Return to Transcripts main page

CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt

Trump Now Casts Doubt On Ability To Reach Deal With Iran As Gas Prices See Their Biggest One-Day Jump In Six Weeks; Now: Protests Amid Iran War, Rising Gas Prices, Economic Fears; Schumer Dealt Blow As Mills Exits Critical Maine Senate Race; Judge Admonishes DOJ In Hearing On Press Dinner Shooting. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired May 01, 2026 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:00]

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: And that, of course, pushes gas prices much higher, guys.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Yeah.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: It does.

SANCHEZ: It seems like there are some conversations behind the scenes, but not to the president's liking and certainly not to Tehran's.

Vanessa Yurkevich, thank you so much for the update.

"THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" starts right now.

(MUSIC)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA. It's great to have you with us on this Friday. Happy Friday. We made it.

As we come on the air, President Donald Trump is under immense pressure to make a deal with Iran and the war and start to drive gas prices down, even as all of that seems very far from certain. Overnight, the national average price for a gallon of gas jumped another 9 cents. It is now $4.39. That's $1.41 higher than it was when the war started.

And that may be, in part, why a new poll from "The Washington Post" finds that just 36 percent of Americans think that U.S. military action against Iran was the right thing to do. Sixty-one percent say it was a mistake. Those are numbers that we saw years into the wars in Vietnam and in Iraq. And it gets worse for the president. Just 19 percent of Americans say that U.S. actions in Iran have been successful, 39 percent say they haven't been, 41 percent say it's too soon to tell.

So, we're now 60 days into the war with Iran, which means under the War Powers Act, President Trump is supposed to either end it or ask Congress to approve it. Today, the White House sent congressional leaders a letter that declares this, quote, "The hostilities that began on February 28th, 2026, have terminated," end quote.

So, the war is over? Or maybe it isn't.

Here's what President Trump had to say today about the War Powers Act and the prospect of a peace deal.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So many presidents, as you know, have gone and exceeded it. It's never been used. It's never been adhered to. And every other president considered it totally unconstitutional. And we agree with that.

I mean, do we want to go and just blast the hell out of them and finish them forever? Or do we want to try and make a deal? I mean, those are the options.

REPORTER: Do you want to go blast the hell out of them and finish them forever?

TRUMP: I'd prefer not. On a human basis, I'd prefer not. But that's the option.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right, let's get off the sidelines, head into THE ARENA. My panel is here.

We're going to get started, though, with CNN senior White House correspondent Kristen Holmes.

So, Kristen, sources tell CNN that Iran has sent a fresh peace proposal to Pakistani mediators. What is going on? Are we at war? Are we not at war? Are they going to talk? Are they not going to talk? What do you know?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Honestly, right now, it does not sound good. Just two days ago, a senior White House official was telling me they felt like things were moving in a good direction, that they felt like they had gotten Iran over the hump on various issues. And today, you have President Trump using that same rhetoric that we heard a few weeks ago where he's saying either a deal or were going to blast the hell out of them.

He had kind of refrained from using this kind of rhetoric for several days, as they've been negotiating behind the scenes. And I asked President Trump what he thought of the new proposal. Did it move the needle? Here's that exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: The new Iranian proposal --

TRUMP: So they want to make a deal, but I don't -- I'm not satisfied with it. So we'll see what happens.

Iran wants to make a deal because they have no military left, essentially. And they want to make a deal. But I'm not satisfied.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: He also said at one point that they've made strides, but they're not there yet. He's not sure if theyre ever going to get there. But talking to these officials around President Trump, despite the fact that he is using this rhetoric, despite the fact that we are seeing these briefings with his top defense officials talking about various military options, we are told that he still wants this to end.

He still wants some kind of diplomatic resolution, but it certainly sounded like they were farther apart today than they even had been in recent days from talking to U.S. officials, they seemed very unhappy with this most recent proposal. We're waiting to get some more details on what it looked like and what exactly was even changed from the last round.

We know President Trump is still very hung up on the enriched uranium. This has been a sticking point. One, the enriched uranium that's already there, and two, a timeline for Iran to not continue to enrich uranium is something that the two sides haven't been able to agree on.

HUNT: Right. Really, in many ways, the biggest question in all of this.

Kristen, thank you very much for that reporting.

All right. My panel is here in THE ARENA because we're in New York today. Political columnist for "New York Magazine", David Freedlander; host of the "Off the Cupp" podcast, CNN political commentator, S.E. Cupp; former communications director for Vice President Kamala Harris and a CNN political commentator, Jamal Simmons. And we're joined by CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings.

Welcome to all of you.

And just to set the stage, before we begin, we just want to take a look at some of these live pictures. These are May Day protests. They're happening across the country. May 1st, always a day for protests by labor groups. Clearly, this years demonstrations are getting something of a boost, it seems, here in the United States from anti-Trump sentiment and anger over things like affordability in particular, perhaps also Iran and inflation.

But we're going to continue to monitor these as they play out, and you may see them pop up on your screen.

David Freedlander, let me start with you. Welcome to THE ARENA, your first outing here.

And this obviously is 60 days of talking about this for the president. They're telling Congress on the one hand that the war has been terminated. On the other hand, you saw what the president had to say about it seeming not to be terminated, right? All options, including, I think the phrase was "blast the hell out of them" on the table.

DAVID FREEDLANDER, POLITICAL COLUMNIST, NEW YORK MAGAZINE: Right.

HUNT: So, I mean, what are Americans supposed to believe? And what impact does that have on how they feel about it all?

FREEDLANDER: I mean, obviously, they're very unhappy with this war, as we saw from the polling there. I mean, this -- who knows? It looks like its going off the rails. I mean, it looks like a quagmire. I mean, it feels like were on the precipice of something, you know, very, very bad. Trump seems unable to get out of this thing.

You know, the war is clearly not over. It's ongoing.

HUNT: S.E.?

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I'm just looking back at what's -- what we've gotten out of this so far. Or what anyone's gotten out of this so far.

The regime is unchanged. The Iranian people are not liberated. The nuclear materials still barely there. The Strait of Hormuz still closed.

HUNT: And it wasn't closed before, to be clear, before this started.

CUPP: No, I mean, now closed. No.

HUNT: Right. I mean, what have we gotten out of it? We have gotten a closed Strait of Hormuz.

CUPP: We're in a worst spot. And obviously, we're seeing the result of this economic pain and people very frustrated with, A, being misled, lied to during a campaign in which we were told Biden and Kamala were going to get us into a war with Iran, and Trump wasn't. And people who just dealing with the economic frustration.

I think at the very least, because suddenly, everyone's a foreign policy expert, right? And some are going to say we're winning this war. And Trump is saying it's terminated. There's no unilateral termination. Iran gets a say.

But putting all that aside, at the very least, I think it's very clear. Trump-Hegseth have failed to sell this war to the American people. And that's what we're seeing in those poll numbers. And that's a big deal in an election year.

HUNT: Yeah. Well, let's -- let's dig into some of this polling for this side of the table, because as I astutely points out, I think it I think it helps explain the disparities here. Okay. So the right decision, wrong decision in "The Washington Post" poll, 61 percent say that it was a mistake to take military action against Iran, 36 percent say that it was the right decision.

Now, what does this split look a lot like? I don't think I have it to hand, but let me just tell you, it looks a lot like President Trump's approval rating. Okay. His up or down. Now compare. This is Iran, Iraq and Vietnam. Okay. Obviously in Iraq, the Bush administration did a ton of work, much of

course, later discredited. But at the time they did a lot of work to convince the American public that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a good idea. And they built up public opinion. They sent Colin Powell to the United Nations to work on that.

Now, Vietnam, I'm going to date myself, but you all know that I was not around for the Vietnam War. My knowledge of how that was sold to the American public was quite different. But that also came in the context of a very long fight against communism, in the wake of two world wars, the Korean War and other places.

But it's just worth noting that the polling that you are looking at in Iraq, okay, 2007, when these numbers look like what the Iran numbers look like now, 2007 was four years after we invaded in Vietnam, 1970, well into the conflict.

Scott Jennings, I mean, how big of a mistake was it for the president to do this without bringing the American public along with him?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, look, I noted in the other survey you put up that 41 percent said it was too soon to tell. And I suspect what they are waiting for is whether we meet the primary objective, which I do think the presidents been pretty clear about. We can't let them have a nuclear weapon.

And so if we exit this thing, whenever we exit this thing and can tell the American people, yes, this stuff was buried under the rubble, we've got a plan to extract it, or its not going anywhere. Or however, we explain that theyre not going to be able to build a nuclear weapon. I suspect a good chunk of the people who say too soon to tell will say, okay, well, we exit it, having met our objective.

Now, the question is, how long is that going to take? And the truth is, we don't know the answer to that. I think the president would like it to happen right now. He obviously would love to make a deal right now.

And I also think the president believes that the blockade in which were not actually dropping any bombs on them, we're just in the middle of a blockade right now, is actually more effective at hastening the end of this than the military campaign was. I hope that's true.

[16:10:00]

I interviewed a former rear admiral this week, and he was like, yeah, a little patience on the blockade. And you may just get what you want, which is ultimately bringing the Iranian economy to its knees, bringing them to the table, getting China to force them to end this. And the way it can only end for him is they don't have or cannot build a nuclear weapon.

HUNT: Yeah. I mean, listen, you've you and others who have sat in the Republican seat on this show have made an excellent case for why it's important that Iran not have a nuclear weapon. It's that the president didn't do that in advance, right?

And, Jamal, I mean, I want to bring this up because I think it's important to underscore, right? We talk about gas prices, right? You all drive by your, your, your local gas station. You know what it costs, but it's not just about the numbers. I mean, we do averages here. That's kind of the easy thing to poll.

But "The Washington Post" asked Americans, how is this impacting you? What are you doing differently? Because these gas prices are higher, 44 percent said they had to cut back on driving, 42 percent are cutting back on household expenses, 34 percent are adjusting their travel and vacation plans, 15 percent are considering buying an E.V., although that is potentially about to get way more expensive, by the way. That's a -- that's a whole different thing.

CUPP: Yeah, don't do that.

HUNT: But, Jamal, I mean, we're heading into a midterm election. And this is how Americans are feeling.

JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: They are. I think the president's problem fundamentally, obviously, the war is bad. People don't want to be there. It's against his brand. He ran as an economic turnaround artist and the economy hasn't turned around. People are -- prices are even higher in some ways than they were a year ago. He's -- he is running against getting involved in Middle East wars.

And now we're in the middle of a Middle East war. And people don't really understand why. And they don't know when it's going to be over.

And then the president also ran on you know, dealing with immigration. What they did not expect was that a bunch of American citizens were going to get wrapped up in that, and a couple of them are going to get killed. This all is against what he ran for as president of the United States. I think that House is starting to collapse in on him.

Now, the question is, what can he do to turn this around, whether it's in the next six months or in the next 18 months or whoever's going to succeed him? I'm just not sure there's much he can do, because once people turn you off as president of the United States, ask George Bush, it's very hard to get them to click back in on you.

HUNT: Agree?

JENNINGS: Yeah. Look, I think people like us can sit here and analyze the politics of this. I do think one thing about presidents is true. They make national security decisions with other things in mind other than tracking polls or, you know, the media or political push and pull. They make national security decisions based on information that only they have, and based on the threats that they see that are imminent to the American people. That was his argument that Iran was an imminent threat, that we didn't have time to wait, that this was the correct time to do it.

Now, history will judge whether he was right or wrong about that, and history will judge how this ends, and history will judge whether he met his objectives. But in the moment, that's essentially what you hire a president to do, exercise their judgment, to make national security decisions based on information that only they have. And that's what he's done here.

CUPP: But history is really important. I'm glad you brought it up, because I hope that he's looking at history, too, because history is there for all of us to look at. And if you look at, say, 1980 and the war between Iran and Iraq -- Iraq offered a ceasefire eight days in. Eight days in, they offered a ceasefire. Iran said no. Iran would say no to ceasefire six more times, and that war would drag on for eight years.

Iran doesn't want to move quickly. Iran -- this is good for Iran. Iran is loving this. And they've been preparing for a war of attrition with us for 20 years.

So, the president walking in and saying it's terminated, we're done. We've won. They get to say the enemy gets a say.

JENNINGS: I don't think the ayatollah would agree that this has been good for him. I mean --

CUPP: I didn't say the ayatollah, but --

JENNINGS: The top layer of the regime would not agree that it's good for them.

CUPP: We've opened up sanctions.

JENNINGS: We've destroyed their economy.

CUPP: If the point is to drive the economy to their knees, we're opening up sanctions.

JENNINGS: We've destroyed their economy. And their currency is now basically worthless. I think it's -- in my opinion, it's fair to say its good for them.

HUNT: And yet -- and yet we can't get --

CUPP: They're not running to get a deal.

(CROSSTALK)

CUPP: They're not running to get it.

JENNINGS: We're blocking it. I mean, it's our strategy to keep it closed in order to bring them to the table. That is the current strategy. Now, you may disagree with that or think we should be having a different strategy, but the current strategy is no bombs but a blockade to bring them to their knees to the point where they have to come to the table.

SIMMONS: Look, I don't reflexively root for the president to lose on this because the president of the United States is the symbol of the American democracy. And so if the president fails, it means that we as a country have failed.

The problem is here, the presidents not doing what it takes to bring us together in order to accomplish the goal. He's not getting the American people around this goal. He's got some questions about the military strategy. Iran now controls, or is at least a partner in controlling a very strategic asset in the Middle East that they didn't have any say in before.

So I think what we need is the president to try to bring Americans together, whether its Democrats in Congress, it's people in the American public to try to accomplish this goal.

[16:15:01]

And right now, he's not doing any of those things. Instead, he looks like he's sort of moving all over the place. Iran is holding steady and the president keeps changing his mind every couple of days.

HUNT: All right. Well, we're going to continue to talk about this coming up in our next block here in THE ARENA. Those May Day protests happening across the country from Los Angeles to Chicago to the nation's capital.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All these issues that seem unrelated -- Iran and Gaza and ICE raids and all those I think actually are related, they're about concentrating power and wealth in the hands of a few people. And that's not good for any of us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:20:02]

HUNT: All right. We're looking at live pictures right now. There are mass protests going on as we speak in cities across the country. These are the annual May Day labor demonstrations, and they've been infused with new energy protesters angry about President Trump's handling of Iran, immigration enforcement, affordability, other issues.

Our panel is back here, and I -- look, S.E. Cupp these protests that we're seeing, and we're going to continue to look at them because we are seeing really large numbers of people gathering. It's a long standing tradition, started in 1886, actually, when protesters demanded the eight-hour work day.

So, our thanks for that very much.

SIMMONS: You only work eight hours, right?

HUNT: But -- let's -- from a big picture perspective, right? It's -- we have seen in the wake of Donald Trump getting elected to his second term, right? Democrats were incredibly demoralized, unlike what we saw when he was first elected in 2016, where the protests were immediate. It has been a slower burn, but it does seem as we are headed into the midterms, that certainly opponents of the president are now getting their feet under them in situations like this, more than they had at the beginning.

And there is a swell of energy opposing the president. When I see some of this -- and one of the questions, I don't have the numbers. You know, the Democratic Party's popularity to hand. But unlike 2018, the first time that Donald Trump had a midterm, the Democratic Party is not terribly popular. But the president is really unpopular here, too. And the Democrats are likely to benefit from it.

CUPP: Yes. So this is interesting because this isn't like a culture wars rally. This is over the economy, right? These are people who are very frustrated. Mostly on the left, but I would wager there are some moderates and maybe even some, some right wing people in these crowds who are frustrated with the economy.

The economy is not great. Job opportunities aren't great. If you just graduated from college, you're maybe one of millions of people who cannot get a job. There's a real frustration here. And I was just talking to Mo Elleithee, a friend of ours who --

HUNT: Yeah, of course. Great friend of the show actually.

CUPP: He's wonderful. I talked to him today and he said something so interesting. He said, I don't think we're seeing a left right issue in this country in our politics right now. We're seeing a front back. And people who feel like they are in the back and they are suffering because the people in the front are winning, and that -- the person in the front can look different, depending on where you are.

You could be mad at the billionaires, as I think a lot of people here are on the right. Maybe you're mad at migrant workers. You're mad at some other kind of like boogeyman that is keeping you from getting to where you want to get.

HUNT: Sometimes the billionaires, too, honestly, on the right.

CUPP: Absolutely. But people are mad because they feel like theyre in the back of the line, and other people are winning. And its led to this uprise in populism and Donald Trump's version of populism is very different than, say, Reagan's or Bernie's. But there's a rise in populism for a reason. People feel like theyre not able to get where they want to get.

FREEDLANDER: I think it's interesting, the comparison to 2018, as you mentioned. You know, back then, like Democrats were tapping into this energy. They were leading these protests in. These protests are like getting arrested at protests.

And I feel like now Democrats are kind of trying to keep their distance from this kind of like, energy that's populated, that's bubbling up out in the population. And so I think that explains part of the reason why Democrats have been a little unpopular.

HUNT: Jamal, do you agree with that? SIMMONS: I don't completely agree with that. Because what is happening is that Democrats are also being, taken to a different place by members of the party. You see that in Maine with Graham Platner, who is now the going to be the Democratic nominee for senator in Maine, James Talarico in Texas, who's somebody who is kind of -- he's not like your typical Democrat. And so, theyre very different --

CUPP: Mamdani.

SIMMONS: Mamdani, theyre very different characters. Each one of them is a very different kind of character, but theyre all not typical Democrats.

And so, I think especially when you start talking about running for president, the presidential candidate who finds a voice that is against both the normal workings of the Democratic Party and the oligarchy and the Republican billionaires and all that, is the person to watch in that primary.

HUNT: Scott, you look like you want to weigh in. I kind of --

SIMMONS: Maybe, I don't know.

(CROSSTALK)

JENNINGS: I agree with you. It's not -- it's not traditional for political candidates in the United States to have Nazi tattoos. I concur with you about that. Even if they did choose to try to cover them up and then decide later, they regret covering them up like Platner did in Maine. At any rate --

SIMMONS: Let's talk about Hegseth. We'll do that later.

JENNINGS: Well, let's talk about it. What kind of -- no, no, no -- what kind of tattoo did he have?

It was a -- it was a Christian symbol which the Democrats -- so the Democrats embrace Nazi tattoos, not Christian?

HUNT: Americans are -- we're going to put this poll up on the screen. How are you doing financially since Trump's second term began? Better off, 14 percent. Not as well off, 40 percent. About the same, 42 percent.

JENNINGS: I wouldn't -- I mean, this -- look, I don't know a ton about the May Day demonstrations, mostly because I think its sort of the high holy day for socialism.

But I suspect what's being wrapped in here, S.E., with all due respect, is not disaffected conservatives, but people who go out and protest every time they're given the chance. The people you see at the No Kings rally. The people you see at the Free Palestine rally, the people you see at the Black Lives Matter rally, the people you saw at Occupy Wall Street. You know, all the same sort of anti-American, anti-western radicals that congeal anytime there's a chance to go out and block the street for a handful of hours and not get arrested. I -- that is what my sense is of this.

SIMMONS: Not the January 6th rallies, though, not those.

JENNINGS: I don't support --

CUPP: But are you dismissing the economic concerns of millions of Americans.

JENNINGS: No, no, every -- every --

CUPP: That's what theyre saying. They're concerned.

JENNINGS: Every, okay, every single election I've ever been involved in. The economy was the number one issue.

CUPP: Yeah.

JENNINGS: Everyone. I know, we sort of like what's going to be the top. It's always the economy.

CUPP: Yeah, for sure.

JENNINGS: And so you can't dismiss economic polling or what people think about it. But I also think the idea that this is sort of like regular people showing up and saying anything, I -- this is organized by groups who have ties to the far, far, far, far, far left, just like the No Kings rallies, just like the other sort of radical, anti- American anti-western rallies.

HUNT: Are you talking about -- okay, so this is a labor movement, right? Like, is do you think the AFL-CIO qualifies as an organization like one you just described?

JENNINGS: Do you think do you think communist organizations or socialist organizations qualify because theyre part of it?

HUNT: No, I'm asking you, based on your characterization of who would be organizing this. Do you put the AFL-CIO --

JENNINGS: Not necessarily, but they're not the only -- but they're not the only ones --

HUNT: But I mean, they --

JENNINGS: Do you -- do you -- do you -- do you dispute that some of these big rallies, you've got people holding communist --

HUNT: Scott, I have not been out there on the streets reporting on these rallies. Okay, so I am -- I'm going to say what we know here at CNN, what I have been learning about the history of the day and what I know I actually did cover the labor movement. It was my first job as a reporter.

And the history of the labor movement is one that -- you know, I understand what you're saying about some groups being on the left, but like members of the AFL-CIO in places like Ohio and Michigan and western Pennsylvania are some of Donald Trump's biggest supporters.

JENNINGS: I'm not disputing that you played a clip --

SIMMONS: To liberate Europe.

JENNINGS: You played a clip of a guy before we came into this saying, look at the connection between Iran and Gaza and ICE and -- I mean, that is, you have a sort of a class of professional protesters that are from the very, very far left that have grown up around attacking and protesting against Donald Trump. They come out all the time. It's not terribly unusual.

HUNT: Look, I'm not going to dispute that. There certainly are people who are basically professional protesters, okay?

If you do cover and I have covered a number of protests, and you can oftentimes tell the difference. I think part of what's noteworthy about this here is that what we are seeing in terms of anger around affordability in the country is that there are people showing up. I mean, these crowds are -- I understand your point also about building a crowd. I've covered politics long enough to know that politicians can pay to build one. Okay?

But the question is, are average people doing things they don't normally do walking in the streets, you know, on a day when they otherwise might be at work because things are worse than they were before?

FREEDLANDER: I mean, Scott's right. This may not be the best example of like the economic pain people are feeling in the country, but it is real. There is real anger -- people -- I mean, it takes a lot to like leave work for the day and go to protest. That is happening out here.

And there's like -- there's just a real anger in the country right now. And I think it can not be ignored by either party.

HUNT: All right. Coming up next here in THE ARENA, what a federal judge is telling the DOJ about the investigation into the shooting as the White House correspondents dinner into the -- at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, as we get new surveillance video from the time of the attack.

But first, new CNN reporting just coming in on who called Graham Platner and what was said after that big jolt in a key Senate race.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM PLATNER (D), MAINE SENATE CANDIDATE: There has been more reach out from, I would say, more kind of like establishment folks. However, however, and this is the important part, not from like the, not from like the DSCC, not from the DNC, like the, like nobody in the places of power remains interested.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But they're lost, dude, like there --

PLATNER: It's so bad. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're lost.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:33:29]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESISONAL CORRESPONDENT: Schumer calculated here?

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ (D-NY): What I think the real problem is, is this idea that any one person in Washington can be pulling strings to determine representation for any other state, right? Like it's really not about him. It's about the people of Maine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: More reaction from Capitol Hill on Maine Governor Janet Mills's abrupt exit from the state's Senate race, which has left some Democrats questioning the midterm strategy that's come from their longtime Senate leader, Chuck Schumer.

Mills, of course, was one of Schumer's handpicked senate candidates. The 75-year-old New Yorker believed that she could help flip the Senate in the fall. It's a goal that Graham Platner, now Maine's presumptive Democratic Senate nominee, although a little bit of time, still told Schumer that he shared when Platner spoke to him on the phone yesterday, just hours after Mills suspended her bid.

Joining me now, CNN senior political and global affairs commentator Rahm Emanuel. He is, of course, the former mayor of Chicago, the former ambassador to Japan, the former chairman of the DCCC.

Rahm, I always miss things when you come on. Thank you for being here.

What is going on here in terms of how Democratic leadership -- I mean, I think the question is, is it sclerotic? I mean, is Chuck Schumer the right person to be in charge of this anymore?

RAHM EMANUEL, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Well, I actually have a different view. One is if you go back six months ago, everybody wrote off the chances for the Democrats in the Senate today, both Democratic and Republican folks acknowledge that this is a 50/50 proposition.

[16:35:04]

And one of the reasons is obviously the president of the United States and the Republicans, given their majority there, it's a referendum on their leadership, and theyre going to get whacked. And that has created an environment for a lot of opportunity.

The second piece is you have races in Alaska, you have races in Iowa, you have races in Texas. You have actually also races in Mississippi. You have a bunch of seats that weren't in play, weren't on anybody's radar screen in the Washington, D.C., beltway six months ago. And that's also part of recruitment.

So, look, in the end of the day, having been when I was chair of the Democratic congressional campaign committee, after three cycles of losing, I was an idiot until I wasn't an idiot.

And so I just -- you know, my family still thinks I am an idiot. So I just -- I think -- I just think this whole thing is really just talk about something crazy. You have to look at the whole field. That's what the chairman has to do as a team. And rather than everybody trying to make ideological scoring political points, the whole goal here is keep your eye focused on Donald Trump and what he's done and breaking promises to the American people have a wide enough field that if there is a wave, and I think this election, having been all over the country, there will be a wave that you have enough people out there to take advantage politically, strategically, from that wave in corners of the country that Democrats don't usually win.

HUNT: Rahm, when you think about the main race in particular, I take your point about the broader map. That's absolutely fair enough. Part of what was going on in the main race is that Graham Platner has some significant vulnerabilities that, of course, Republicans are going to exploit, and that Democratic leadership in Washington were concerned about in no small measure, the tattoo of a Nazi symbol that he covered up after it was written about, or that that he -- that he did cover up. It was written about in the press.

Are you comfortable with that kind of a background for someone who's going to serve in the United States Senate?

EMANUEL: Well, here's -- first of all, we're a long way from that.

That said, I would hope that in this process that he understands what a Nazi symbol is. Having had certain epithets thrown my way, having started my own political career back in the '70s, not career, but interest in politics, confronting neo-Nazis, I think that's important.

And third is, look, you're going to -- he's going to have to make his way. And the Democrats, he'll be the nominee, should support his candidacy, and taking on the race.

You know, one category I find interesting in all this, you're talking about this one race main. You're talking about Congress. You're talking about the Senate. What people don't talk about. Democrats are going to pick up a number of governorships, a number of state capitals. This -- there's a whole other bucket of races. People aren't looking at.

So he'll have to make his way. The Democrats will support him in that effort. But again, the field is wide. I actually believe that the House is in good shape. The Senate is today 50/50, and I believe at the end of the night in November, Democrats are going to have more governorships and more state capitals, and the Republicans are going to wake up having gotten whacked, exactly, because the American people think the Donald Trump and the rubber stamp Congress has actually produced higher prices and broke their pledge and promise to focus on the economy when the president of United States doing anything but focusing on the economy.

HUNT: Do you think that the definition or the persona that it takes to successfully win national elected office is has changed because Graham Platner, we can put up the polling, right? He was at 49 percent to Susan Collins' 38. Janet Mills was 41 to Susan Collins' 40. There seems to be a demand in the electorate for people who don't look and sound and act like the same kinds of people that have been.

And no offense, you've been on the stage a long time. So like, I don't you know, I don't want to discount that at all. But are people like sick of all y'all, like --

EMANUEL: Well, you didn't get me on this show Friday afternoon to ask whether they hate Washington and hate people. Let me break the news to you. Yes.

HUNT: That I know.

EMANUEL: But I think there's two --

HUNT: I mean, do they want a different type of person, right?

EMANUEL: No. There's two -- there's two things that's important, or three, I would say. I've always believed that the messenger is part of the message. And in this case, he's saying change. He looks change, he acts change. He is change to status quo.

That was true in '06 when we recruited people out of the military establishment, football players, et cetera. So you have to be authentic to that and your character opens up a group of voters that usually put Democrats on mute. And what would be also, I would add this as a component. When you look at and I've been around the country for people who are former ambassadors or part of the military, the other piece of this is strength versus weakness, because it runs counter to the Democratic type and brand.

[16:40:06]

In a party known as weak and woke, there's nothing about him that reflects either weak or woke. It's strength, and it's actually talk and honesty. And I think those are qualities that are more.

Now, there's no doubt historically, well over 250 years, American people have been consistent about one thing they prefer change.

HUNT: Are you going to endorse Graham Platner?

EMANUEL: As I used to joke to President Obama -- people hate the status quo, and theyre not too excited by change either.

HUNT: Yeah.

Are you going to endorse Graham Platner? EMANUEL: I mean, if he -- if he's Democratic nominee, I'm going to help him if he wants my help, absolutely. I -- obviously, we'll have a discussion. When Mamdani won, he was -- rather when he was a candidate, I told him when I first met him, I said, I don't know who's going to hate this meeting more, my rabbi or AOC, but we had an honest meeting, as a former -- two former mayors had an honest discussion about what to face as mayor.

Yeah, I support the party. I support winning because I think you have to put an end to Donald Trump and a rubber stamp Republican Congress and get focused again. And not only in 2026, making sure that the American people know what are the choices ahead, because 2028 is going to be the first election about the future that we haven't had in 20 years.

HUNT: Yeah. Jamal Simmons, I want to ask you about what the mayor said there, calling the Democratic Party weak and woke, and that that's really the image that you have to fight against, especially in the Trump era. Is he right?

SIMMONS: Oh, I agree with everything Rahm always says. I'm not silly.

(LAUGHTER)

SIMMONS: You know?

HUNT: I'm just waiting for S.E. to say Rahm for president.

CUPP: Rahm 28, Rahm 28.

FREEDLANDER: You're sweeping this panel, Rahm.

SIMMONS: Right. No. Look --

HUNT: Continue --

EMANUEL: Jamal, cut your losses now. Cut your losses now. That's it. End it there.

SIMMONS: Listen, I think that the American people are looking for something that's different. That's been very clear. And again, as I laid out a second ago, look at Platner. You look at Mamdani, you look at Talarico in Texas. They are looking for people who can speak authentically and who don't look and sound like every other politician they've been listening to for so long.

JENNINGS: I mean, I do agree with Jamal Talarico. Doesn't sound like anyone I've ever met from Texas. Six genders and no meat. I mean, I don't -- I don't know any person from Texas, let alone a political candidate that has ever said that out loud.

SIMMONS: Low blow.

JENNINGS: So I agree with you. Frankly, he sounds like nobody I've ever met. SIMMONS: This guy talks about his faith all the time. He talks about

reaching out to people. He wants -- he wants an America that brings us together and not one that divides us.

JENNINGS: It's not silly. Those are literally his positions.

SIMMONS: We shouldn't pooh-pooh that. That's like a real thing.

CUPP: But I think you we can't. And ill say it again, Rahm 2028.

But I think, listen, the Democratic Party has not had a great week. You know, the "Pod Save America" interview with Ken Martin was really awful. The decision not to release an autopsy was a huge slap in the face to Democratic voters who were let down by the party in 2024.

The Democrats lost all seven swing states to a convicted criminal who we had seen before. So Democratic voters deserve to hear directly from the party as to what they have learned and what they plan to do differently.

Rahm, I'm wondering if you can speak to that decision and what you thought of that.

EMANUEL: Yeah. Well, look, I think we have to be honest with ourselves and analyze what went wrong. That's not that we are good enough, strong enough to handle not only the analysis and the critique, but also what are the corrective steps.

And this is why I think, you know, certain parts of this are going to be about having an agenda that grabs the American people, about the future. We have had two presidents back to back in presidential candidates that are trying to return to past that's not coming back.

I can tell you this firsthand having been from Hattiesburg, Mississippi, to Hanover, New Hampshire, the American people are desperate for a conversation not only about the future, but how to secure it. And that is what the party should be offering that to the American people. That clear contrast.

Right now, 2026 is a referendum. 2028 is a choice, and we better get ready to show that we can fight not just Donald Trump, but we can fight for America and the American people.

HUNT: Rahm, do you think that the kind of primary I mean, we are shaping up for a 2028 that has a primary field that looks like the one Donald Trump ultimately conquered in 2016, right? Like potentially a kids table debate stage level number of candidates. Do you think that that's going to be a recipe for success for Democrats, or does it -- is that potentially a huge pitfall?

EMANUEL: Well, one thing is the party, when you really look back, never really had choices. They didn't have them in 2024. They didn't really have them in 2020. And so, I think the party is ready, as I jokingly say, sometimes, if you didn't have a choice in 2024.

In 2028, it's going to be Baskin-Robbins 31 flavors. And if I decide I'm going to be, I'm going to be rocky road, man. So I think that's actually good for the party because I really do believe this.

[16:45:04]

We have not had a debate about the party and the future and how to define it, and who get -- and how to make sure more Americans are part of that. And so I welcome I think we should have a big, wholesome debate. I think it was a mistake for the DNC not to put the report out. We're grown ups. We can handle honest discussion. But make no mistake, 2026, like 1994, like 206, like 210 and like 2018, it's a referendum on Donald Trump and the Republicans who are a rubber stamp for his agenda. That's it. Full stop.

HUNT: Rahm Emanuel, rocky road. Okay, you heard it here first. We're going to work that into the campaign slogan somehow. I'll see you soon, sir. Always great to have you.

EMANUEL: See you.

HUNT: The rest of the panel is going to stick around.

Ahead here in THE ARENA, the new CNN reporting on why a federal judge appeared annoyed at a hearing for the White House Correspondents' Dinner alleged gunman. Why she's reportedly calling out the Justice Department.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:50:19]

HUNT: All right. Welcome back.

New details are emerging about Thursday's detention hearing for the suspect in the White House Correspondents' Dinner shooting. CNN has exclusively learned that the federal judge in the case privately reprimanded prosecutors for attempting to grandstand at the hearing. This all comes as the Justice Department released new surveillance footage of the moments before the incident. Prosecutors say the video shows the suspect, Cole Thomas Allen, exchanged fire with a Secret Service agent, although its not immediately clear when Allen allegedly fired his gun.

CNN's crime and justice correspondent Katelyn Polantz is with us, and we're also joined by CNN senior law enforcement analyst, former deputy director at the FBI, Andrew McCabe.

Thank you both for being here.

Katelyn, can you walk us through your new exclusive reporting?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Kasie, this comes from a transcript I was able to obtain from the D.C. district court. And what the judge said in a sealed part of the hearing yesterday, the detention hearing for Cole Allen put it into the category of are they performing or are they practicing law as they normally would in other circumstances? What happened in the hearing was that the Justice Department

prosecutor stood up to the judge and said, we have some evidence. We want to show it in court. And the judge says, we don't really need that because Cole Allen is going to remain in detention.

And then the judge called the prosecutors up to the bench, put on the husher in the courtroom, so the white noise. So we couldn't hear what they were saying. And she said, according to the transcript, I don't know what's going on here. I know that you want to present your case, I guess, to some other audience, some audience other than the court. I don't want this to turn into a circus.

Then the prosecutor sort of swerved and said, you know, we're five days into this investigation. We're still nailing down discovery. Let's set our timeline. But it's that hint of is the Justice Department performing or going above and beyond what they need to do in this case in court?

At the same time, the justice department has been out there with this new video that they released yesterday and also sent to the court for no, in no particular legal need, but they did provide it publicly, showing Cole Allen running through the magnetometers and the shots being fired, where the agent fires back at him, and then he is off screen. That's the shooting.

But a CNN investigative team analysis of this video is inconclusive of when exactly he's firing that shotgun. There's no muzzle flash there. But we did also speak to an audio expert that said there were six shots fired. The first one heard on pool footage. So, separate footage was the loudest, potentially indicating that he did fire that shotgun.

HUNT: Yeah --

POLANTZ: Just being accurate though, that's going to be the question.

HUNT: Yeah. Andy McCabe, I want to put this new video back up as we have this conversation because you can see a little bit more of what was going on here. This I think is earlier. But at one point they appear to like be taking down the magnetometers. I've been sort of wracking my brain to think about is this standard procedure at campaign events or events like this? I'm interested in your assessment and what you would point us to as you see this all play out.

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, I think you've definitely have identified this correctly. They are clearly taking down the security checkpoint, the magnetometers.

Now, it may be that they are -- they've reached the point in the evening where no one who wasn't already inside was going to be allowed in. Maybe that was their intent. If that's the case --

HUNT: The doors traditionally close and don't reopen. That's -- that is true.

MCCABE: Right. So you wouldn't really need to screen people a second time if they'd already been screened once. But, you know, its fascinating to me that you see, you see the shooter

Cole Thomas Allen comes out of that door. He goes into the door with his coat on and then is followed inside essentially by an officer with a dog who remains there at the open door for some 10 or 12 seconds, and then retreats and walks away. And just a second after he walks away, the shooter comes out without the coat and carrying the shotgun. Just, I mean, an amazing timing wise, that whole thing could have been stopped right there.

But I do think that his progress through the magnetometers, these attempts to sprint past the Secret Service agents, it is really not clear just from watching the video where exactly he fires the shotgun. This is the sort of fact that the government typically would not reveal until trial. You would have an expert testify at trial of video forensics expert to resolve this one time and one time only.

Right now, the government has a very back and forth record on this.

HUNT: Really interesting.

All right. Andrew McCabe, Katelyn Polantz, thank you both very much for being here, I appreciate it. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: All right. Thanks very much, my panel. Really fun to be with you guys in New York. Thanks for coming in to do it.

Thanks to all of you for watching as well. Don't forget, you can watch more of THE ARENA tomorrow. THE ARENA SATURDAY will air at noon and again at 4:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on CNN. I really do hope to see you there, and I'll be grateful if you spend part of your weekend with us.

Right now, don't go anywhere. Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".

Hi, Jake. Happy Friday.