIAN: Well, you know, this is a two-step proposition for the Democratic Party, as you know. And same true for republicans last cycle or any presidential cycle. When you've got a competitive primary, you are fighting for a slice of the pie among voters that are committed party activists that show up in these presidential primaries. That is a small slice of the overall -- not just the overall party but the overall country.

And so, to -- in order to get to the place where, as a democratic nominee, you're going to have a conversation and try to win over the middle, you first have to actually become the democratic nominee. And so this is an age old calculation in politics. How do you appeal to the base without going too far left or too far right to make it that much more difficult to woo over the middle when you're a nominee in the general election.

CUPP: I mean, we all remember the 2016 republican primary. We all said, okay, Trump won the nomination, now he'll pivot in the general. He didn't and he won. Do you think the democrats can bank -- do you think democrats are banking on that same calculus for their primary and general this time?

CHALIAN: I don't. I do think we will see some pivots. Although I do think the most successful presidential candidates, I think of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama or George W. Bush, Donald Trump in recent times, they had -- they won the White House on a consistent message from the primary season all the way through, even if they had to make slight adjustments.

You know Donald Trump didn't pivot, S.E. But remember, Donald Trump won the middle. He won the independents over Hillary Clinton in 2016 by four points. They swung by 16 points in 2018. Independents -- democrats won independents by some 12 pints in the midterm election. So, yes, even though Donald Trump didn't pivot to the middle, he wasn't appealing candidates in the middle, especially lined up against Hillary Clinton. That went away for republicans in 2018 and democrats will try to exploit that in '20.

CUPP: Yes, I hope they're listening, I hope they're watching, I hope they're reading these polls. CNN Political Director and national treasure, David Chalian, from Iowa tonight, thank you so much. Thank you.

All right. next up, I'll talk impeachment politics with my candidate of the week. And President Trump calls off the tariff threat to Mexico. High five. I'll break it all down for you. Stay right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

CUPP: To impeach or not to impeach? That is the question that democrats are still wrangling with, and it's causing a rift in the Democratic Party leadership. This week, House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler broke rank in the democratic leadership by privately pushing to open an impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

That effort reportedly earned Nadler a strong rebuke by Speaker Pelosi, who, according to Politico, told him and other senior democrats she doesn't want President Trump impeached, she wants him in prison. Sources say Nadler has been supportive of members of his committee who have publicly backed opening an impeachment investigation. So who is winning this political tug of war?

Joining me now is a member of the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Eric Swalwell. He is also my 2020 candidate of the week. Welcome, Congressman.

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): Thank you, S.E.

CUPP: Okay. So, first, you have said, you told your colleagues to prepare for impeachment, but you haven't publicly called to impeach the President. What, in particular, are you waiting for?

SWALWELL: I believe we should first impeach the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, S.E. I think they are front door obstructers. The evidence that you would need for an impeachment of Donald Trump, they've buried deep beneath the earth and have obstructed, they violated the law, they are worthy of impeachment, I would start there.

But just stepping back, look, if we play this out, knowing this president, the crescendo here is going to be impeachment. I think our Speaker wants to make sure that all the instruments are tuned and every person in this symphony is in concert, and that we don't rush into it.

And as the only candidate in the field for president who would actually have to try the case, I'm mindful of that, too.

CUPP: Sure. I want to shift for a minute and get your thoughts on one of your opponents in the 2020 race, Joe Biden, as you know, I'm sure, abruptly flips his position.

SWALWELL: Which one?

CUPP: Yes, I know. Joe Biden abruptly flips his position on the Hyde Amendment after supporting it for decades. I'm wondering, do you think he did that for political expedience?

SWALWELL: I'm glad he did it. I don't know why he did it. He should not have been opposed to it. And to get rid of the Washington speak here, that amendment prevented women who did not have private health insurance from making the decision about an abortion. I think every woman should be able to make that very personal decision without their insurance being a means to it.

[18:30:02]

And we shouldn't punish people for evolving in this debate. So I'm not attacking the Vice President.

S.E. CUPP: OK.

SWALWELL: I hope every candidate can affirmatively say that.

CUPP: So I want to turn now to your signature issue which is gun control. You've talked about being moved to action after the tragic Parkland shooting. You held your kickoff event 13 miles from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. You met with many of those parents impacted by the shooting and you are the only candidate who is calling for a confiscation of guns. You say you want to ban and buyback every single assault weapon in

America. You've touted Australia as a model of how gun confiscation works. You might be surprised to hear this, Congressman, but I want to applaud your position on this issue. Sincerely, gun control advocates often insist no one's coming to take your guns away. You say, "Yes, I am." And that is refreshingly honest, sir.

SWALWELL: Well, the only radical thing I believe, S.E., is to do nothing as we have more and more shootings in America and more dead children. And so I'm not confiscating anyone's guns but my plan does say that if you have an assault weapon, you would have to sell it back to the government or only use it at a shooting range or a hunting club.

And other candidates have called for an assault weapons ban but they only want to ban future manufacturing and future sales.

CUPP: Right.

SWALWELL: And I think if you recognize that an assault weapon shouldn't be made anymore in America, why don't you just get to the point where you say, "Those that are here shouldn't be here." That's where I'm at.

CUPP: Yes. No, that is the confiscation. It's existing guns, as you say. It's not future purchases, putting a ban on future purchases. You're talking about existing guns. And look, I have always said that if you truly blame guns for gun crime, the only intellectually honest position is to advocate for taking them away.

So my question is why are you stopping at assault weapons, which account for less than 5 percent of gun murders and not confiscating handguns which account for the vast majority of guns deaths.

SWALWELL: Yes. And I have a plan for hand gun deaths too and I'll just say assault weapons are a smaller percentage of gun violence deaths. But when you talk to a child in a classroom today, a hundred percent of their fear is an assault weapon coming into their classroom.

But for hand gun deaths in cities like Chicago, and Baltimore and Oakland where I worked as a prosecutor, my plan is to address the more structural issues that lead to hand violence, hand gun deaths in those cities and it's a lack of hope really.

CUPP: Yes.

SWALWELL: I talked to a woman on the south side of Chicago, Tamar Manasseh. She's taken over a bunch of blocks. And she said, a lot of these kids, the only time they think they'll ever wear a suit in their life is when they're "in the box." Meaning that there's such a hopelessness in these communities because of a lack of jobs, a lack of education.

So that's a structural issue, that's different than no background check can fully address that. That means investing in those communities.

CUPP: Right.

SWALWELL: But having fewer guns in the wrong hands or making sure that they're locked up safely or they're reported to the police when they're stolen can go a long way there. But I recognize, S.E. that there's not one single issue that will reduce gun violence deaths, but I think it's going to take a single candidate to say this will be their top priority, if we're going to have no gun violence deaths in our future.

CUPP: Well, yes, just quickly before I let you go, why do you think your opponents, all of them, haven't gone as far as you have on this issue? Do you hear me, Congressman? Did we lose him?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We lost him.

CUPP: OK. Congressman and presidential candidate Eric Swalwell, sorry we lost him. Thanks for his time. I appreciate it. The President gets to claim a win today after indefinitely suspending crippling tariffs on Mexico. I'll check the scorecard, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:37:25] CUPP: In THE RED FILE tonight, after 11 hours of negotiations yesterday, the U.S. and Mexico hammered out a deal on immigration and President Trump indefinitely suspended the unpopular tariffs he threatened to put into effect on Monday. As part of the agreement Mexico will take "unprecedented steps to send the flow of Central American migrants into the U.S.," including the deployment of thousands of National Guard troops at their border with Guatemala.

And individuals caught crossing into America seeking asylum will be "rapidly returned to Mexico," while their claims are processed in the U.S., during which time Mexico will provide them with jobs, health care and education. Also, as Trump tweeted this morning Mexico will immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers.

Here with more on the literally 11th hour deal CNN's Boris Sanchez. Boris, Republican leaders are applauding Trump for his negotiating skills. Democrats, not so much, what's the latest from Washington?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey there, S.E. Yes, even Republicans who were sort of worrisome about the potential for a tariffs against one of the united states largest trading partners in Mexico like Senator Mitch McConnell, they were praising the President last night on Twitter.

On the other side, Democrats like Minority Leader Chuck Schumer were mocking the President. He actually tweeted out last night saying that it was a historic night and then now immigration issues were solved. He put out a statement later today expanding on what he thought about this.

He writes, quote, just as I predicted, the President backed off. He says that Mexico will take action to 'greatly reduce, or eliminate illegal immigration coming from Mexico and into the United States', but if past is prologue, this is likely to be just one of the President's typical, bogus solutions to justify backing off of things like the tariffs, which he precipitously proposed, much to the consternation of the business community nationwide and Republicans in the House and Senate. It is likely to have only a small impact on solving the root causes of Central American migration because many of the components are things Mexico is already doing. President Trump ought to stop acting like a showman and start working with Democrats on our serious proposals to address the nation's most pressing needs.

Now, it's clear the President is casting this as a win. We should point out just a short time ago he actually had the campaign tweet out a fundraiser based on this agreement, citing his best seller The Art of the Deal. This also could potentially embolden the President.

Remember that sources indicated that he ignored the advice of even his own son-in-law, Jared Kushner and others, who suggested that threatening these terrorists could derail the ratification of the USMCA, something that the president should said that Democrats should get on immediately. So potentially we could see the President threatened tariffs on a series of other issues to try to force allies to act according to his whim, S.E.

CUPP: Well, according to the White House, talks with Mexico will continue over the next 90 days. Do we know exactly what that will entail?

SANCHEZ: Not precisely. Essentially, the two saying that they're going to continue discussing ways to slow the flow of immigrants coming from Central America through Mexico and into the United States over the next 90 days. They said they would have an announcement on this potentially coming within that timeframe. It's really unclear exactly what that might entail, but it wouldn't be a surprise to see the President revisit this. His stance on Mexico aggressively.

Remember that just a few months ago, he suggested the entire southern border should be closed before aides ultimately talked him out of it. This is an issue that's central to President Trump's presidency to his candidacy going into 2020. And whenever he sees any criticism, especially coming from the far right, commentators on the far right, he instinctively reacts because he does not want to lose the base on this, S.E.

CUPP: CNN's Boris Sanchez from the White House tonight. Thanks so much.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

CUPP: Against the solemn backdrop of World War II grave markers, the President launched political attacks. It's become far too easy to forget what the service and public service actually means. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [18:45:25] CUPP: This week we mark the 75th anniversary of D-Day when

more than 160,000 allied troops storm the beaches of Normandy with the support of more than 5,000 ships and 13,000 aircraft. By the end of that day, there were 10,000 allied casualties. It was the epitome of service and sacrifice.

That, of course, lives on in the 1.3 million brave active duty men and women in the U.S. military and the 800,000 reservists who volunteer to keep us safe and defend our way of life. But elsewhere, especially in politics, the ideas of sacrifice and service seem to have diminished over time. For example, we have a President who abused the sanctity and solemnity of the D-Day anniversary to bash his political opponents.

We have a president who avoided service only to dismiss the service of others decades later. Likewise, we have politicians on both sides of the aisle who now run for office not to serve their neighbors, but to build their brand, line their own pockets and sell books. We have political leaders who defend the indefensible just to keep their jobs.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think that's what the greatest generation fought for nor is it what this next generation deserves. I'm joined by retired Rear Admiral and former State Department Spokesperson for the Obama administration, John Kirby.

When you hear from World War II veterans, whether they're living or through their letters or their memoirs, they speak of that sense of duty and honor. They felt in serving their country and you just wrote about this for cnn.com. I'm wondering if you can help contextualize for us what that sense of sacrifice was that was so defining of the greatest generation.

JOHN KIRBY, CNN MILITARY & DIPLOMATIC ANALYST: I think there's three things to it, S.E. First of all it's humility. It's not believing too much about your own self and being humble about it. You never hear these guys brag about what they did. They won't even talk about it. It's selflessness. It's putting others before yourself.

I mean, when you really talk to World War II vets or vets frankly of any combat that I've talked to, they'll tell you that what they're fighting for is their buddy, and they're fighting not to let their buddy down, not to disappoint them. It's not so much about wrapping themselves in the flag and that's the third thing. It's a sense of patriotism that's different than the one that we see and hear and taste so much today, wrapping yourself in the flag, the Jingoism, the my country, love it or leave it.

That's not the patriotism that most combat vets espouse. It's more of loving your country clearly but not being afraid to question the motives of that country, not being afraid to criticize it.

CUPP: Yes. The idea of public service, I think, has always changed so dramatically and not just in the past few years but over the past century. I don't think the founding fathers ever meant for political office to be a lifetime career. Certainly not a money-making opportunity and yet, as you know, here we are with a president who has used the office to enrich his businesses. And 24 Democratic candidates running for president, let's face it, many I think are just doing it to build a brand.

KIRBY: Yes.

CUPP: What's your take on what public service has become?

KIRBY: I think we need to have a national conversation about public service writ large, not just the military. We tend to think of the military too much when we think of public service, but we should have a national conversation about it. Teddy Roosevelt used to say, "You should bring private morality into public service."

I think we need to get back to some very basic ideas of what serving the public is all about. And it's not about yourself. It's about the office. It's about the institution and it's about the people that that institution is supposed to preserve, protect or defend.

CUPP: Yes.

KIRBY: And I think we've kind of gotten off kilter from that. And it might be fueled a little bit by the mass media environment.

CUPP: Sure.

KIRBY: I mean, when you're a politician, you're on all the time, you try to get your message out.

CUPP: That's right.

KIRBY: And you get driven, I think, by this notion of having to communicate everything. I think we need to get back to a much simpler sense of what public service is all about and it really is about duty. It's about putting yourself behind the needs of others.

CUPP: Do you think that upcoming generations can sort of take over the mantle from the greatest generation?

KIRBY: Absolutely, I do. Absolutely, I do. We have a new greatest generation, S.E., and pretty soon we're going to have soldiers serving in Afghanistan that weren't even born on 9/11.

CUPP: Right.

KIRBY: And they have been performing magnificently, them and their families fighting a 19-year war now with an all volunteer force. They are the new greatest generation and they do want to continue to serve the country. We saw record numbers of vets now running for office.

CUPP: Right.

KIRBY: And many of them won office in 2018. I hope that trend continues. I think it's important to have vets not just in Congress, in office, but in teaching an institutions.

[18:50:00] CUPP: Right. KIRBY: Serving on municipal boards. I mean, being in a police force.

Having vets out there, I think, is a good thing and I do believe that this new generation of men and women who have served in uniform and are serving are equal to that task and are every bit as great as the World War II generation.

CUPP: That's great to hear coming from you. I really appreciate you coming on and having this conversation tonight.

KIRBY: My pleasure.

CUPP: And as always, thank you for your service.

KIRBY: Thank you.

CUPP: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:54:17] CUPP: I was driving in to work yesterday and right along the west side highway here in New York City is the Intrepid Museum. The star of which is the USS Intrepid, a decommissioned aircraft carrier that saw battle in World War II, Vietnam and the Cold War. It's a place of tremendous pride for our men and women who served in the military.

It was also, I noticed yesterday, a place of pride. It is pride month which commemorates the Stonewall riots and celebrate its LGBTQ rights. And there in the long row of American flags was one lone rainbow flag. I took this picture and posted it to my social media accounts. The responses were mostly positive, but not all.

"Disrespectful to all veterans. Is that why you posted this trash?" Said one.

"Why is it flying at the same height and in between the U.S. flags?" Questioned another.

"Gays and trans don't belong in the service." Said one more. Needless to say, I was saddened to read those comments. As far as we've come in fighting for LGBTQ equality, there's a lot more work to be done. But I was struck by something else, that a flag, especially one as positive and happy as that one could get someone so triggered, so angry made me realize that flag is a very powerful symbol.

The Trump administration has reportedly rejected the requests from U.S. embassies in Israel, Germany, Brazil and elsewhere to fly the rainbow pride flag during June and that is disappointing. The administration's campaign to end the criminalization of homosexuality abroad is an admirable and important one. But decriminalizing homosexuality begins with destigmatizing it and the best way we can help do that is to fly that flag proudly, both overseas and here at home.

OK. Stick around for the top of the hour when former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates will join David Axelrod to discuss the President's foreign policy approach. THE AXE FILES are next.