Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Demonstrations Planned In South Amid Redistricting Battles; Trump: "Made No Commitment Either Way" To Xi On Taiwan; A Taco Order Sparks Debate In Texas Senate Race; Trump-Backing Former Election Official Tina Peters To Receive Clemency From Colorado Governor. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired May 15, 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]
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Well, thankfully they haven't yet.
MATT MIRA, CO-HOST, JAMES BONDING PODCAST: There is. Yes, I agree. I agree.
BRIANNA KELAR, CNN HOST: Matt Mira, it is so great to have you. It's been fascinating. Thanks for coming on.
MIRA: Oh, thanks for having me. And I look forward to coming back on when they finally figure out who the next James Bond is.
Boris, you're pretty good, though, I think.
SANCHEZ: No Dr. Evil.
MIRA: I think a bald James Bond, we're in.
SANCHEZ: Give me a hairless cat and mini-me. I'd rather be Dr. Evil.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Take it easy, Matt.
THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts right now
(MUSIC)
PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. Welcome to THE ARENA. I'm Phil Mattingly, in for Kasie Hunt.
Right now, the fight to redraw the maps and sway control of Congress already shaking up the midterm election, with one Democrat announcing his retirement after the elimination of his district.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. STEVE COHEN (D-TN): This is by far the most difficult moment I've had as an elected official. In the ninth district that they have under this new law. There's nothing like the ninth district that I've represented. I've had people tell me as recently as today, African American and Caucasian, don't quit, and I don't want to quit. I'm not a quitter, but these districts were drawn to beat me. They were drawn to defeat me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: That's Representative Steve Cohen there referencing the support he has received from African-American voters. It's worth noting that the district is represented for almost 20 years. Tennessee's ninth was the state's only black majority district.
Now, fresh off the Supreme Court's ruling, Republican controlled states across the deep south are looking to do much the same. Today, South Carolina's legislature began a special session aimed at carving up the district, long represented by Democrat Jim Clyburn. That district, the only one in South Carolina with a plurality of black voters. In response to all of this, voting rights groups, including Black Voters Matter, have announced a national day of action, with demonstrations set to take place in cities and towns across the country this weekend.
As that happens, Democrats in Congress are looking to harness that anger as the midterm elections get closer every single day.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): There is determination and righteous resolve to push back against this unprecedented effort in modern American history to turn back the clock, bring us back to the Jim Crow era in terms of black representation in the Deep South. And we're not going to stand for it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel is here.
CNN political analyst and national political reporter for "Axios", Alex Thompson; CNN contributor and host of "The New York Times'" 'The Interview", Lulu Garcia-Navarro; former DNC communications director Mo Elleithee; and Republican strategist Matt Whitlock. We are also joined by former Democratic congressman from South Carolina, Joe Cunningham.
And that's where I want to start, because, Joe, the way this is moving, and it started to move very, very quickly in the wake of the Supreme Court decision, South Carolina is clearly one of those states moving forward. Where do you think this goes there?
JOE CUNNINGHAM (D), FORMER SOUTH CAROLINA CONGRESSMAN: Well, look, first of all, I want to say that gerrymandering is one of the biggest threats to our democracy. Full stop. And it's terrible, no matter who does it. It's important to note this mid-decade redistricting arms race was started by Republicans in Texas and then moved to California and Virginia, and it's making its way throughout every state.
And every single state is different. You know, Tennessee is different than South Carolina. But what I can tell you right now, if they carry through with their promise to split up Congressman Jim Clyburn's district, his voters don't just disappear. You know, as the young kids say, the math doesn't math.
We have seven congressional districts here in South Carolina. And so by cracking up his district, it's going to make other districts more competitive and possibly create two to thee other swing districts here in South Carolina.
MATTINGLY: Matt, I find -- that's such a good point, because the idea of, hey, this might make a lot of sense now, but I guarantee you, Democrats back in 2024 didn't think the entire border of Texas was going to move very, very sharply to the right in the Hispanic community. Now, it's all shifting back the other way on some level.
So, what is the end game here? Is it just 2026 win this? Because if you open the door for -- as Republicans to 2028, Democrats can cash a lot of seats real quick with the states they run.
MATT WHITLOCK, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I'm actually really grateful that Congressman Cunningham laid it out the way he did, because he makes a really good argument for exactly what Republicans are doing here, which is potentially make things more fair by creating more competitive districts instead of having districts that are set in place based on racial gerrymandering. That's exactly what the Supreme Court was trying to undo there.
And I think one reason were seeing so much of these sort of racial animus conversation is Democrats see that that's the best way to reengage their base after some pretty embarrassing setbacks, like what we just saw in Virginia, where they blew $80 million on something, they didn't do the legal legwork for in advance. And so, to reengage their base and to make sure the base doesn't hold them accountable for these embarrassing setbacks, they're sort of trying to turn on that engine.
And I think there's a good chance it will work, because that's a big base motivator. But I don't think it's necessarily based in reality.
ALEX THOMPSON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I mean, there's no way that 2026 is the end game here because you already having Democrats talk about trying to redistrict Illinois, Colorado, New York.
[16:05:05]
Then you're also going to have Republicans re-try to do Indiana, possibly. I also -- there's already chatter about maybe even some Democrats, you know, proposing expanding the House of Representatives, creating more districts in order to also change this up.
I think, you know, Trump has opened really a pandoras box. And we are only at the very beginning of this discussion.
MATTINGLY: I think what's fascinating is Democrats right now, again, like two weeks ago, Democrats were looking around like, I can't believe we -- we didn't just fight this to a wash. Like we met with Virginia. We may end up net. Now everything seems to have inverted back to where it was initially.
And that's led other Democrats to see. All right. Is there something we can do now, including Maryland Governor Wes Moore? Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. WES MOORE (D), MARYLAND: We don't have a choice but to act, particularly when we're watching the greatest assault on black voter representation around the country that we have seen in generations. Frankly, I think it is the responsibility for Maryland, for our general assembly and for every other state who has the option to say, why should certain states go through a process of determining in mid- decade what their states going to do? But then other states are supposed to sit on their hands.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: Lulu, what is your sense of the options that Democrats have right now tangibly before the midterms, given how fast Republicans are moving?
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR; Well, before the midterms, I think that's the big problem, right? Because everyone is looking in very short term just to sort of figure out how this is going to play out in the next few months, because we are very close to the midterms. I don't think they've got a lot of options, to be honest. The options that they have are fighting where they can fight. And then also just hoping that the turnout just overwhelms whatever the gerrymander is in the places where they can.
THOMPSON: And to Lulu's point, just in terms of lack of options, Wes Moore tried to do this already earlier this year, and his own Democratic state senate said no.
MATTINGLY: Yeah, Illinois had a similar issue as well, where there -- I mean, honestly, I get it like general assembly members are saying, you know, we work to get here. We're the next in line. We don't want to mess around with seats.
Mo, walk me through, especially in ahead of this day of action that we were reading through like from the momentum, from the energizing Democratic base. Is this a fight that is just for energy or is this a fight where there are some actual wins here that could happen as Republicans pursue this in the state legislature?
MO ELLEITHEE, FORMER DNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Yeah, I think maybe a little bit of both. But I tend to agree with Lulu. Democrats are going to have fewer and fewer options with each passing week to actually change the map in any way that could mitigate what Republicans have been doing. So that's why you're hearing more and more Democrats out there right now saying, we got one last option. Go out and win some elections, go out and try to beat them in some of these districts.
And I think you're going to start to see more and more energy around that. This is a great motivator for a lot of voters who are really just frustrated with what they're seeing from Republicans.
But at the end of the day, the maps are pretty much set. They are, you know, the playing field is set. Democrats are going to have one opportunity. And if the general atmospherics remain where they are, there are going to be more seats that are competitive this time. You know, we were looking a while ago at, you know, a lot of Democrats at, you know, places where looking at a net gain of 20, 30 seats coming, not, you know, in the election, right, that we could pick up 20 or 30 seats.
Republicans right now look like they might have clawed back nine through all these. It's still good atmospherics for Democrats if they can capitalize on them, if they can keep people motivated, and if they can organize.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: And let's not forget why President Trump did this. He did this because he sees the poll numbers.
ELLEITHEE: Yeah.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: He sees the unpopularity of the party, and he's trying to, you know, sort of win these elections any way that he can so that he doesn't face his own reckoning with a Democratic Caucus.
WHITLOCK: To add to that really fast. Just one thing I'd add, I think you're exactly right. I think Republicans aren't going to take these map changes for granted. As in, they don't need to compete. I think most exactly right. The dynamics are still what they are.
Republicans have to fight for every inch. But one thing that congressman, that the congressman said that I would just challenge is that this began with Texas. This began with New York, but it also began with the census and the reapportionment that had so many obvious errors that landed in the side of Democrats.
And so, Republicans have had frustration on that. That's, I think, what President Trump really based a lot of this frustration off of and starting these --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Remember who the president was during the census?
WHITLOCK: I mean, I think that --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I just -- I don't recall who was it? Oh, oh, it was President Trump.
WHITLOCK: But I just don't see what that refutes though.
MATTINGLY: Joe. Joe, go ahead.
CUNNINGHAM: Yeah. No, can't jump in here. And just note that there's only one party that's put a bill on the House floor to ban gerrymandering. And that's a Democratic Party. It's a bill that I voted for.
[16:10:00] And I think I want to reiterate why it is that Republicans in South Carolina are redistricting. It's at the behest of President Trump. And the last time that President Trump meddled in a midterm election when he was president was back in 2018, when he ousted Mark Sanford in South Carolina's first congressional district, a district that Trump carried by 13 points.
I came in and flipped that seat in 2018 because of that. So, I think people need to understand that the reach and the breadth of which Democrats can attain in this redistricting process, in this environment. And if Democrats begin to repair their own brand.
MATTINGLY: You identified three potential seats. Maybe that could as kind of the diffusion of Clyburn voters moved into other districts. Do you think that they're in play this cycle because of where the president currently sits, where the Republicans currently sits?
CUNNINGHAM: With that -- without a doubt, without a doubt. And Republicans will tell you that privately. Again, the only reason this is going on right now is because President Trump is putting pressure on South Carolina Republicans that -- you know, behind closed doors.
They'll tell you this is -- this is a bad move and a bad idea. And, you know, they'll learn a hard lesson, come to the midterms.
MATTINGLY: Mo, when you talk to Democrats right now, are they thinking through that? Like, we need to make sure we've got good candidates in these places to maybe if the district net is changing by 10 or 12 points. We got a shot in South Carolina --
ELLEITHEE: I mean, I think -- I think Democrats are looking state by state now and figuring out what the game plan is in each of these districts. Right. And that's what they need to do because if we think we are just going to turn the table by fighting this fight, the redistricting fight between now and this November, that's the wrong fight.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: It's late, though, to be picking and choosing candidates. I mean, we're already halfway through the process of the primaries. So, I mean --
ELLEITHEE: But they need to be going -- right, they need to rethink what their strategy is. And I think the congressman is absolutely right. We've got to be focusing on the brand right now. We've got to be focusing on what the message is.
What is the alternative for those people who look at this president and look at this Republican Party and say they are not fighting for me, Democrats, if they're going to win in some of these new districts, have to show how they will.
MATTINGLY: Joe, I just want to close with you. I mean, are you having those conversations with people? Is -- are Democrats in South Carolina thinking through like, okay, who can we put up right now?
CUNNINGHAM: Well, I think I would counter that -- there's this notion that the Democratic establishment and leadership selects candidates or recruits them. I was never recruited to run for office. You know, my conscience recruited me. So, I think you have a lot of South Carolinians who are seeing what's going on right now with affordability and everything and thinking to themselves, I need to stand up and do something.
So we're waiting on all those heroes to step up and do something. Every single congressional district in South Carolina, if those lines are redrawn and filing period is reopened.
MATTINGLY: It was funny how many people after the fact took credit for your rise, Congressman, that I'm sure you would probably listen to him and be like, I don't remember you being there when I started this campaign.
CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, yeah. No, I mean, I never got called from the DCCC. I never got called. You know, it's an R plus 13 district. They weren't looking at this seat back in 2018. And so, you know, me, Ben McAdams --
MATTINGLY: Yeah.
CUNNINGHAM: -- Kendra Horn, all these people. They're -- they're on the fringes. And so, I think that reach may be just the same in 2026 as it was back in 2018, possibly better.
MATTINGLY: All right. One note, Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen will be on with Abby Phillip tonight at 10:00 p.m. Eastern.
Joe Cunningham, thank you very, very much, my friend.
The rest of my panel, you're sticking around. Stay with us.
Well, coming up in THE ARENA, a political food fight and a key Senate race. And it seems everyone has an opinion. We'll explain.
But first, President Trump enroute back to Washington after his summit with China's president in Beijing. New details on what the two leaders discussed, including what they agreed on and what's still up in the air.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: On Taiwan, he does not want to see a fight for independence, because that would be a very strong confrontation. And I heard him out I didn't know -- I didn't make -- I didn't make a comment on it. I heard him out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Would the U.S. defend Taiwan if it came to it?
TRUMP: I don't want to say I'm not going to say that. There's only one person that knows that. You know who it is? Me. I'm the only person.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: President Trump refusing to say whether the U.S. would defend Taiwan from China. This after he wrapped up a high stakes summit with Chinese Leader Xi Jinping.
Trump was also asked about whether the U.S. would continue arms sales to Taiwan, and he sounded rather noncommittal, at least for now. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: What about the arms sales to Taiwan?
TRUMP: I'll make a determination over the next fairly short period of time.
REPORTER: You're not necessarily going to go ahead? It was your proposal.
TRUMP: I'll make a determination. Good to see you. I have to speak to the person that right now, as you know, you know who he is, that's running Taiwan.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: CNN White House correspondent Alayna Treene is with us. We're also joined by CNN senior international correspondent Will Ripley in Taiwan.
And, Alayna, I'm interested in what you're hearing from folks at the White House today, those who are not on an airplane or very jet lagged at this point because the strategic ambiguity is kind of a central component of the one-China policy. What is your sense of where the president is going here?
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Look, he was vague, sure, but less vague, I would actually argue than what we've typically heard from past presidents and predecessors who toe this line very carefully.
[16:20:02]
I do think, you know, too, that clip you played specifically of him, you know, saying he still needs to make a decision when it comes to arms sales.
I mean, I'd remind you, Congress passed a $14 billion deal to sell arms to Taiwan back in January. So, I'm sure that is, you know, causing some anxiety among people who had thought that that was already something that was going through. But then he also brought up how in one of his conversations with Xi, you know, talked about how Xi says independence is a very touchy subject for the Chinese president, which I think is probably an understatement. And then went on to say that he hasn't committed to anything either way. Listen to how he put it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: On Taiwan, he doesn't want to see a movement for independence. He says, look, you know, we've had it for thousands of years. And then at a certain period of time, it left that we were going to get it back. On Taiwan, he feels very strongly. I made no commitment either way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TREENE: So, look, I'm saying I need no commitment either way. I mean, clearly this was going to be a subject that I think many people were watching very closely. We actually heard from many members on Capitol Hill, including Republicans, saying that they hoped the president wouldn't go to China and maybe see Taiwan as potential leverage to get something on the Iran war. It doesn't appear that something that actually happened.
We also heard from the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, making clear that the policy, the long U.S. policy toward Taiwan, that strategic ambiguity that you referenced, Phil, is still very much the U.S. position today, as we look at the president wrapping up his trip in China.
So, we'll see what this leads to. But I do think Trump kind of left it open ended, and that's something I'm sure and you'll hear from Will about this might be causing some anxiety among those in Taiwan who look at the U.S. as one of their strongest allies.
MATTINGLY: Yeah, there is no perfect, more perfect segue straight to Will Ripley than -- Will, what is the sense? What are you hearing right now in the wake of what we heard from President Trump?
WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Look, it could have been a lot worse. I think people here in Taipei are used to not necessarily hanging on every word from President Trump, but reading the overall impression that the -- that the words provide and clearly what it seems like happened is there was a conversation about Taiwan. Taiwan loomed large over the meeting, as was expected.
The foreign minister here in Taipei, after news broke about President Trump's Air Force gaggle, just pointed to the remarks by Secretary Rubio, saying the United States said very clearly that U.S. policy on Taiwan remains unchanged. Rubio even warned it would be a, quote, terrible mistake for China to use force.
And President Trump did say that he heard Xi Jinping out, but he did not make a comment. Now the $14 billion in arms sales. This is a really tricky one. Yes. U.S. lawmakers approved it back in January. But actually, Taiwan's parliament did not approve the full funding until a matter of days before President Trump's trip.
So, the fact that there's been this delay could also partially be because of the fact that there's a real divide here in Taiwan about military spending. You have the president, Lai Ching-te, who was asking for $40 billion for weapons, including $25 billion in arms sales from the U.S. and then you have the opposition controlled parliament, led by the opposition leader, Cheng Li-wun, and she and her party have been trying to push for a much smaller amount of military spending. And in fact, the $14 billion was just approved, as I said, along with an $11 billion package. So, $25 billion combined right before President Trump flew to Asia.
So, I think now that Taiwan has approved the funding, they're hoping that president Trump will authorize the additional $14 billion as soon as possible. But it may not be, as you know, anxiety, you know, wracking situation as one might expect, given that there had been this internal delay getting that funding pushed through.
One other quick note, I would say, Phil, is that when President Trump said he wants to speak to the person running Taiwan, it's unclear which person he's referring to. If he was talking about speaking with Taiwan's elected president, Lai Ching-te, that would be obviously extraordinary, because Lai Ching-te hasn't even gotten approval to transit through the United States during his presidency.
But if he's talking about the opposition leader who is going to be traveling to the United States next month and hopes to meet with Trump allies and lawmakers, and he -- and that's the person he was referring to, because Cheng Li-wun just met with Xi Jinping in Beijing a couple of weeks ago, and she's hoping to meet with Trump.
So, which one is he going to meet with? So that's going to be probably the big question people are asking here.
MATTINGLY: That's such a great point. Alayna has so much more reporting to do over the weekend.
Will Ripley live in Taiwan. Alayna Treene from the north lawn of the White House. Thank you both so much. Great reporting as always.
And joining us now is Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California. He's a member of the Oversight and Armed Services Committee and serves as the top Democrat on the China Select Committee.
[16:25:02]
Congressman, really appreciate your time.
Just to start with, it was always interesting covering President Trump's predecessor, who just outright said the thing you weren't supposed to say as a U.S. president when it came to defending Taiwan in the event of an attack. The president seems to be hewing back towards the traditional way of not commenting one way or the other. But the arms sales reticence to commit seem to be pretty notable. What was your take on it?
REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): Well, we should have, as you pointed out, strategic ambiguity. But the Taiwan Relations Act requires us to provide support to Taiwan. And the arms sales passed the Congress almost unanimously. There is a clarity that China and Taiwan can discuss the future of Taiwan. But what they cannot do is have China militarily coerce Taiwan.
And the six assurances negotiated under President Reagan, the six assurances to Taiwan was that an American president would never seek Chinas permission to be able to provide Taiwan with arms sales. So, we should have these sales go through, and I hope that the president doesn't back off.
MATTINGLY: What's your kind of broader sense of this meeting? It's always been an interesting dynamic. It wasn't the first term as well this time around. I think what we have heard from Trump's readout of his conversation was very much what you would expect from Xi Jinping in a meeting with the U.S. president.
Do you think there were deliverables that the president brought home here?
KHANNA: Not enough. I mean, he got 200 airplanes, a commitment. But in his first term, he got China to agree to 300 Boeing airplanes. And that's why Boeings stock fell. And he will see what the deal is on soybeans. But we did not get a commitment on China not having a monopoly on rare earths. I mean, there's still saying they're going to restrict those at the end of the year. We didn't get a commitment on them not subsidizing.
My broader problem is that the president shouldn't be doing the bidding of American Wall Street business leaders and tech billionaires. He should be doing the bidding of the people of the American worker, the American farmer, the American manufacturer. And I don't think he made progress on what they're facing with dumping in Chinese subsidies.
MATTINGLY: The idea of having Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang on the plane with him, on Air Force One with him. There were a number of business leaders there, but I think the chips made by Nvidia are obviously a central piece of a back and forth between China and the U.S. the president kind of saying clear the way for the highest end chips to be sold to certain Chinese firms. The Chinese, not necessarily giving approval of that yet.
I'm interested in how you think this ends up.
KHANNA: Well, we should, of course, restrict the Blackwells and the Rubens and the highest end chips. And the question then is what does China get that is not the advanced technology, but my broader problem is that we went begging for China to put $1 trillion into American factories. Really?
I just was on a tour through Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio. There's a Chinese glass manufacturer, Fuyao, in Ohio. They're hiring undocumented labor. They're abusing that labor. They're getting Chinese subsidies, and they're putting an American manufacturer of glass out of business, or really straining their business in Meadville, Pennsylvania.
I don't want more Chinese factories in the United States that are going to put American workers out of business. And so, my problem with the president is he railed against these global elites, that he's taking these global elites to cut deals with China.
MATTINGLY: Would you like to find out that the president was able to leverage Chinas relationship with Iran? And its -- frankly, its domestic need for the Strait of Hormuz to eventually open again, despite their stockpiles to make some type of diplomatic progress on the ongoing conflict slash cease fire slash, wherever we're at right now?
KHANNA: I hope he did. I mean, we need to end this war. And like President Obama, he needs to actually engage in diplomacy. President Obama had 97 percent of the enriched uranium in Iran out. And he did it without firing a single shot. How did he do it? He got China, Russia, the Europeans and NATO allies negotiating with Iran.
So, we need China as part of the solution. And my hope is that the president made progress in ending this war, getting the Strait of Hormuz open and having a negotiated settlement with the Iranian government.
MATTINGLY: Before I let you go, I do want to ask about the gubernatorial race taking place in your state. Do you think Governor Newsom needs to come in and endorse at this point that his staying out of the race is creating uncertainty and anxiety in your party?
KHANNA: No, I don't. I mean, it's up to the governor what he wants to do. But the race is really down to either Tom Steyer or Xavier Becerra.
[16:30:00]
Steve Hilton will be one of the Republicans, and I've endorsed Tom Steyer. There are others who support Becerra. It's really going to be one of those two, but I don't have a concern that a Democrat will get shut out. Of course, the governor is free to endorse, but it's not going to prevent a Democrat from winning.
MATTINGLY: California Congressman Ro Khanna, I appreciate your time, sir. Thank you.
KHANNA: Thank you.
MATTINGLY: Well, up next in THE ARENA, what the president noticed in China that he says should be replicated in the U.S.
Plus, the president weighs in on the all-important Texas Senate race, including if and when he might endorse one of the Republican candidates.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: There's never been a record of endorsements like this, which is a great honor as far as I'm concerned. No, MAGA is a movement the likes of which our country has never seen before. It's never been in.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:35:14]
MATTINGLY: Welcome back.
President Donald Trump is now on his way home from Beijing, but his historic summit with the Chinese president was not exactly the first thing he wanted to share with the American people on his truth social platform. The president instead posting this about his White House ballroom project, writing, quote, "China has a ballroom, and so should the USA. It's under construction, ahead of schedule and will be the finest facility of its kind anywhere in the USA," adding that it will be opening around September 2028.
My panel is back with me now and, Matt, like the two most powerful leaders representing the two most powerful countries, the two largest militaries, the two largest economies. Really tense moment geopolitically right now on a number of different levels, like why?
WHITLOCK: Well, I think part of it is he's got a low blood pressure. He's not really fazed by anything. We've seen that through his entire career.
And so, it's not a huge surprise to me that, you know, he'll be going through these really high level things and be thinking about, you know, wait a second. What about that ballroom?
For me, I just can't get the outrage, you know, because he's not even going to enjoy it. It's going to be done in September of 2028, when he's almost out the door. And so, when you see Democrats acting like this is the end of democracy, to me, it just feels like focusing on the wrong things here. And we talk about --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Somebody is focusing on the wrong thing, for sure.
ELLEITHEE: Exactly.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But it ain't -- but it aint Democrats or it ain't reporters.
WHITLOCK: But I think when you look at Democrats having the worst brand in history, part of it is because the outrage chasing the ball everywhere, people don't really care about this that much. This is a very Washington story.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Oh, absolutely untrue.
WHITLOCK: I poll people. I've seen a lot of polling on this. This does not rate in the top 20 concerns. You are dealing with.
ELLEITHEE: You know what? The high cost of living.
WHITLOCK: I agree with that.
ELLEITHEE: It polls a lot higher. Gas prices poll a lot higher.
WHITLOCK: Oh, completely.
ELLEITHEE: And the president didn't talk about those things coming out of the summit. He didn't talk about what deals he actually cut to help the American worker, to help people across the country. No. He talked about the ballroom that nobody wants.
WHITLOCK: But I think they've been doing days of interviews about these other issues. The idea that he had one truth social post about the ballroom, I don't think suggests that's the only thing he's thinking about. I think that he came back.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: There was an assassination attempt against him, and he turned it into a plea for the ballroom. I mean, the ballroom becomes everything. Everything comes. It's like this Venn diagram that everything comes back to this obsession with the ballroom. I personally, yes, I'm tired of hearing about the ballroom. I do --
WHITLOCK: But do you think it'd be a bad thing to have?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I don't care.
WHITLOCK: Exactly. I think that he talks about it. I don't think that means that's his entire priority set.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: No, but he talks about it all the time. He plays with an erector set. He brings people in and shows him the little -- the little model of the ballroom.
MATTINGLY: We should say --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: He holds placards about it.
MATTINGLY: This wasn't the only thing he was thinking about. There was also this post. This is a statue now standing at Doral that was commissioned by a large group of political supporters who just wanted a statue of yours truly. I very much appreciate their support and all that they went through to get it done. They are very good people. Those playing the blue monster at Doral are absolutely in love with it. Congratulations to all involved. With time, it will become a landmark.
So Matt was right. He's not just talking about the ballroom.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: It's true.
WHITLOCK; He's got statues. Come on, guys.
THOMPSON: The through line is monuments to himself.
WHITLOCK: But I think that the ballroom is something that presidents of both parties have wanted for a long time, and presidents of both parties for a long time will enjoy. And it is a security issue. He's faced three different assassination attempts. So I don't know why this wouldn't be just a natural thing we would all want to have.
THOMPSON: I will say two things. One is Democrats. You're right that the ballroom is not high on the polling list. One, one thing Democrats are hoping to make high in the polling list is corruption. And they are hoping to take the ballroom and make it into a symbol of that. Given that a lot of the companies that funded, especially initially, were companies that have gotten a lot of carve outs on tariffs, are companies that were on air force one to go to China this weekend and have a lot of business before the government. And I think that is where Democrats are hoping it could become a political liability for the president.
WHITLOCK: I don't think that's wrong at all. I think that that's a smart play for them to make. But I think if you were to also ask people in a poll, what would you rather have private companies fund this ballroom or, you know, taxpayers --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But they're not because there's $1 billion that is coming due to the American taxpayer.
WHITLOCK: For security enhancement.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: No, come on, Matt, this would have been a great thing to have said, you know, maybe a month ago. But now this ballroom is going to be hung around the neck of every single GOP person.
WHITLOCK: I hope that Democrats talk about this nonstop.
ELLEITHEE: You ask the American people, which would they rather have a ballroom or lower gas prices, a ballroom or a president who is focused on making their lives cheaper? I think that's pretty clear.
WHITLOCK: I think you're exactly right.
ELLEITHEE: President is putting out a lot. I don't see the Truth Social posts about lowering gas prices. I don't see the Truth Social post about making your life easier. He's talking about the monuments to himself.
[16:40:01]
THOMPSON: I will --
MATTINGLY: Go ahead, Alex.
THOMPSON: I will say to your point, Matt, there are many Democrats that have served in past administrations that don't think necessarily the idea of a ballroom is a terrible thing. As one person from the Biden administration put it to me, right idea, wrong designer. And I think it's more so sort of the way he's gone about it. And sort of, to Lulu's point, his obsession of talking about it at every single event that are not that are not about the ballroom that they're hoping will become a political.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: You know, this isn't smart politics. But also, it's not smart politics.
WHITLOCK: Mo is exactly right in what he said. People would rather have lower gas prices than a ballroom, but no normal person out in Middle America is thinking about that choice. The ballroom conversation is incredibly D.C.-focused, and so that's why I don't think it's going to really raise.
ELLEITHEE: They'll see the choice throughout this campaign.
MATTINGLY: I'm interested to see how Democrats frame the idea of like goldfish, there's too many things to chase is one of his superpowers --
WHITLOCK: Yeah.
MATTINGLY: -- on some level. And so, there's a way to package all together. I assume we will see. It does feel very.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Oh, I can already see the ads.
MATTINGLY: All right. Well, ahead in THE ARENA, the food faux pas lighting up one of the year's biggest midterm races. We're going to taco about -- taco about -- taco about it with the host of "Tacos of Texas" podcast.
Stay with us.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MANDO RAYO, PODCAST HOST: Texas, if you know, if you know, you know, you got to get that Tex-Mex, right? So part Texas, part Mex, 100 percent Texano. On the Mex side, you have chorizo con nuevo. On the Tex side, you got bacon, egg and cheese. So what's the middle ground? Potato, egg and cheese, people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:45:58]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think I know your order.
JAMES TALARICO (D), TEXAS SENATE CANDIDATE: We have breakfast tacos. That's right. I come here a lot.
BARACK OBAMA, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: I could tell.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: Oh, that taco order. It is fueling real debate in Texas because there's no other serious things going on.
The Democratic senate candidate, James Talarico, has started a furious debate after getting his usual order while campaigning with former President Obama earlier this week.
Some seriously questioning the order itself. Is it too basic? Should he have gotten something with meat? Others wondering about the timing. Who eats a breakfast taco at 2:00 in the afternoon? Others wondering about things that matter.
Joining our panel, however, is somebody who's going to explain why this matters, frankly, because, as I told him during the break, as an Ohioan, I am self-aware enough to know this is not my area of expertise. I have no insight into it whatsoever.
But taco journalist Mando Rayo. He is the host of "Tacos of Texas" podcast.
Mando, potato, egg and cheese, acceptable or no?
RAYO: Totally acceptable. It's what we have in Texas. It doesn't matter if it's 9:00 a.m. or 2:00 in the afternoon. You know, I think it's like a really good middle ground of a breakfast taco. And there's nothing wrong with some, you know, some roasted potatoes, some eggs, yellow cheese, because you know, its Tex-Mex and then some salsa. Some salsa to go with that, too.
MATTINGLY: Are you surprised that this became a thing all of a sudden?
RAYO: You know, a little bit, but not necessarily because like, when you think about, you know, the state of the world we're in, everything is a hot topic, right? And so especially when a politician goes in and goes into a taco shop and you're always going to find out, okay, is he ordering a legit taco?
And so, you know, we grew up in Texas. You grew up with potato, egg and cheese. It was like something that grandma made, something that your mom made that, you know, was -- it's hearty and it lasts the whole day. And but being, you know, being in Texas, you know, you do have a lot of choices, some with meat, some without definitely some with spies and definitely lots of cheese.
MATTINGLY: So say hypothetically, our friend Matt Whitlock is running for president and he is down in Texas, and you want to give him advice for the best taco order for the campaign trail. What would it be?
RAYO: Okay, so it all depends on -- on the voters. So, if you want the Latino vote, you got to go with chorizo and egg. You know? And -- but if you want you know, I think I think if you're in like Texas and central Texas, you know, a good hard working blue collar taco is barbacoa, you know?
And so -- and so, if you know anything about barbacoa, it's steamed beef cheek and its delicious. Its sweet, goes great with cilantro and onions and some salsa or even some pico. So I would say that that would be my second choice.
And then definitely got to get some migas, you know, some migas is a fried tostadas or chips, mixed with eggs and jalapenos and serranos and, and tomatoes and onions. And, you know, so, it's a good mix of those.
And I think that's a good representation of what -- of the types of tacos you can get in Texas -- especially, I'm talking about breakfast tacos specifically. Like there's definitely some that like street tacos, carnitas, or al pastor. You can definitely do that.
But if you're going to wake up, it doesn't matter at 7:00 a.m. or 2:00 in the afternoon. We are the live music capital of the world. So, you got to start with a breakfast taco.
MATTINGLY: I agree. The one thing I will not stand for is attacking somebody for eating a breakfast taco in the afternoon. That is ludicrous and out of bounds.
[16:50:00]
RAYO: Right. Yeah.
MATTINGLY: Yeah. Lulu, what do you -- what is your thought on this?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, I have many thoughts about this. I am not of Mexican descent, but I like myself a good taco. And frankly, and I lived in Mexico for a long time.
The big controversy here is actually, is that a flour tortilla or is it a corn tortilla? Nobody brought that up. I am offended about that because that is the real question. Is he like white bread or does he like, you know, you know, maize? I mean, what is it? What is it that he's doing there?
The second thing is, why is anyone talking about Obama? What did he eat? I havent seen any coverage of that. What did Obama have?
WHITLOCK: That's a good question.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, come on.
MATTINGLY: Two ovens.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I mean, this is two ovens.
So, yeah, I think I think this taco, tragedy, not taco. What is what is it? Taco gate -- taco gate is no -- is no taco gate at all.
MATTINGLY: Matt?
THOMPSON: Well, actually I -- yeah, I'm going to try to argue why it matters politically and, and it's because food -- and I think he sort of said it. Food represents culture and politics is about relatability. And it's why food controversies have been a thing in politics for a long time. Bill de Blasio eating New York pizza with a knife and fork. Obama in 2007, you know, saying, have you been to Whole Foods lately and seen the price of arugula? You had John Kerry in 2004, try to get a Philly cheesesteak and order it with Swiss cheese.
MATTINGLY: John Kasich eating everything in 2016.
WHITLOCK: Looking like a psychopath. THOMPSON: And the most famous Texas one is Gerald Ford going to Texas
and trying to eat a tamale without taking it out of the shell, the husk. So, you know, this has. And maybe it is frivolous. It's dumb, but it is -- the reason it becomes controversy is because food becomes about culture.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: No, I agree with you, but I just don't think that this was a bad taco order. I think this was totally legit.
THOMPSON: Totally.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I think it's totally legit.
WHITLOCK: Can I rain on everyone's parade? The politics of this. Part of the reason that this is so bad for Talarico is he has said we have an existential need to reduce meat consumption to fight climate change, which I think is one of the worst things you can possibly say, running for senate in Texas in one of the biggest meat producing states in the country.
But I also to add some levity, appreciate that there's another state food litmus test like the cheesesteaks in Philly. We should have a taco test for every Texas candidate.
MATTINGLY: Yes, 100 percent. I knew you were going to say --
WHITLOCK: I'm sorry I had to do it.
MATTINGLY: This is like, this is like Whitlock --
WHITLOCK: I'm so sorry, everyone. I had to --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I want to just say chorizo is pork. It's not beef.
MATTINGLY: Most importantly, Mando Rayo, you made us all smarter and a lot hungrier. Thank you so much for joining us.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Where are my tacos? Give me my tacos.
RAYO: I know you got to get some.
MATTINGLY: Well, breaking news, CNN has exclusively learned that the governor of Colorado will grant clemency to former elections clerk Tina Peters. Peters is the only Trump ally still behind bars for a conviction related to trying to overturn the 2020 election, and the president has repeatedly called for her release.
CNN senior reporter Isaac Dovere joins us now with his exclusive.
What are we learning here?
ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, listen, I spoke with Governor Polis just a little while ago, and he explained to me his rationale in this decision. Tina Peters is in prison for not crimes directly related to election denialism. She was convicted of letting basically -- getting improper access to a room where there was elections equipment in Colorado. So that was the crime.
But at issue here is that at her sentencing, the judge talked about it in the context of all the other things that were going on. It does, though, after the January 6th rioters' pardons the President Trump made on his first day in office mean that Tina Peters is the last person in prison for anything related to this. Those were state level charges, which is why Trump could not pardon her for it.
Polis could. He spent a lot of time over the last couple of months thinking about it, getting a lot of pressure, he told me getting pressure privately from Trump, talking to a lot of Coloradans, talking to the district attorney who convicted her. And he decided to go forward with it.
But importantly, I said to him, usually clemency comes with some level of contrition. She has not said that. And he said to me, actually, she did provide a statement in her clemency request, and ill read it to you, Phil.
She wrote, "I made a mistake four years ago. I misled the secretary of state when allowing a person to gain access to county voting equipment. That was wrong. Going forward, I will make sure that my actions always follow the law."
Now, of course, that doesn't say I broke the law or admitting it that way, but it is much further than peters has gone in. Anything that she has said or that her allies have been posting on her twitter account for her over the course of this last couple of years.
MATTINGLY: Do we know when she may be released?
DOVERE: Well, look, what happened is that she had a nine-year sentence. Polis cut it down. He did not pardon her. He said he wants her to be a felon. And this remain a crime. But the sentence is now cut down to four and a half years, which means she's eligible for parole in about a month. Which means by the summer, she could be back out. And a free woman.
MATTINGLY: Wow. Great reporting as always, my friend Isaac Dovere. Thanks so much.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:59:35]
MATTINGLY: Thanks so much to my panel. You can watch more of THE ARENA tomorrow. THE ARENA SATURDAY airs at noon and again at 4:00 p.m. Eastern, right heron CNN. Be sure to join us.
Meantime, Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Hey, Phillip. Good to see you. We'll look for more next week in THE ARENA.
Did President Trump just open the door to the U.S. no longer selling Taiwan defensive arms?
"THE LEAD" starts right now.
