Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
White House Denies It Asked For Ceasefire Extension With Iran As Two Sides Weigh Potential Second Round Of Talks; Iran Vows Retaliation Over Blockade As U.S. Mulls More Talks; Vance: Pope Should Be "Careful" Talking About Theology; White House Press Secretary Raises Question About What Dems Knew About Eric Swalwell's Sexual Misconduct Allegations. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired April 15, 2026 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: -- Dana and see if she can help me whisk it.
[16:00:03]
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Whisk it.
DEAN: Yeah.
SANCHEZ: She did a great job there. Thanks again to Dana Bash.
Thank you so much for joining us this afternoon.
Jessica, always great to be with you.
DEAN: Good to see you. I'll be back tomorrow.
SANCHEZ: Yeah. We're excited for that.
THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts right now.
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA. It's great to have you with us on this Wednesday.
Right now, the ticking clock and the talks about the talks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: These conversations are productive and ongoing. And that's where we are right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: As we come on the air, there's a heightened sense of both diplomacy and rhetoric in the war with Iran. The White House late today saying a potential second round of direct talks with Iran could be on the horizon. Sources tell CNN the vice president is again expected to lead those negotiations should they happen.
And while the talks about the talks appear to be picking up in pace, the window for an off ramp to the fighting seems to be closing. That fragile ceasefire now just days away from expiring. And today, the administration swiftly knocking down any notion that the president, as of right now, wants to blow past that deadline.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: I saw some reporting again, bad reporting this morning that we had formally requested an extension of the ceasefire. That is not true at this moment. We remain very much engaged in these negotiations, in these talks. We feel good about the prospects of a deal. The president mentioned that in his interview yesterday, and it's obviously in the best interest of Iran to meet the president's demands. I think he's made his red lines in these negotiations very clear to the other side.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Today, Iran is issuing a new threat to the U.S., vowing to shut down shipping operations in the Red Sea if the U.S. continues its blockade of Iranian ports.
U.S. Central Command, saying that blockade has, quote, completely halted most of Tehran's economic activity. And while dealing with the present and future of the war, the president eagerly wanting to put the war that he started in the past.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If I didn't do that, right now, you would have Iran with a nuclear weapon, and if they had a nuclear weapon, you would be calling everybody over there, sir. And you don't want to do that.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS HOST: Well, you keep saying was, is this war over?
TRUMP: I think it's close to over. Yeah. I mean, I view it as very close to over.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Very close to over. All right, let's get off the sidelines. Head into THE ARENA. My panel is here.
We're also going to get started with CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes.
Kristen, what more are we hearing from the administration about this hour, about what's next?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kasie, the administration keeps saying that they're optimistic that a deal is going to come. And I will point you to Karoline Leavitt's comments about extending that ceasefire in the very end of what she said when she said, at this moment, we have not put in a formal request.
So think about where there is some movement in there. The administration and the senior officials who are involved are around. These talks have made it clear to us that they are looking for an off ramp and that if President Trump believes a deal can be met and it might not be within the final days of the ceasefire, that he is likely willing to extend it.
We also heard a lot of talk about those talks that Karoline Leavitt said would likely also be in Pakistan. She praised the Pakistani negotiators. Weve heard that from President Trump as well.
And this comes at a time when the U.S. has just issued another round of sanctions on Iranian oil. They just issued sanctions on roughly two dozen individuals, vessels, corporations.
And we heard from Scott Bessent today during this press briefing that they might launch another round of sanctions, including secondary sanctions on countries that buy Iranian oil. All of this when Americans are still wondering, what is this going to mean for the price of gas?
Scott Bessent had somewhat of an answer on that today. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CL,IJ)
SCOTT BESSENT, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: I'm optimistic that during the summer, we will see gas with a three in front of it sooner rather than later. So I've been meeting with a lot of my Middle Eastern counterparts, the finance ministers, and they all say that once the straits are open, they can start pumping again within one week.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: Now, it is important to note that most of the experts we've talked to have said that it doesn't seem likely that those gas prices could go down to a three in front of them. Of course, we know now the national average is about $4.11 on gas prices as quickly as this summer.
And Scott Bessent at one point did acknowledge that a lot of the gas price is going to be dependent on how these talks go. But of course, Kasie, that is part of the reason the White House has been looking for an off ramp. They do not want to go into November or even into campaign season with gas prices the way they are, when they know that affordability is at the top of the ticket.
HUNT: Kind of surprised they didn't think about that. I don't know, in February, but maybe it's just me.
Kristen Holmes, thank you. Much appreciated.
My panel is here in THE ARENA. CNN special correspondent Jamie Gangel, CNN contributor; "New York Times" journalist Lulu Garcia-Navarro; CNN global affairs commentator, former deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh; and the former Republican governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker.
[16:05:05]
Welcome to all of you. Thank you all very much for being here. Jamie, I know you have some reporting about what the president said in
terms of this being close to over, and I want to play kind of a fuller version of his comments. And we saw the soundbite there, but he put a little bit more context around this when he talked to Fox Business. Let's watch.
It looks like we might not have that, but essentially, Jamie, he said it's close to over. It's very close to over. If I pulled up stakes right now, it would take them 20 years to rebuild the country.
What are your sources saying? You know, you've talked to people in the security community for years and years.
JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Right. So, here's the question -- is progress really being made at the table if they come back? So, the question I hear from intelligence sources, there is concern that the White House may not fully appreciate the Iranians' strategy, that it is, as one said, it is possible that the Iranians are playing the U.S. negotiators and President Trump, not that they won't come back to the table. It's in the Iranians interest to come back to the table.
But they are known historically to talk and talk and talk, to feel that time is on their side. So even if we come back to the table, as the president suggests, the question is, do they intend to make a deal or are they stringing us along?
HUNT: And, Governor Walker, do you see this as these comments as diplomatic or political in terms of what the president is saying?
SCOTT WALKER (R), FORMER WISCONSIN GOVERNOR: I think all those things are both. They're a little bit of both in that regard. And there's always a deeper strategy. I think if you look at the American people as well as the president's base. But I think for all of us, I've said this repeatedly on your show that there's a combination of most Americans, myself included, do not want a long, protracted war, but we don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon.
And so, anything that that ends up with Iran still having an enriched uranium, I think is a no go. On the other hand, we don't want a long, protracted war. And so, that's the balance here. Right now, a ceasefire with a blockade that seems to be working, I think setting us on the right path.
HUNT: Lulu, let's watch J.D. Vance talking about the nature of the deal that the president wants to do here, because of course, Vance, it looks like, would continue to be the lead negotiator on any talks going forward. Let's take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He wants to make the grand bargain. And what he's basically offering to Iran is very simple. And frankly, it's something that no president has, I think, has had the ability to offer. He said that if you're willing to act like a normal country, we are willing to treat you economically like a normal country. He doesn't want a small deal. And that's one of the reasons why, one, I'd say in Pakistan, we made a ton of progress. But the reason why the deal is not yet done is because the president, he really wants a deal where Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: What's your view of that?
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I mean -- no, I'm just -- honestly, everyone wants a big deal with Iran. I mean, you know, to say that he's the only one who's ever wanted this. I mean, you know, many presidents have wanted that kind of scope for a deal.
And the problem is that at this point, you have decapitated the entire regime. You have new players on the table, you have a country that's incredibly unstable and, you know, this grand deal is frankly very hard to achieve at this particular moment because as I think everyone's been saying, Iran is looking at this in the long game.
And, and the pressure point for them is the oil. And they see time ticking. They see the poll numbers of the president going down. They see panels like this discussing how long the president can hold on. And, you know, the fact is, when you live in a democracy, you serve at the pleasure of the people, and the people ain't happy.
HUNT: Sabrina?
SABRINA SINGH, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: I mean, I think you're completely right. And Iran's strategy has always been to run down the clock. And they do have more time on their side. I mean, Iran did take the nuclear option here by closing the strait. And that set off a global economic crisis that we hadn't seen in years. And so, they know that they have the president and I think the U.S. economy, but the global economy sort of at their knees by closing the strait.
Right now, what you're seeing the U.S. military do is try to decapitate Iran's economy with this blockade. It is successful. It is working. But how long can this actually last for remains to be seen, because at -- I mean, we know Asian markets are very dependent on the oil coming out of the strait. They have an incentive to see this blockade lifted.
And so, I think what you're going to see over these next few days is this administration moving closer to some type of deal. There might be a ceasefire that gets extended. Maybe it wasn't today, but it's in the next few days.
And then both parties coming back to the table, because I do think both parties do not want to resume military kinetic action, but I think Iran is certainly willing to it.
[16:10:06]
WALKER: You're just as sure it's not a partisan issue. I think it needs to be somewhere between Bush 41 and Bush 43. But most of the retrospect saying think Bush 41 didn't get the job done, pulled out too early, thought Bush 43 stayed in too long. I think most Americans are somewhere in before -- in between. Don't let them have a nuclear weapon, but don't be in there forever.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I will say J.D. Vance, from what I've heard, is actually having quite a good rapport with the Iranian negotiators.
SINGH: And they both kind of praised each other today.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Praised each other. There's -- there seems to be good communication.
HUNT: Semiotics of the photos that came out of the Situation Room --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yeah, and also the report, the reporting behind that as well. So that's a promising sign. Listen, at the end of the day, nobody wants war. I wish them all the best. You know, I hope they sort this out but --
SINGH: And the Iran --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: History shows us that this is going to be harder. Yeah.
GANGEL: One quick piece of advice, someone who has been involved in negotiations like this before said, if they go back to the table, the U.S. should stay there. Don't walk away again, keep them there as long as possible.
HUNT: I want to play a little bit more of what J.D. Vance said at yesterday's Turning Points USA event. This, of course, the late Charlie Kirk's outfit. Lots of young conservatives on the right. It should be or has been historically a place where J.D. Vance is very, very much celebrated.
Here was the pitch that he made to young voters in that room who perhaps are not happy with this war in Iran.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I recognize that a lot of young voters don't love the policy that we have in the Middle East. Okay? I understand that. I'm not saying you have to agree with me on every issue. What I'm saying is don't get disengaged because you disagree with the administration on one topic. Get more involved.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Governor Walker, you've run for president. We're watching the next presidential race play out in almost real time, right, with J.D. Vance on the world stage, moments like this one, how do you evaluate where he sits in that star system right now and what impact this is having?
WALKER: Well, two years is an eternity in politics. I would say I was the smart one, I got out before I got a nickname.
HUNT: And warned everybody, by the way, as you said goodbye and no one else seemed to pick up on that.
WALKER: Exactly, followed me around. You knew it.
HUNT: I did, yes.
WALKER: But you know, it's -- he's feeling pressure now from certain blocs out there. I think in the end it's a steady as you go. If things turn out well, more than just this war or what happens with the war, I think what happens in the midterms, it goes back to affordability. If Republicans make the case that they're better suited to deal, particularly with younger voters, with anybody on affordability, they'll do somewhat well in what's otherwise is normally a cycle that goes back and forth.
If they don't, then I think the midterms are bad for Republicans. There'll be people looking for a different candidate.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But, Governor, can I ask you a question? Because obviously you've been in this game for a long time. Have you ever seen someone who is as underwater with young people as Donald Trump is at this moment that get reversed? Like I've just never seen that.
Once you were underwater, once people have made an impression about where things go, it's really hard to turn that around.
WALKER: Young men 18 to 29 went plus in 2020, plus 15 points for Biden in 2024. They went plus 14 for Trump. So yeah, I think they can if the issue is right.
Most of those young people are like most swing voters in my state and around the country, they want somebody to do the things that they want them to do. If they don't -- if they don't feel like they're doing it, regardless of party, they're going to switch to the other party.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Well, I think you make an interesting point about two years being an eternity in politics, which is completely true. But the issue is, is that we're going to feel these impacts from this war for much longer than two years. So, I think while Donald Trump did come in and sort of had the momentum of younger voters, I think you are going to see a dramatic shift, not just with younger voters, but with independents going to Democrats in the midterms.
HUNT: If there's been any consistent trend in American politics in the last decade plus that I've been covering it, is that these swings back and forth are getting more volatile every single time, not less.
All right, coming up next here in THE ARENA, the White House raising questions about who knew what, when and when they knew it. When it comes to the allegations against the now former Congressman Eric Swalwell.
But first, the pope's new message today, as more and more Republicans publicly encourage the president to move on from his criticism of the pontiff in the wake of that infamous Jesus post
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JIMMY KIMMEL, COMEDIAN/LATE NIGHT TV HOST: First, he was Jesus, then he was a Jesus. He was a doctor. And now it was a joke. Why did I get kicked off the air again? I can't remember.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:19:09]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I've never been one of these people who say that you should never have, you know, Christian leadership, not talking about politics or, frankly, political leaders, not talking about their Christian faith. But I do think that we have to remember that, you know, each of us has our own role. I think it's very, very important for the pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: That was the vice president, J.D. Vance, at a Turning Point USA conference last night in Georgia, amid the administration's ongoing clash with Pope Leo over the war with Iran. Vance's warning prompted this response from Senate Majority Leader John Thune, quote, "When he talks about matters of theology, isn't that his job?"
It all comes as the president and the pontiff continue to exchange opposing messages.
[16:20:01]
Overnight, Trump posted this, quote, "Will someone please tell Pope Leo that Iran has killed at least 42,000 innocent, completely unarmed protesters in the last two months and that for Iran to have a nuclear bomb is absolutely unacceptable."
Pope Leo, who has not -- who has said he will not enter into the debate with Trump, did not directly respond to that post, instead opting to continue spreading his message, which he says is one of peace.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE LEO XIV, CATHOLIC CHURCH: Although we have different beliefs, we have different ways of worshiping, we have different ways of living. We can live together in peace. And so, I think that, to promote that kind of image is something which the world needs to hear today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: All right. CNN political commentator and former Trump White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin joins our panel.
Alyssa, welcome back. Congratulations on your growing family. I'm really grateful, though, that you're back here in THE ARENA to talk to us a little bit about all of this.
What was your reaction to what you heard there from J.D. Vance in terms of what the pope should or shouldn't be doing on the world stage?
ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Not dissimilar from Leader Thune. I think it's his job to talk about theology. And I say that as a mere Protestant who would not presume to know what the Catholics believe.
But listen, this is a fight that the White House does not need to be picking. I said it on "The View". There are like three people on the planet politicians shouldn't start fights with -- the pope, Dolly Parton, and probably the Dalai Lama. Beloved, renowned figures that are above reproach.
And it just feels like every day the story could go away. It could stop, yet they keep weighing in on it, and the weighing in is somehow making it even worse, if not more -- worse than it was to begin with.
HUNT: You obviously worked in the first Trump administration. You've been in close proximity to the president over your years working in politics. I mean, how do you explain what is going on here? Because, I mean, if you look back at that post of President Trump as Jesus, right, that he was forced to take down, this is not a man that likes to take stuff down. But what he has been doing and how he's been saying things has generated pretty remarkable backlash from his own camp.
GRIFFIN: Yeah. I mean, I think what you can't lose in this story, to is the fact that these posts -- that specific one -- happened in the wee hours of the night.
So, this is a president who, by the way, when I worked for him, didn't sleep much. He did work at all hours, but is sharing, you know, sort of memes on Truth Social that he may not be thinking through. He's likely not running by staff because I think really any practicing Christian on his staff could have said, hey, let's not share this image that could be interpreted as you depicting yourself as Jesus. That to many people is tantamount to blasphemy.
And on this issue with the pope, listen, evangelicals are never leaving Trump. That is a base that is so core to who he is, and they will be with him. But Catholic supporters are actually a lot softer with the Republican Party. They broke for Trump. They are strongly with him on abortion.
But issues like refugees and immigration enforcement tactics, they're a lot more nuanced on, and there is room for them to move away from Trump, from his base, and the Republican Party. So, picking a fight with their leader, the pope, is just a really, really bad strategic political decision to make.
HUNT: Governor Walker, I mean, do you agree with that assessment? I mean, as someone who -- I -- you know, you've run a number of elections and you've had to face -- WALKER: A lot of Catholic support as well.
HUNT: Catholic voters. Yeah.
WALKER: Well, you know, when the president sitting in the Oval Office behind the Resolute Desk, over his left shoulder is a portrait of Ronald Reagan, he should take a page out of Ronald Reagan's playbook, because Ronald Reagan, as president, didn't have to agree with everything that Pope John Paul II said.
But he was wise enough -- in fact, I think part of it was because they both nearly missed nearly were assassinated early in 1981. Shortly after that, they found a way to work together. And arguably the two of them maybe throwing Margaret Thatcher were largely responsible for the fall of communism.
Within the next decade, they found ways to work together, even if they didn't always agree on every other nuance. It would behoove this president to do the same thing with the pope. Agree on things you can agree on, work together. And if you're not, let it move on.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: You know what's the strangest thing out of all of this? J.D. Vance, I spoke to him about his conversion to Catholicism. In fact, he's coming out with a book about his conversion to Catholicism.
This is something that's very central to him, to his story. It helped him get on, you know, the so-called Trump train. It really changed his relationship with his family.
Oh my God. He needs to go back to catechism class or whatever, because you do not -- that saying that the pope should stay in his lane and shouldn't talk about theology is crazy.
So, I think at this point, what Trump actually could do is use the many Catholics in his administration. There are many Catholics in his administration. Marco Rubio, J.D. Vance, also his White House -- excuse me, his White House -- my God, the words are not -- the words are failing me at the moment.
[16:25:08]
SINGH: He has a lot of people.
(LAUGHTER)
GARCIA-NAVARRO: He has a lot of people who are Catholics. I'm so sorry. I'm feeling the Holy Spirit.
There's a lot of Catholics around him. And they could use, you know, to sort of mend bridges here because this is a stupid fight.
GANGEL: Can I -- can I just say message to self, stop with the Jesus posts and stop with lecturing the pope? Yeah. It is. It's not good for them politically. And you know, if the president says he's not a fan of the pope or this is not a winning message, not -- end of story. SINGH: I think -- I think Alyssa was right. You just don't go after
the pope and you probably don't go after the Dalai Lama or Dolly Parton, but especially the pope.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Never Dolly Parton. Yeah.
HUNT: Well, I mean, look to this point, Alyssa as well. I mean, this pope is -- obviously the pontiff is -- has a very specific role in the Catholic Church. He plays a specific role in the faith life of, you know, millions of practicing Catholics around the world. But in terms of American elections, in American politics, okay, this is an American pope who, as we just saw, speaks English with an American accent.
I made the mistake of saying on the air yesterday that he wears a Cubs hat. He does not. But he does wear a White Sox hat, okay, out of Chicago. It seems to bring this new layer to your earlier point about whether or not its politically savvy to criticize the man.
GRIFFIN: Well, it is -- it's a -- it's a major point of pride for all Americans that we have our first American pope, not pope, not just practicing Catholics. And when you think about the most powerful forces in American life, he is up there with Donald Trump. He's also someone who's going to be in power and an authority figure and someone of influence for much longer than him.
So, I mean, again, if I were the White House, I would be trying to cool these temperatures. I also -- listen, Donald Trump is someone who is reactionary.
Many of these things he's interpreting as direct slights at him or attacks on his agenda from the pope are really just broad strokes Catholic beliefs. War is bad, peace is good. Diplomacy is something we should do rather than engage in conflict if it's an option anyone around him who could get to him, some of the many good practicing Catholics around him, I think should remind him this is not a helpful fight, especially ahead of the midterms when the issue of immigration tactics and refugees is going to be on the ballot.
HUNT: And I do think it's worth noting -- you know, the -- this -- this pope comes after Pope Francis. And they have many of those around the president, to a certain extent, president himself. I mean, they have talked about how they don't like that, perhaps, Leo is in the tradition of Pope Francis.
Let's flash back to 2016, which may help us kind of understand where some of this comes from for President Trump. This is, of course, when he was running back in February. This was actually what Pope Francis had to say then. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPE FRANCIS, FORMER POPE: A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be located and not building bridges is not a Christian. This is not in the gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not a Christian. If he has said things like that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Governor Walker, what's your reaction to how that pope put it then? Because it does, I think, set the stage for where we find ourselves today.
WALKER: Well, interesting enough, I think if I go to the Vatican and Saint Peters, there's a big wall around it and there's guards and security along the way. So, I was always shocked by that particular comment. But I think in the larger context, I was reading the text change, they're talking about Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
I think particularly my state in the northeast corner of Wisconsin, you've got a heavy, heavy Catholic population. If I'm J.D. Vance, if I'm President Trump, I look at things like lifting up the nuclear family, supporting families, helping them thrive and go forward. That's something this pope wants to talk about. Catholic leaders want to talk about.
I talk about the protection of innocent lives, unborn children. Those are things this pope's been adamant about. Find ways to be united with the pope on things that matter. And were you disagree? Disagree. But don't make a big deal about it.
HUNT: Yeah. Don't make it personal. Which is, of course, a real hallmark of this. President.
Alyssa Farah Griffin, thank you so much for being with us today. I always love to have you. Hope to see you soon.
All right. Coming up next here, new CNN reporting on growing pressure for California Governor Gavin Newsom to get involved in the race to replace him. We're going to talk live with the top Democrat from the Golden State. Congressman Ro Khanna will be here live.
Plus, the first reaction from the White House to the resignation of Eric Swalwell. And the question the press secretary is now asking.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: I think it's also quite plausible, as you point out, Jack, that there were many other Democrats in this town on Capitol Hill who knew about his -- perhaps illegal behavior. Certainly, his disgusting and inappropriate behavior.
[16:30:00]
And why were they silent for so long?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) LEAVITT: The accusations and allegations against former Representative Swalwell are despicable and disgusting. I think it's also quite plausible, as you point out, Jack, that there were many other Democrats in this town on capitol hill who knew about his. Perhaps illegal behavior, certainly his disgusting and inappropriate behavior. And why were they silent for so long?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: The White House commenting today on the sexual misconduct allegations against now former Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, raising questions about what exactly his colleagues may have known about his alleged behavior.
[16:35:05]
Senator Ruben Gallego, who was a close friend of Swalwell's, admitting to reporters yesterday that he had heard, quote, rumors about Swalwell being, quote, flirty but denied knowing anything about the sexual assault allegations, which we should note. Swalwell denies.
Joining me now in THE ARENA is Democratic congressman from California, Ro Khanna.
Congressman, thank you very much for being here.
I want to start with that question that the White House press secretary posed there. Why were Democrats on Capitol Hill silent for so long when in many cases we're learning some aspects of this behavior, alleged behavior of Swalwell's was an "open secret", quote/unquote?
REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Well, look, I had heard rumors that he was a womanizer. And that's one of the reasons that I endorsed Tom Steyer in the race and didn't go along with a lot of the other California establishment that was lining up behind Swalwell. But I certainly didn't know that he was abusing staff, let alone that there were allegations of rape or date rape.
But this is a wake-up call for the Congress. We need to be far more proactive in allowing staffers to come to a place they feel safe to launch. These kind of complaints, and any member who knew about this should really be, forthright and should own up to the fact that they should have reported something.
Certainly, if I knew that someone was having an inappropriate relationship with any staff member or engaged in alleged rape, I would report it to the House Ethics Committee.
HUNT: Congressman, I want to circle back to what you said there at the top, what you had heard about Congressman Swalwell was part of why you picked one of his opponents to back in the governor's race?
KHANNA: Well, I support Tom Steyer in his own merits in terms of single-payer health care and him being for a billionaire tax. But that's why I clearly was not going to endorse Swalwell. I was surprised that so many California establishment folks were supporting him. I -- you know, the whole party was coalescing around him until a week ago.
So, we should just be honest about that. I've always been a straight shooter.
I will say to the White House press secretary, it should be a bit embarrassing that congress has acted faster in kicking out Swalwell and Tony Gonzales than the entire Trump administration has acted in going after the Epstein class. I mean, Congress, which is about the slowest body, managed to kick out two members and hold investigations, and they have not held a single investigation against any of the people in the Epstein files.
HUNT: I want to circle back to that in just a moment. But to stick with California, your home state and the noted establishment, I mean, there was one senior Democratic staffer quoted anonymously in "The Washington Post" that, quote, Swalwell benefited from being one of Pelosi's pets for a long time.
And certainly, I was a reporter for many years on capitol hill. She was leading Democrats on capitol hill, and he was seen as someone that Democratic leaders wanted to elevate. Why do you think that happened, considering what you're outlining here?
KHANNA: Look, Kasie, there's a difference between someone who has rumors of maybe having had extramarital affairs, not condoning it, but that's very different than abusing staff members or allegedly raping people. And, I take the speaker at her word that she had no idea that he was engaged in inappropriate relationships with staff members or with allegations of sexual assault.
But certainly, if there are members or who knew that he was engaged in an inappropriate relationship with staff members and didn't speak up, that's a real problem. And they should come be honest about that.
HUNT: We have new reporting here at CNN that there have been some calls for Governor Newsom in your home state to weigh in here in a race that, let's be honest, was already scrambled with Swalwell in it and is now further scrambled considering events. Do you want Newsom to get involved?
KHANNA: Well, the governor can make his own decisions, and I'm sure will. I do think that Tom Steyer now is going to win. He has the clearest plan on reform and breaking up PG&E and actually delivering single payer and actually delivering and building homes and taxing billionaires.
My sense is that he is very well-positioned. He has a lot of momentum. I have been on tv for him. I've been campaigning for him, and I fully expect that he'll be the next governor.
HUNT: All right. Fair enough.
Let's turn now to Jeffrey Epstein, which of course, you mentioned, and you have been a leading voice in calling for more accountability there to the point that you actually did a joint appearance right here on CNN with Marjorie Taylor Greene, who on the other side of the aisle, a villain in many cases to the Democratic left.
[16:40:15]
But you have made common cause with her and argued that this is something that could benefit Democrats going forward. I guess I'm curious, do you embrace what she brings to the table wholesale? Is this a situation where you are just partnering with her on the Epstein files? How do you view that piece of this?
KHANNA: Yeah, I got quite a lot of pushback from my Kaitlan Collins interview. Why are you talking to Marjorie Taylor Greene? Why are you working with her?
And let me say two things. Of course, I'm working with her on issues where we have common ground where we want to stop a war, we want to stop a president from threatening to wipe out Iranian civilization, where we want to have justice for survivors. And Marjorie Taylor Greene showed great courage.
I also pointed out there are places where we have strong disagreements on LGBTQ rights, on abortion rights, on voting rights. But here's the point more broadly than the issues I fundamentally believe in this country that we need to sit down and try to understand people who may not share our views, that we need to listen as much as talk, that we need to have dialogue with civility, and that we have to have a sense that people may have said things in the past that they regret, and that there's a possibility for redemption for all of us.
That's my attitude towards politics. And so, I don't apologize for trying to take that spirit in engaging with people on the other side, like Marjorie Taylor Greene.
HUNT: Fair enough. What is the next step for the oversight committee in the Epstein investigation? Melania Trump obviously made that statement somewhat surprisingly, about her own role, or lack thereof, in having a relationship. She said she did not have a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Are you planning to try to ask her to testify before the committee?
KHANNA: I do think she should testify before the committee. But look, I worked with the first lady on the Take It Down Act, which was to prevent sexualized images of young Americans. I wish that people just focused on four of her words in that statement. Quote, Epstein was not alone.
The first lady is saying that Thomas Massie and I were right, that the survivors were right, that not just Epstein and Maxwell, but other powerful men raped and abused these girls. And she said there need to be investigations.
I wish the first lady would meet the survivors. I wish she would tell her husband, the president, to release the rest of the Epstein files, and she would tell the president to call on the attorney general to have investigations and prosecutions. And I'm prepared to sit down with her. I'm sure the survivors would. I
hope she could actually become someone who champions the cause of the survivors, because for me, this has never been about politics.
When we started this, we thought Donald Trump would actually support the legislation. It's always been about getting justice for the survivors.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Ro Khanna, very grateful to have you on the show today. I always enjoy our conversations. Thanks for being here. Hope you come back.
KHANNA: Thank you. Kasie.
HUNT: All right. Ahead here in THE ARENA, what we know about who arrived in Tehran today and what it means for the future of the war with Iran. We're going to ask former NATO supreme allied commander, Admiral James Stavridis.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:47:47]
HUNT: All right. Welcome back.
We are now over 48 hours into the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports in the Strait of Hormuz. An Iranian media is reporting that four vessels have traveled to and from the country today, with maritime data showing that three of the four entered Iranian waters, while the fourth was outbound.
U.S. Central Command, however, has said that no vessels have made it past U.S. forces and that nine ships have complied with their direction to turn around. Vessels passing through the Gulf of Oman now met with this warning from the U.S. military.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: The U.S. has announced a formal blockade of Iranian ports in coastal areas. This is a legal action. All vessels are advised to immediately return to port if leaving and discontinue transit to Iran if that is your next port of call.
Do not attempt to breach the blockade. Vessels will be boarded for interdiction and seizure, transiting to or from an Iranian port. Turn around and prepare to be boarded.
You do not comply with this blockade. We will use force. The whole of the United States navy is ready to force compliance.
(END VIDEO CLIPO)
HUNT: All right. Joining me now is former NATO supreme allied commander, the Admiral James Savridis.
Admiral, thank you very much for being here. There's no one I'd rather talk to about this quite candidly, considering how much work you've done in the region and of course, across your career at this point, what are the possible Iranian responses to this blockade and how should that impact our thinking.
ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS, CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST: First and foremost, we ought to be concerned about mines. Additional mines.
We already know there are probably dozens already deployed, but they could put more in the water. Don't forget, Kasie, we almost lost a U.S. Navy frigate to an Iranian mine back in the late 1980s. Secondly, they could amp up cyberattacks here. I'm particularly concerned about the possibility of assistance from Russia in that regard.
Number three, they could open another front in the war when you may not have thought of it would be the Red Sea, the Suez Canal, the Houthis down at the bottom of that red sea could block that. So now U.S. Navy would have to be opening that strait as well. That would expand the problem set.
And then fourth, and finally, they could use terror directed against the Gulf Arab states and notably against their oil and gas infrastructure.
[16:50:13]
So, there's plenty to worry about. But I think so far, so good on the blockade. And as far as who are you going to trust about statistics, I'm -- I'm going with the U.S. Navy.
HUNT: Betting on the U.S. Navy never, it seems -- seems like a good way to go, basically all the time.
Admiral, when you say that we should be worried about the Red Sea -- I mean, this is something that's come up as a threat. I mean, do you see the capability there for the Houthis to actually do that? I mean, how easy is it or isn't it for them to follow through on that?
STAVRIDIS: A lot of people think of the Houthis like we did the Somali pirates, right? Teenagers, flip flops, rusty AK-47s, putt-putt boats. Nope. The Houthis are trained, equipped, organized by the Iranians.
Google video of Houthi takedown of commercial tanker. You'll see something that looks like a seal team coming out of a helicopter rappelling, down, taking control. So yes, they have the capability.
The question is, if you're a Houthi leader, do you really want to throw in with what appears to be a declining regime in Tehran? I'm not so sure they're going to jump into that breach.
And final thought here, let's face it, the Iranians will fight to the last Houthi. They'd love to put them on the front lines of this. Let's hope the Houthis are smart enough to stay out of this one.
HUNT: Really interesting way to think about it. So, so big picture here. The White House is essentially saying they're
talking about having more talks and that the vice president would likely be the one to continue to lead them.
Do you think the blockade is likely to force the Iranians back to the table? And how do you evaluate the diplomatic strategy the administration has been using to this point?
STAVRIDIS: I certainly hope that it is a wake-up call for Iran. They've been effectively pounded in the face with a two by four in a military sense, but we haven't really choked off their economy. And that's why I think they believe they still have some cards to play.
If the blockade is effective, and I think ultimately it will be. It will stretch the U.S. Navy. It's not easy work. I've done it myself in several places around the world, but I think we can manage it.
That will ultimately choke off the economy. I'm not sure the Iranians have another set of cards beyond the handful I mentioned a moment ago. So, yes, I think it will push him to the table.
What is the deal look like? I don't know, but I suspect the shape of the deal will be a Strait of Hormuz that is open. Iran gets some sanctions relief. We stop pounding them militarily, and we put the enriched uranium in a kind of sidecar to negotiate over time.
And let's face it, uranium is at the bottom of a tunnel in Isfahan with tons of concrete on top of it. We've got time, my view, to negotiate that one. I think that's the shape of the deal. I think the embargo will help push the Iranians toward it. And certainly, I'd say the markets are thinking that way. When you look at how they're responding in the last 24 to 48 hours.
HUNT: Yeah, absolutely fair point.
Finally, sir, I want to ask you about NATO. "The Wall Street Journal" today is reporting that European leaders are accelerating what they're calling a kind of NATO fallback plan. And they write this, quote, "The officials working on the plans, which some officials are referring to as European NATO, are seeking to get more Europeans into the alliances command and control roles and supplement U.S. military assets with their own. The plans, first conceived last year, underscore the depth of European anxiety over U.S. reliability."
And they also note that, crucially, a political reversal in berlin is boosting momentum. And, of course, the leader in berlin, the Chancellor Merz, it was very interesting coming out of the Munich security conference, the discussions that they were having about Europeans and nuclear weaponry. What do you make of how they are approaching all this right now?
STAVRIDIS: They're rational actors as they look at the potential for the United States to walk away from the NATO alliance, something President Trump has talked about quite openly, because he's annoyed that they will not surrender Greenland to him. He's annoyed they have not come into this war against Iran. As a result of all that, Europeans are hedging.
[16:55:00]
And here's a newsflash, Kasie, Europe has a lot of capability, a lot of capacity, a population that's bigger than ours, a defense budget that's the second largest in the world, collectively, $400 billion to our $800 billion. They have a lot of capability. And they, I think, are quite capable of deploying it. And you're seeing echoes of that right now.
HUNT: All right. Retired Admiral James Stavridis, sir, always grateful to have you. Thank you so much for your time today.
STAVRIDIS: Thanks, Kasie.
HUNT: All right. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: All right. Thanks to my panel. Really appreciate you all being here.
Thanks to you at home for watching as well, but don't go anywhere. Phil Mattingly is standing by for "THE LEAD".
Hi, Phil.
