Return to Transcripts main page

CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt

Trump On Iran Deadline: "A Whole Civilization Will Die Tonight"; Tucker Carlson: Officials Should Say No To Trump Orders; Trump Endorses Steve Hilton In California Governor's Race. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired April 07, 2026 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:02]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Otherwise, Iran would face serious repercussions.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Yeah. Big questions about whether this is going to potentially be the off ramp. So we're going to be watching to see if that's the case.

And "THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" starts right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Breaking news, we are fast approaching a monumental deadline in President Trump's war with Iran.

Hi, everyone. Welcome to THE ARENA. I'm Kasie Hunt. It's great to have you with us on this Monday. It's great to be back with you.

As we come on the air, we are just four hours away from that 8:00 p.m. deadline that President Donald Trump gave Iran to agree to a deal and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Sources tell CNN that Trump administration officials are hopeful that indirect talks can produce some kind of agreement to delay or decrease the severity of America's next strike.

Still, with every second that ticks by, we get closer to a potentially extreme escalation of this war.

President Trump, writing on social media this morning, quote, "A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. However, now that we have complete and total regime change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen. Who knows? We will find out tonight. One of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the world, 47 years of extortion, corruption, and death will finally end. God bless the great people of Iran," end quote.

So, of course, Donald Trump has made his political career saying things that are shocking, alarming, even offensive -- even offensive. But it is worth taking a moment to just think through the real world consequences of these words. So, this is the president of the United States, the commander in chief of the most powerful military that the world has ever known publicly threatening to order American men and women in uniform to end an entire civilization in a war that he has repeatedly said we've already won.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You know, you never like to say too early you won. We won.

Oh, I think we've won.

We've already won the war militarily. We've totally won the war.

We are on track to complete all of America's military objectives, shortly, very shortly.

We're the winner. We won. Okay? They are militarily defeated.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: We won. They're militarily defeated. He said it.

But that's just it, isn't it? This deadline isn't about a military victory. It's about trying to force this diplomatic deal.

And despite almost six weeks of war, more than 10,000 U.S. airstrikes, there's little sign today that Iran is in a deal-making mood. In a statement, a spokesman for the Iranian government said this, quote, "threatening a civilization is, more than anything, a sign of ignorance of the history of a nation that has repeatedly overcome crises and continued to stand," end quote.

Now, today, some Iranians are creating human chains on bridges and near power plants. These are the exact types of sites that President Trump vowed to strike if this deadline passes. And then, in his own words, a whole civilization will die.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We can hit sections of Tehran and other places that if you do it, it will be almost impossible for them to rebuild their country. And we don't want that.

Well hit bridges and we've hit some. Well hit some bridges. We've got a couple of nice bridges in mind.

Every bridge in Iran will be decimated by 12:00 tomorrow night, where every power plant in Iran will be out of business, burning, exploding, and never to be used again. I mean, complete demolition.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right. Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel is here. We're also joined by CNN White House correspondent Alayna Treene and CNN chief national security analyst Jim Sciutto. He is standing by in Tel Aviv for us.

But, Alayna, let me start with you, because, of course, everyone wants to know what our administration officials, what's the president thinking ahead of this 8:00 p.m. deadline.

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Look, Kasie, I've been on the phone with administration officials all day, and what they tell me is that they are hopeful that some sort of diplomatic breakthrough could actually happen. Of course, it's very much unclear whether or not that is going to happen. They said, though, that they're hoping that some sort of agreement could be made to either, one, delay these attacks further, or to at least lessen the severity of these attacks.

Now, I will say the status of these talks has not been immediately clear.

[16:05:01]

We heard from "The Wall Street Journal" saying that essentially indirect communications between the U.S. and Iran have been cut off. We heard "The New York Times" going even further, saying that there are no indirect talks or, excuse me, "The Washington Journal" said no direct talks. "New York Times" saying not even indirect talks are happening.

What I can tell you, though, from what my sources are telling me, is that they are still very much hopeful that negotiations will continue and that they are eager to find some sort of diplomatic solution here.

They also said that really that aggressive, ratcheted up rhetoric we heard from the president this morning, going so far as to say a whole civilization will die tonight if Iran does not heed its calls to reopen the strait by 8:00 p.m., they said essentially, that is his way of putting maximum pressure on the Iranians. But they warned as well that the president is still very much not ruling out moving forward with these, you know, higher level of military strikes that he has been warning of.

Now, I do want to give you a little bit, though, of what were also hearing now, because there was this new proposal laid out by the Pakistani prime minister. I should note, Pakistan has been one of the most crucial and involved intermediaries between Washington and Tehran. As these negotiations continue, he offered a pretty optimistic assessment in this statement of where diplomatic negotiations are.

And then he called -- for one, he called on the Iranians to reopen the Strait of Hormuz for two weeks as a sign of goodwill, but also for both sides and all parties involved to agree to a two-week temporary ceasefire, to allow these negotiations to continue before this deadline of 8:00 p.m. that Trump has set.

Now, I did speak to the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt. She sent me a statement saying that the president has been made aware of this proposal and that a response will come. We also just saw Fox News saying that they had a phone interview with the president. You know, just four hours now until that deadline. He said he won't give off any information because he is still in heated negotiations over this and that he has not yet fully been briefed on this ceasefire proposal put forward by the Pakistanis.

All to say, there's a lot of time still, even though it seems four hours is not a lot of time for my sources. They say that's still a lot of time to see whether or not some sort of diplomatic breakthrough could be reached. I know that's what many people in that building behind me are hoping for, Kasie.

HUNT: Well, and to that point, I mean, Jim, we've seen us and Israeli strikes on Iran. We've seen those strikes on Iran's Kharg Island. What are you understanding, seeing, hearing from the region as this deadline approaches?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, this is certainly a pivotal point in a war that has already longer and larger than many had expected at the war's start, but a point where it might very well expand with the decision. And Israeli officials have said this quite consistently with the decision entirely up to President Trump at this point, as to the next step in this war from the U.S. and even the Israeli perspective.

But today, we did see a pretty heavy tempo of strikes in all directions. As you noted, the U.S. carried out strikes on Kharg Island. That is where Iran exports more than 90 percent of its oil. A U.S. official confirmed that this was specifically military targets on Kharg Island, not oil facilities there. And we should note that the U.S. did strike military targets on Kharg in the middle of March. So they've done this before, striking those targets again, I think you could read that to some degree as a message as well, that the U.S. can, if it were to decide to, strike oil facilities there as well.

But Israel has already begun to strike civilian infrastructure, at least infrastructure that is used by civilians in Iran today, railway bridges, roads, railway lines and Israel said it chose those targets because they were used by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps to transit ballistic missiles and ballistic missile parts.

For its part, Iran has been firing back. We spent a fair amount of time today in the shelters as incoming fire came towards Israel, including here towards Tel Aviv. So the tempo of Iranian attacks towards Israel certainly hasn't slowed. And as we noted earlier in the broadcast, Iran is threatening to expand those attacks across the region if the U.S. were to follow through on the president's -- on the president's alarming threat.

HUNT: All right. Jim Sciutto, Alayna Treene, thanks very much for getting us started this hour. Really appreciate it.

My panel is here in THE ARENA. CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams, CNN political commentator Jonah Goldberg, former Biden White House communications Director Kate Bedingfield, and Republican strategist Brad Todd. Of course, both CNN political commentators.

We're also joined by "The New York Times" and CNN's national security analyst, David Sanger, the author of "The New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion and America's Struggle to Defend the West". You can get it in paperback out today.

[16:10:02]

And on that point, David, I started my day actually with your piece in "The Times", kind of outlining how we got here. But perhaps more importantly, what the options are going forward here.

Can you help us understand this new reporting we have with the Pakistanis talking about attempting to get two more weeks to talk this out? What do you think that means and where you think the White House is thinking is right now ahead of this deadline?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, the best we can tell right now, Kasie, is that the Pakistanis who have been the intermediary here and have a good relationship with President Trump, are basically trying to buy time. We have no indication there's been any substantive back and forth proposal, particularly on the bigger issues. You know, right now, the president's been mostly focused on the fact that no traffic or very little traffic is trickling through the Strait of Hormuz.

And remember, the strait was not a reason that the United States attacked Iran. It was a reaction to that attack. So if you could get it open, what would happen is you'd go back to the status quo ante on February 28th, wouldn't affect the nuclear program. The missile program, and so forth.

It's not clear that the Iranians would agree to reopening the strait during this two-week ceasefire. They believe that once its opened, the U.S. will position its forces so that it couldn't be closed again in the future. And they also believe that the U.S. will use that time to restock and rearm and begin their attacks again. So there's a big disincentive for the Iranians to go do this.

At the same time, it's entirely possible the president will say that out of respect to the Pakistanis and their efforts here, he'll give another two weeks. That would be very much in keeping with what he has tried to go do here.

I'm not sure that making maximalist demands, like the erasure of civilizations, has the effect that he intends on the Iranians, who I think probably viewed it more as an insult than than a credible threat to actually do all of this. But president loves unpredictability.

HUNT: That's an understatement in in many ways. But your point is extraordinarily well taken, David.

Jonah Goldberg, can I get you to weigh in on this? Because I think one of the big questions here is, I mean, I think there's even this, you know, its become a cliche, right, that Trump TACO moment, right, where he does threaten quite a bit, right? Tries to ratchet up the pressure and then ultimately folds in the face of in many cases, its been the bond market. That's the problem.

But this is obviously kind of a new level of threat. And the stakes are probably higher than they've ever been.

JONAH GOLDBERG, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah. And in fact, I cant remember was the prime minister or the president of Iran actually pointed out that the rhetoric would escalate right after markets close. And then like on a Friday and then Monday morning, all of a sudden calm has been restored.

People can figure that out, right? I personally like, I don't like the language. I don't think it's good language. All that. I think it's, it's also not aimed at an American audience per se.

He's trying to intimidate the Iranians out of this. There's a -- there's a geo-strategic problem embedded in all of this. It's implicit in the offers that we're making, that the Strait of Hormuz is Iran's to close in the first place, right? Hey, let's have a goodwill thing. You open it up for two weeks. Well, if you're saying that they can open up the toll road, you're sort of conceding the precedent that they can close it. And it's the one major piece of leverage that Iran has.

The other one being if they go after. This is why I don't think it happens tonight, whether you want to call it TACO or not. That's another thing. The the Gulf states around Iran have been told that Iran will do to them what we do to Iran. And the idea that they aren't getting Trump on the phone saying, you can't do this if we lose our desalinization plants, some of our cities become uninhabitable for years. And I think that kind of pressure is going to come to bear.

HUNT: Elliot?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I agree. It's the unfortunate pickle the president has put himself in is either commit pretty egregious acts that step up to being war crimes or chicken out. And I think, yes, I understand the concept of aggressive negotiating. Yes, I understand it's a tactic, but hes sort of boxing himself into a position that that that I don't think he wins in either scenario.

KATE BEDINGFIELD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: He is. And he's also, I mean, to Jonah's point -- I mean, he's also essentially handing them all of the leverage. I mean, that post from Sunday morning, you know, opening the -- open the effing strait, I mean, that was that reeked of desperation.

[16:15:00]

So if you -- purely, if you want to step back even from the kind of atrocious things that he's saying when he's saying, I'm going to obliterate a civilization, and you want to look at it purely through the lens of negotiation and tactical exchange, he basically said to them, you hold all the cards and I'm freaking out over here.

And that's -- and I think the idea that this is some sort of like strategic, you know, stroke of brilliance that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I also think, by the way, not for nothing, he has pretty spectacularly obliterated one of the rationales that he initially gave for regime change, you know, was to free the Iranian people. And now the goal is what? To obliterate their civilization?

I mean, obviously, it's not -- it's not news that he's not adhered to a coherent theory of why he has waged this war, but that seems like a pretty significant undermining of something that he and his people were out in the first couple of weeks saying was one of the reasons that they were going to do this.

BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I agree with that, Kate. I think that the Iranian people rising up against their government was one of the best impetus for us to go and do this. And I think you did -- I think he gave it away in three words. No, I don't think he gave it away.

But obviously, hes not going to obliterate whole civilizations. And obviously, that's not in the interest of the United States. I think it reflects his frustration level that the Iranians have not come to the table. But I think you're right. It undermines one of the larger messages for it.

I think last Wednesday, though, when the president said all our military objectives and all lines of effort are ahead of schedule, that's still true. That's still true.

And the right approach for this time would be for him to continue to say, that's what's going to happen. We will achieve our objectives and we're going to achieve it by April 28th. That's when the 60-day mark hits. That's when Congress is going to start getting antsy about his use of military force under the War Powers Act.

So I think that the next three weeks are really important. I don't think we'll see whole civilizations wiped out tonight. But I think -- I think that that was a mistake type of rhetoric.

WILLIAMS: Brad, just a question on the ahead of schedule point, wasn't it the case that five weeks ago, the president said this will be over in four to six weeks, and we're now talking about either ending it tonight, which clearly is not going to happen, I think, or extending it some period of weeks. I just don't know how much we ought to believe this notion that we're being fed that we're actually ahead of schedule in this conflict.

TODD: Well, for six, eight weeks are all sort of within rounding errors of each other. They're both all short conflicts. They're all short conflicts.

HUNT: You do point out the importance of 60 days, which is around that that eight-week motion.

I do want to conclude here with David.

Your colleagues Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan have put out a pretty granular, detailed ticktock of how this decision came to be made in preparation for a book that they have coming out, and they essentially seem to lay out that this regime change idea, this idea that the Iranians were going to kind of rise up and take things back, that American intelligence assessed like that wasn't a reason to go and do this, right? That they sort of laid out what the Israelis had argued to the president of the United States as to why this should happen and why it should happen now.

What is your kind of assessment of the way the president seemed to make this decision, and also the fact that the people around him -- there didn't seem to be anyone in the room who looked at him and said, Mr. President, this is a bad idea. You shouldn't do this.

The possible exception of J.D. Vance. But even he said, you know where I stand on this and I'm with you, if you do it.

SANGER: So, a few things. First of all, I urge everybody to go read this excerpt from their forthcoming book, "Regime Change". It's an adaptation that gives you a real sense of the divisions inside the administration, of J.D. Vance acting much more cautious, as we suspected he had been since he had campaigned so heavily on the thought of no more forever wars, no more long wars in the Middle East.

But what it really paints a great picture of is how the Israelis came to try to sell the president on the idea that as soon as this happened, if you could assassinate the supreme leader, the Iranian people would rise up as the president invited them to on the night of February 28th, when this all began, right? And that there would be this this revolution and American intelligence pushing back, saying there's no evidence that that's going to happen.

And it turned out it has not happened. It may happen at some point in the future, but it certainly hasn't happened yet. And I think what it tells you is that the president has surrounded himself by such a small, tight number of people who hes comfortable with, that there aren't enough people sort of backing off and saying, let's think about what happens if the strait is closed. Let's think about what happens if there is no spontaneous revolution.

And I think that's what got him to where he is today.

HUNT: All right. David Sanger, thank you very much, sir. Always appreciate having you.

The rest of our panel is going to stand by.

Coming up next here in THE ARENA, new CNN reporting on what House Democrats are doing to try and get a handful of Republicans to back a move to limit the president's war powers in Iran.

We'll talk to one of them, Democratic Congressman Jason Crow, a veteran of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is here live

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, LATE-NIGHT TV HOST: Let me set the scene, okay? You're finishing your Easter brunch, cleaning up. The kids are running out to the yard to find jelly beans, and suddenly, your 79-year-old grandpa stands up and yells, "Open the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell! Just watch. Praise be to Allah." You'd put him in the car and drive him straight to the emergency room, right? I mean --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:25:03]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They've got to know we've got tools in our tool kit that we so far haven't decided to use. The United States can decide to use them, and he will decide to use them. If the Iranians don't change their course of conduct.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: Vice President J.D. Vance today warning that the U.S. has many more tools in the toolkit should Iran fail to meet the U.S.'s demands. Those comments coming around the same time that the president threatened to end, quote, "a whole civilization if Iran does not open the Strait of Hormuz by 8:00 p.m. tonight."

Joining me now, Democratic Congressman Jason Crow. He serves on the armed services and intelligence committees. And, of course, is a former army ranger.

Sir, thanks very much for being here.

REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): Thank you.

HUNT: You, of course -- Congress has been briefed to a certain extent on the state of the war. Right now, the president is threatening that a whole civilization will die tonight.

Do you think the president is going to follow through on that?

CROW: Well, it's a war crime. Its a very clear war crime. If he attempts to follow through on it, my message to the military servicemen and women that would have to follow through on those orders is they have an obligation to follow the Constitution and have an obligation to follow the law.

You know, last November, me and five of my colleagues, members of Congress, veterans and veterans of the intelligence services joined together and put out a video for exactly this type of instance, that if they are ordered to do something that is a crime to kill civilians, to destroy civilian infrastructure, that they have an obligation to follow the law.

HUNT: There were a lot of questions at the time that you put out the video about what exactly you were focused on, and if you take what you're saying and extrapolate it out, right? If the president orders the military to take action against civilian targets, what specifically are you asking members of the military to do? And who are you asking? Are you asking the officers? Are you asking the lieutenant commanding a platoon? Are you asking the private? I mean, who are you talking to?

CROW: There are instances where it is very clear that something is not a military objective. If you're asked to target civilians, if you're asked to kill women and children, you're asked to kill noncombatants, you're asked to bomb a school. You're asked to bomb a civilian power plant, that would be a war crime.

And service members have independent obligations to follow the law, to follow the law of armed conflict. We are trained on that law. We are trained on those obligations. And that obligation is always there, regardless of the order given.

And this is exactly why we wanted to put out that video in November, because we have a president with a strong and long history of threatening to violate the law, a threatening to put our service members in the position of -- awful, awful position of having to disobey an unlawful order, which this president continues to threaten to do.

It is a terrible position. But our message to those folks now that if you follow the Constitution, you obey your oath, you follow the law that congress and the American people will stand beside you.

HUNT: So would you say to the pilot that's been ordered to bomb a civilian power plant, don't take off. Don't push the button.

CROW: If they're put in the position of bombing a civilian target, that would be unlawful and they shouldn't do it.

HUNT: And who should be held accountable, if they do?

CROW: There will be accountability. I think that's the other message that if service members and commanders are asked to do something that is obviously illegal and obviously a war crime, that they should not do it, and if they do it, they will be held accountable for those crimes.

HUNT: Who would hold them accountable? Would you, if Democrats take back the House, want to hold accountable service members who committed these crimes?

CROW: I think that has to be a part of accountability, right? Like we have to make sure that we are following the law.

You know, the damage that this president has done to our international standing, our reputation -- let's just say he doesn't follow through on this threat, already sitting here today, he has done incalculable damage to America's standing in the world. Our moral authority, our partners, our alliances, people around the world are de-risking from America.

It is isolating us. It is making us lonely. It is making us weak. And it is providing fewer and fewer options every passing week for what America can do to keep Americans strong.

So, accountability has to be a part of it, and the message needs to be sent very clearly. Kasie, that there will be accountability. You can't skirt the law. You can't disobey the Constitution and get away scot- free. And that is the message to people within this administration that if we retake Congress, there will be accountability. And ultimately, we have to pursue that.

HUNT: So another way to hold people accountable is potentially and Democrats have tried this before impeaching the president of the United States. And after the post over the weekend where the president used considerable profanity and vulgarity, a number of your House Democratic colleagues have called for the president to be removed via the 25th Amendment.

[16:30:00]

Would you add your name to that list?

CROW: Well, this is something I know an awful lot about because I was an impeachment prosecutor in my first term. When I was a freshman member of Congress, I was asked to serve on the impeachment team to prosecute Donald Trump, to stand in front of the Senate and to bring the case to have him removed from office. And I thought then, as I do now, that he remains a risk to this country, a risk to the American people and a risk to our government.

But impeachment, just like the 25th Amendment, is one of many tools available to stop a runaway rogue presidency. All of those tools have to be on the table.

But sitting here right now, I am not holding my breath. The Republicans in the administration, Republican cabinet members, you know, the cronies, the clowns in many instances, like Pete Hegseth and others, are going to rise up and fulfill their duty, whether its the 25th Amendment or impeachment in Congress or any other tool right now to stop this madness, which is why Democrats need to hold the line.

We need to call Congress back into session. And that is my call today to Speaker Johnson. Call us back into session today. Let's hold a vote.

And until that happens, the American people need to rise up and call their members of Congress and demand accountability and demand an end to this war.

HUNT: Before I let you go, are you having personal conversations with Republican -- your Republican colleagues, to try to get them to sign on to an effort to limit the president's war powers?

CROW: I am.

HUNT: Any luck?

CROW: Not yet. There are some that are open to it. Listen, I have been through an insurrection. I've been through impeachments. I've been through wars.

I have seen so many opportunities come and go for Republicans to grow a spine and to stand up and push back on a rogue, lawless president that continues to pose a threat to Americans, and in this instance, to the world. And they have not yet stood up to do that. But it's always the right time to do the right thing.

HUNT: All right. Congressman Jason Crow, thanks so much for your time, sir. Appreciate it.

CROW: Thank you.

HUNT: All right. Coming up next here, how the president is responding to a prominent conservative who is now urging White House officials to stand up to the commander in chief when it comes to Iran.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TUCKER CARLSON, FORMER FOX NEWS HOST: Unless somebody puts the brakes on right away, we're going to wind up in a place that we can't even imagine, not just Iran, us, and the rest of the world. And so that means because this is obvious to anyone who's paying any attention, that if you work in the White House or in the U.S. military, now is the time to say, "No, absolutely not." And say it directly to the president, "No."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:35:50]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: To use the U.S. military, our military to destroy civilian infrastructure in another country, which is to say, to commit a war crime, a moral crime against the people of the country -- those people who are in direct contact with the president need to say, "No. I'll resign. I'll do whatever I can do legally to stop this because this is insane. And if given the order, I'm not carrying it out."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: In the ever evolving on again/off again relationship between Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump, the two now clearly seem to be at an off point. Today, President Trump called Tucker Carlson low IQ.

But Carlson is not alone in being on the right wing and criticizing the president over Iran. That criticism has only grown since that Easter morning post that included extraordinary profanity and vulgarity.

Marjorie Taylor Greene called the president, quote, "evil". His former White House communications director, joining others in saying he should be removed from office. Even Republican Senator Ron Johnson said that he hopes the president's comments are bluster.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. RON JOHNSON (R-WI): I am hoping and that President Trump is, this really is bluster. I do not want to see us start blowing up civilian infrastructure. I do not want to see that. We are not at war with the Iranian people. We are trying to liberate them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right. My panel is back.

Brad Todd, I want to go to you on this one because of what Johnson just said there. Tucker Carlson literally saying the same thing about these war crimes and what should happen as the Democratic congressman that was just sitting here on the set.

At what point do Republicans here in Washington just say enough?

TODD: Well, I think there is a big dichotomy. Tucker Carlson and his crowd and many of the people you had on the screen there, Alex Jones, those people are not really in touch with the Republican base, even if they occasionally say the right thing. Broken clocks are right twice a day, and that's a case we have here.

And so, I think Ron Johnson is much closer to where Republicans are. They want to see us win this war. They want to see us stay long enough to achieve our objectives there. But they also don't think we ought to eliminate, quote, whole civilizations. That's -- those are all one thing headed in the right direction. It's where the Republican Party is. And I think it's where the president really is to tell you the truth.

But Tucker Carlson, he's got a big microphone. Hes got a lot of people that follow him on social media. It doesn't mean he represents anybody meaningful.

HUNT: Well, but here's the thing. I mean, Jonah, I take your point about Tucker for sure. But the president talks to him, too. I mean, the president -- "The New York Times" is just reporting. This is Jonathan Swan and Maggie Haberman, that, quote, "A couple of weeks before the war began, Mr. Trump, who had known Mr. Carlson for years, tried to reassure him over the phone, I know you're worried about it, but it's going to be okay, the president said. Mr. Carlson asked how he knew, because it always is, Mr. Trump replied."

GOLDBERG: Yeah, I think that's more interesting about Trump. I mean, Trump is a profoundly lucky guy, right? He's -- I've been saying for ten years now, he's the millionth monkey banging on typewriters that actually produces Shakespeare because he does -- he does things wrong all the time.

[16:40:06]

And they work for him.

I don't like it. I don't like the message. It says, I don't like the example he sets. But it is true. And so it's absolutely true that Trump thinks that way, that it always ends up working out for him. He thinks he's Ferris Bueller, and he's got some reason to think that or deep cut Parker Lewis.

Anyway --

BEDINGFIELD: Wow.

GOLDBERG: But because Parker Lewis can't lose.

WILLIAMS: Can't lose.

GOLDBERG: That's right.

HUNT: Yeah.

GOLDBERG: Anyway, my point is, I'm very much with Brad on this. Tucker, Alex Jones, Candace Owens, those various gargoyles of the extreme idiotic --

TODD: Circus act.

GOLDBERG: -- circus act, right, they are gearing towards engagement and they get engagement. I mean, Tucker is also talking in the same week about how Trump might be the Antichrist, right? That is not the median Republican primary voters' position.

And so, they're talking to an audience and they get a lot of attention, but I don't think they're all that representative. I think Ron Johnson -- I'm actually shocked at how critical he was here, but it's much more representative of normie Republicans.

BEDINGFIELD: Well, you call them gargoyles. They are. I would wholeheartedly agree with that. But they get embraced by J.D. Vance. I mean, there is a sector of the Republican Party, I mean --

GOLDBERG: For sure.

BEDINGFIELD: -- we are looking at the future, the post-Trump future of the Republican Party.

And there's big question, how -- what kind of role will Trump continue to play after he's out of office? Where will he -- no, no, you're fine, you're fine. Go ahead.

GOLDBERG: I think you're definitely looking at the post-Trump future of J.D. Vance.

BEDINGFIELD: Well, but --

GOLDBERG: He thinks this stuff is -- he -- he's way too online. He thinks the online stuff is the real world. He cares deeply about Tucker Carlson in a way that the Heritage Foundation president cares about it. I don't think it is wise.

BEDINGFIELD: I agree. I -- just really quickly, I wholeheartedly agree with that, broadly speaking, and we're having a bit of this fight on the Democratic side as well. And I think the obsession with podcasts and the idea that they drive most normal voters in a way that they absolutely do not is problematic for both parties.

But time and again, we hear about, you know, J.D. Vance representing one slice of the future soul of the Republican Party and post-MAGA. And so, I think, you know, just to totally dismiss these guys out of hand, although I totally understand why you both want to do it, and I support you both for it, personally. I'm not so sure that that's the reality of the Republican Party right now.

TODD: J.D. Vance has won one primary ever in Ohio, and Donald Trump carried him across the finish line and dropped him with a parachute across it.

Marco Rubio is much more emblematic of what it takes to win a Republican primary the hard way. And I think Marco Rubio right now is a lot closer to where the median Republican primary voters and the median member of Congress, Senator Vance, former Senator Vance, was not there very long. And I think he is much further out of step with where Republican senators and House members are than Marco is.

HUNT: Interesting.

Okay, ahead here in THE ARENA, less than a month until ballots go out to voters in California, we're going to talk to one of the candidates in the very crowded primary race for governor.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:47:27]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE HILTON (R), CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: Clearly, he felt that it was the time to weigh in on my behalf, which I greatly appreciate. I sent him a text to say thank you. And then, he gave me a call and we had a very good chat, mostly about how actually, if you have a Republican governor in California aligned with many of the common sense things that the president wants to do, it'll be a total change for the better if you can actually have a constructive partnership that helps Californians.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: That was the former Fox News host, Steve Hilton, who is one of the two leading Republican candidates for governor of California, thanking President Trump for his endorsement yesterday in this crowded gubernatorial race.

The president's endorsement, which came about a month before ballots are sent to voters, has added another twist to a considerably windy primary in which only the top two candidates will advance to the general election, regardless of party. It's called a jungle primary.

The crowded field, which has no clear leader, has left some Democrats worried they could be shut out from the November ballot all together.

Joining me now is Democratic candidate for California governor, the former Congresswoman Katie Porter.

Congresswoman, thank you very much for joining us today.

I want to start with your reaction to the president's endorsement of Mr. Hilton in this race. Do you think its more likely now that at least one Democrat will make it to the November ballot?

KATIE PORTER (D), CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: President Trump's endorsing Steve Hilton tracks. It tracks with the things that Steve Hilton has been saying, which is that he will collaborate with support and uplift Donald Trump as he attacks Californians, and as he drives up prices here.

I do think it changes the dynamics of the race. I think we're going to see Republicans consolidate around Steve Hilton. That means that there's really a strong opportunity for a leading Democrat and proud to be one of them, to power through and get that spot. But Californians do not want a Trump enabler in our leadership as governor. They've been crystal clear about that. Every election that Trump's been on the ballot, that they reject him, they reject his values, they reject his unhinged actions.

HUNT: There are a number of Democrats now in this race, including a billionaire, Tom Steyer, the Congressman Eric Swalwell, both of whom polls show are in almost a dead heat, essentially, with you obviously still some polling to be done here in the final weeks. But you can -- you can see there where everyone stands.

[16:50:01]

Do you think that at least one of the top three Democrats here should drop out of this race in order to make it more likely make it easier for Democrats to consolidate their vote?

PORTER: The three Democrats that are polling at the top, I'm one of them. We can continue to compete. This is a widely Democratic state. There are plenty of voters to consider three candidates and make the best choice for California.

I think that we should keep doing that. I think it is a large field. We always have very long ballots in California, so this is no exception to that. But I think with Donald Trump endorsing Steve Hilton, what Democrats need to do is pick a candidate who stands up to Donald Trump, who fights for them, who has a track record of working on bringing down prices like I do, and somebody who has shown that they will shake up the status quo in Sacramento to deliver a more affordable life in California.

So I'm looking forward to continuing to compete in this race. It's a very close race. As you mentioned, a three way tie among the Democrats, but we have plenty of voters here in California to be able to break that tie here in two months on primary day.

HUNT: Is there anything in the backgrounds or platforms of your Democratic opponents that you think California voters should consider, or that might be disqualifying, in your view? PORTER: That's a decision for voters to make. But I will note that

billionaires like Tom Steyer do not have familiarity with what its like for everyday Californians. They don't push a shopping cart like I do. They're not sitting around their kitchen table with teenagers worried about whether or not they're going to be able to afford to stay in California.

So I think the fact that I have a background and affordability, that I'm a regular mom, I think that speaks to the moment that we're in. With regard to Congressman Swalwell, I have seen allegations coming from women staffers. They are very, very troubling allegations. It is those women's stories to tell when they are ready. And I hope that they feel safe and supported if they choose to do so.

HUNT: Have you seen additional evidence of that? We should note, we here at CNN have seen the reports. We have not confirmed them at this point. But have you seen evidence or additional information around this?

PORTER: I have seen the allegations. I have not spoken to any women who are saying that they're going to come forward. But again, our focus here ought to be on protecting these victims. If they have been victims of sexual harassment, sexual assault, we ought to be making sure that they feel safe and comfortable speaking up.

This is about building a politics that works for people, that is focused on living our values. And I believe women. I think that has to be the starting place here. So when those women speak up, I will be there helping to amplify their truths. I think that's the important role that I can play.

HUNT: Okay. Fair enough. Again, we should acknowledge we here at CNN have not confirmed any reports of I think you mentioned sexual assault. I just want to be clear on where we are on that. It's, of course, your issue to raise as his opponent.

Big picture here, I wanted to ask you, there was a point where this California governors race was yours to lose. Looking back, would you do anything differently?

PORTER: Oh, this has been an exciting race. So many candidates who thought about entering. When I started the race, we thought that Vice President Kamala Harris might run. We've had a lot of people take a look at the race. Some candidates have exited some more, have entered what has stayed consistent is my values, my willingness to fight for California and my position at the top of the field.

I am the only candidate in this race, Democrat or Republican, who does not take corporate contributions. That is really an important difference. I'm also a candidate who has a track record of coming into politics to stand up to Donald Trump, voting twice to impeach him and successfully taking on the Trump administration to deliver things like free COVID tests for every Californian.

There's always time for that retrospective after a campaign, but I'm really excited to be right at the top of this field and communicating with Californians about how we can make our state better and stand up to Donald Trump's attacks.

HUNT: So speaking of the field, you position yourself at the top of it. CNN just announced that we are planning to host a California gubernatorial debate coming up here in May. And there are, of course, our polling thresholds which you meet. So we wanted to ask you today, do you plan to be on that debate stage with your fellow competitors in May?

PORTER: Absolutely. I'm excited that CNN's doing this. I think more Californians need to engage in this race, need to understand the stakes. I think all of the unhinged, unlawful behavior we're seeing out of Donald Trump is causing people to not want to look at politics, even though this is such an important political moment.

So I'm grateful to be taking the debate stage and looking forward to having a robust debate about what Californians deserve in their next leader.

[16:55:01]

HUNT: All right. Former Congresswoman Katie Porter, thank you very much for your time. I really appreciate it.

PORTER: Thank you.

HUNT: All right. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: All right. Thanks very much to my panel. Really appreciate you guys.

You can now stream, don't forget THE ARENA live or catch up whenever you want in the CNN app. You can just go ahead and scan the QR code on your screen. You can also catch up by listening to our podcast. You can also follow along on X and Instagram. We are @TheArenaCNN. That QR code is also on your screen.

But right now, Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".