Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Now: Georgia Voters Pick GOP Candidate To Face Sen. Jon Ossoff; Vance Pressed On Economy, Trump Priorities On "The View"; Sources: Many Top Trump Officials Expressed Concern That Iran Would Not Hold Up Its End Of a Deal With U.S. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired June 16, 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]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Kind of gets better, right?
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Yeah, yeah.
KEILAR: Oreos --
SANCHEZ: Shout out to the caramel apple empanada that they saw at Taco Bell. I'm pretty sure that's fried.
KEILAR: Wow.
SANCHEZ: So when this goes away, you could just go to Taco Bell and kind of get the same thing. Why did it ever go away?
KEILAR: "THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" starts right now.
You know, probably health.
(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 Tuesday.
Right now, voters are voting. Voting underway in key primaries and special elections from right here in the nation's capital down south to Alabama, West California. But really the most important race of the day going on in Georgia, where Democrats desperately trying to hold on to the Senate seat that's currently occupied by Jon Ossoff.
Now, he's running unopposed in his primary, but we'll learn soon who he will face in November. It's either going to be Derek Dooley, who's a former football coach, backed by the governor, Brian Kemp, or Congressman Mike Collins, a MAGA loyalist who recently secured the endorsement from President Donald Trump.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: With your vote in the primary, Mike will face off against George's weak and very pathetic Dumbocrat. He's a Dumbocrat senator. His name is Jon Ossoff. He's a stiff and everybody in Washington you don't even hear his name mentioned. He's completely betrayed your state and who attacks Georgia values with every single vote he takes in the U.S. Senate.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
HUNT: The president clearly aware the race is crucial and it's not just because of control of Congress, which is, of course, at stake in 2026, but because we're looking ahead at future elections. Georgia is a proving ground for would-be Democratic presidential candidates, Democrats like Jon Ossoff. If he can win again in Georgia, let's be real, it would immediately send him toward the front of a PAC that is likely to be extraordinarily large, very crowded field of Democrats running in 2028.
Now, Ossoff recently said he has, quote, "zero interest," end quote, in running for president. Where have we heard that before?
Anyway, that aside, he does seem to be practicing the not-so-subtle art of the easily clipped, easily shared viral moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
SEN. JON OSSOFF (D-GA): Rent, power, groceries, and healthcare have all hit all-time highs this year.
We were promised a golden age.
You're seeing what I'm seeing, right? The president posting about the Obamas like a Klansman at 1:00 a.m.
If you're involved in any of this, next year you'll be raising your right hand and swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God in front of the United States Congress.
Let's make sure they hear it all all the way down at Mar-a-Lago that Georgia will bow to no king.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
HUNT: All right, let's get off the sidelines, head into THE ARENA. My panel is here.
The co-host of "The Interview" podcast from "New York Times" and a CNN contributor Lulu Garcia-Navarro; editor in chief of "The Dispatch", and the CNN political commentator Jonah Goldberg is with us; former senior adviser to President Obama, CNN chief political analyst David Axelrod; former Republican Congressman of Louisiana, Garret Graves, and we're also joined by Democratic strategist and CNN political commentator Paul Begala.
Welcome to all of you.
And, Axe, I wanted you and Paul both here for this conversation because --
DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: I'm always glad to be with Paul. HUNT: Because --
PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I love Axe.
AXELROD: Give us a moment.
HUNT: Thank you.
BEGALA: Give us a room.
HUNT: Here, yes, you can all come in THE ARENA. It's, you know, we'll make it smaller just for the two of you.
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I feel comfortable. I'm just saying.
HUNT: Axe, this is going to be a hugely crowded field. Ossoff is very clearly having a moment, right? There's pieces in "The New York Times" and "Politico". "The Times" piece headline is "Why Everyone Wants Jon Ossoff to Run for President". David Plouffe told J-Mart that just in the last few months with donors and activists. You hear his name come up and it's because of the videos. Most have never met him, most have not watched a full speech, but these clips have made him a credible presidential candidate.
What do you make of this bubble around him and how durable it is?
AXELROD: Well, durability is one question and that only gets proven when you're out there and you have to do all the events in the decathlon that is the presidential race. He's very good at what he's doing. He's young. He's dynamic. He has an anti-corruption message, which is very ripe at this moment for obvious reasons.
So I mean, I think I take him very seriously and I do think that he's going to have a lot of suitors among party activists and voters if he comes out of it. I take him very seriously and I do think that he's going to have a lot of suitors among party activists and voters if he comes out of this, as I think he may. But how he will do and how durable it is, that is a question that will be answered.
HUNT: Well, he's got to win, right, in Georgia.
AXELROD: Well, I think that he yes, he does have to win. Yes. Let me say, if he loses in Georgia, I think he'll be a less formidable presidential candidate.
HUNT: Yeah, fair enough.
Paul -- losing, we'll do that. Paul Begala, "The Times" story put it this way. They said if you were cooking up an ideal 28 candidate in a lab, he and let's face it, it's probably a he would look a lot like Ossoff. He's young and handsome with a picture perfect family, a beautiful wife who works as an OBGYN, two small daughters, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Very sort of complimentary if you will.
What do you make of all of it? BEGALA: Well, I think it's real. I think Axe is right. And I don't want to jinx some Axe, but this guy reminds me a little of Barack Obama in the Senate. Just a spectacular order who has this gift of storytelling, specificity. He has a clip out there talking about some sweetheart deal in Kazakhstan that I'd never even heard of, and he explains it so clearly.
He will have to win, and it will not be easy. But this -- this guy has come on and captured attention and electricity. He's not even 40 years old yet, which I love. JFK was 43. Jimmy Carter was 52. Bill Clinton was 46. Barack was 47.
OK, that's Democrats. That's what usually when then -- I love Joe Biden, but I think he was 138. Democrats want youth and if I can quote my brother acts, we want the remedy, not the replica. This guy is a remedy to a lot of what's been going wrong in Washington.
HUNT: Paul, you mentioned Obama. I mean, if you look at the -- just look at the logo that Ossoff is using in his campaigns. I mean, the O in Ossoff actually physically looks like the O in Obama, Jonah Goldberg.
I mean, of course, Republicans went through this situation where they had a dozen-plus presidential candidates. There was, what do we call it, the kids table debate stage.
And it did hand them Donald Trump. Where do you think we are in this sort of jockeying here? Because, I mean, look, let's be real. You watched the announcement Newsom put out yesterday? I mean, this is already underway.
JONAH GOLDBERG, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah, no, for sure. Just on the point about Obama echo in Ossoff, this is a very common story. Particularly, I have to say, among Democrats, there's a version of on the Republican side, a whole generation of people were basically JFK imitators. John Kerry started signing his name JFK after JFK. They all talked about how they got into politics.
Whether it's Shapiro in Pennsylvania or Ossoff in Georgia, you can tell the echoes of Obama that these are people who grew up watching him. And you can just see the influence within the party. That said, I think on the Republican side, what's interesting here is that you're seeing a real split.
First of all, Brian Kemp is one of the last guys standing to really stand up to Donald Trump and still be popular in his own state and have a serious machine. And the guy he's endorsed, Dooley, is representative of a coalition of more urban, more business-oriented, looks more like the old GOP. And his opponent, who Trump has endorsed, Collins, is more rural, more exurban, represents the new MAGA version. And so in some ways, it's kind of like a Spanish Civil War about what's going to happen in the Republican Party post-Trump.
Congressman, do you think either of these two Republican candidates have an equal chance to beat Ossoff? GARRET GRAVES (R), FORMER LOUISIANA CONGRESSMAN: I do. I served with Mike Collins. I've read a lot about Dooley. I think that Ossoff is in general, I think he's ideologically incompatible with Georgia. I think Georgia's a Republican state. I think some mistakes were made in previous races, and I think that you put the right Republican candidate, you run the right race, you can send Ossoff off.
HUNT: Lulu, what do you think about kind of the way Ossoff is positioning himself? Because I will say, if you listen to some of these viral things, I mean, he could fit right in with the progressive left in a lot of ways, but in other ways he presents differently.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I'm actually curious who you think the right candidate is because that's the main question for Republicans, right? Who is the right candidate to win in Georgia?
GRAVES: You know, look, I always defer to locals.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I don't mean to take over the questioning here, but I just wanted to hear.
GRAVES: No, it's a great question. I always defer to locals. And Congressman Brian Jack, who I think is politically astute, He thinks that Mike Collins is the right guy.
Now look, Governor Deal has done an amazing job and been able to, excuse me -- Kemp, to negotiate some really tough challenges in Georgia and so I have a lot of respect for him. I don't know which one's best. I know that in the primary that Collins was able to outperform Dooley by 10 points, but we're going to have to wait and see what the voters say.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: So -- yeah, so I mean the reason I ask this is because I think it's really central to what happens in Georgia and what happens to Ossoff, right? Because I don't think that Georgia anymore is a Republican state. It's a swingy state. There's been a lot of influx and a lot of demographic changes that have happened there.
[16:10:04]
And that's why they have two Democratic senators at the moment.
So I think, you know, not to discount the GOP here, but I do think it really matters who is running against Ossoff, and I think the Democrats have faced their version of this, which is, do you choose the more ideological candidate in a swingy state that feeds the base and might get a lot of sort of enthusiasm, or do you run to the middle? And I think the Republicans are sort of facing that enjoyment.
GOLDBERG: But that's sort of the question. Is it going to be the 2022 electorate, which was a Biden kind of electorate, or is it going to be -- is it going to be a presidential year electorate that elects Donald Trump, or is it going to be at a midterm electorate? I think it's more likely going to be a midterm electorate.
AXELROD: Absolutely. I mean, look, midterm elections are referendums on the person in the White House, and he's not trading very high right now. He may be trading a little higher in Georgia. But these issues that Ossoff is raising, they go right at all of what is disturbing people.
And we settle very easily into this left-right debate, but there is this issue of kind of economic distress and disgust about corruption and corruption as it affects the economic policies of the country and so on. And Ossoff has that, and I think you'll see that he bleeds into some of these areas more heavily than you'd expect.
And, you know, I would think he would win this race. And I also don't think that being the most MAGA guy-- I guess the theory is that if you're the most MAGA guy, maybe you'll bring out the base more than the other guy. But Kemp has a great organization there.
GRAVES: He does.
AXELROD: And if Dooley wins, I think it will reflect that. And maybe he'll be a little less tarnished by the president. He hasn't been casting votes with him and for him.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I also think this is just less of a culture war election. I think Republicans have been using that playbook. You're seeing it with Talarico in Texas. I heard echoes of it in what you said to do with Georgia, that he's not, you know, representative of Georgia. I just think right now if you talk to regular voters, it's the economy, it's the economy, it's the economy.
HUNT: Congressman, go ahead and then I want to get Paul back in.
GRAVES: Look -- I agree with both of you in regard to the economy being a big issue. Ossoff certainly attacked that. But first of all, I think it's important to note that I do believe you are going to see a significant reduction in prices over the next few months. I think that the impact of the Iran deal is going to be profound.
Secondly, I do think that it is -- it is important and I'm going to double down this I do think that Georgia is a Republican state. I really do. And then thirdly, and finally, the other things can be interesting and both of you sort of alluded to this, it's going to be interesting watching also off look at long-term what his goals are but at the same time not lose sight of the fact that he's running in Georgia right now. Said another way, I'm not sure that a national Democrat can compete in Georgia.
HUNT: Paul Begala, what do you think?
BEGALA: Well, let me bring a few data points. Okay, they had a primary, both parties did on May 19th. Republicans had two very exciting races, both for governor and for Senate. They outspent the Democrats who only had really one important race for governor. Outspent the Democrats by 75 to one. Republicans spent $100 million on the May 19th primary. Democrats outvoted them by 150,000 voters.
More Democrats turned out in a less heated primary than Republicans did in a red-hot primary. The Republican base is depressed, and independents are moving toward the Ds.
Donald Trump won Georgia just 18 months ago. He is today, depending on the poll you look at, anywhere from six to 20 points underwater. He's hated.
And so I'm just -- I know the congressman wants to say that Georgia is a red state. I've worked in Georgia. I've won in Georgia. It is a swing state, a purple state.
And right now, it is a state supremely angry at Donald Trump for these high prices.
HUNT: Congressman, your name was invoked.
GRAVES: Yeah, which I'll just say again. Right now, prices are high. You can't deny it. But I'll say it again that I think by the time the election comes around, and in fact, I think even the next few weeks, this Iran deal holds. I think you're going to see significant reductions in prices. And I think it takes the wind out of the sails of that argument.
HUNT: All right. Paul Begala, grateful to have you, sir. Thank you very much. I'm glad you and Axe like each other so much. We'll have to have you back again together soon.
Coming up next year in THE ARENA, new details on some of the president's projects, including why the reflecting pool is that color after a multimillion-dollar renovation and the bill taxpayers are reportedly getting for the White House ballroom.
But first, the other side of the potential 2028 lineup, Vice President J.D. Vance getting "The View" treatment today, talking immigration, race, his boss, including those recent comments by the president about loving inflation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What he said is that he loves the fact that the inflation is going to come down when this war is over. That's what he said.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's not what he said.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wait, are you his interpreter or are you his vice president?
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:19:19]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: This is a show of MAGA Republicans, right?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yeah.
VANCE: That's what my media team told me.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
VANCE: Okay, good.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, we'll find out.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Find out. Right now, Vice President J.D. Vance on a mission to sell his new book, explain an Iran agreement, and maybe, maybe sound presidential in the process. The vice president today stopping by "The View" to promote his new book, which details his personal religious journey. Just one of many media stops that Vance has made this week.
In the process, he's been asked about issues like Iran, the economy, and of course, 2028.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: It sometimes seems like, in the past -- I've only been in politics for three years.
[16:20:00]
You elect somebody to do a job, and instead of doing their job, they're worried about the next job. Maybe I'm just different from other politicians like this. I don't plot things out. I make the decisions that are right in front of me. I try to do as well as I can, and then I figure it out when I've got to make a new decision. Because I don't have to make that decision, I just haven't thought about it that much.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Have you ever met a politician who wasn't thinking about what the next job was going to be? Because let me tell you, I've been in this business for a little while now, and I'm not sure I ever have.
But that aside, he says, quote, "I haven't thought about it that much." And as we underscored, we've heard that before from basically every person who was definitely thinking about running for president.
And an even greater sign that the V.P. is definitely thinking about the political future is how he sounded on "The View" today when he defended the president. But the tone he took was interesting. It was not terribly Trumpian. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: What he said is that he loves the fact that the inflation is going to come down when this war is over. That's what he said.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's not what he said.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Wait, are you his interpreter or are you his vice president?
(LAUGHTER)
VANCE: We do have to strike a balance, of course, between enforcing our laws. We don't want to dehumanize people. We inherited an affordability problem. We're doing a lot to make it better. It's going to take a little bit of time. There's a lot more work to do.
I am, frankly, kind of a conspiracy theory on the Epstein stuff, the affordability problem, again, gas, way too high right now, certain things way too high. We believe everybody, whether you're black or white or rich or poor deserves to live in a safe neighborhood.
I think everybody is welcome in our political coalition, frankly, even if you didn't vote for us, everybody is welcome in our country so long as you're an American citizen with the duties and the legal obligations and rights to be here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Jonah Goldberg, there's a lot there.
GOLDBERG: Yeah.
HUNT: This is someone who, well, there's a very online version of J.D. Vance. There was a version of JD Vance that ran for Senate, someone who was pretty sharp, pretty pugnacious, often in appearances like that. This is a different way of doing it.
GOLDBERG: Yeah, points for trying.
Look, I personally think, and I'm a little annoyed that the conventional wisdom is catching up with me, that J.D. Vance has been the most overrated major politician of the last few years. He underperformed every other Republican when he ran for Senate. He had to get establishment Republicans like Mitch McConnell to help him out to get him over the finish line.
This idea that he is going to inherit Trump's mantle is nonsense. There's not going to be a single mantle. There are going to be a bunch of people running as different kinds of MAGA or MAGA-adjacent people, and probably even some normie Republicans.
And I just don't think he's that compelling a character. And he accumulates statements. And my favorite one, which drives me absolutely bawdy, is he believes in this heritage American thing, where he at one point said, if you have an ancestor who fought in the Civil War, you just have more say in our politics than someone who just got here.
And I always was fascinated by the quote because he didn't say which side you had to fight in the Civil War. And he dabbles with stuff, his sort of footsie big tent for neo-Nazis and Nick Fuentes crowd. I think it's based on a really bad political theory.
And I just don't think he has got the talent or the path that a lot of people in Washington seem to think he does.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I think having interviewed him that he is very adept at speaking to the audience that is in front of him and speaking also to the audience that he wants to hear his message. His things are often very layered so he will sound very affable in this kind setting with all these women on "The View". It's daytime television. He's trying to sell his book.
Pugnacious isn't really--
HUNT: Not the place or time.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Not the place or time. But at the same time, he knows these clips are going to travel. And so what he'll do is definitely put messages out there that his base or the people that he wants to be his base will hear and understand. And so I think he's a defter politician than you give him credit.
GOLDBERG: I think he's a defter debater and interview subject. I don't think he's nearly as good a politician as.
AXELROD: He is a -- he is a code switcher and he is I think he is actually pretty adroit at this. And the example of that is the debate, the vice presidential debate, you know, when on either side of it he was a fire-breathing MAGA guy and then he gets to the debate and he's sort of like Mr. Rogers, why can't we all get along?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: And Walz falls for it.
AXELROD: And Waltz didn't know how to deal with that he completely tilted.
GOLDBERG: That was a good strategy.
AXELROD: No, I agree. Listen, first of all, I don't believe J.D. -- well, let me say one thing about him saying that he's not thinking about this. I remember some of you may -- maybe none of you are old enough to remember this, but when Clinton was impeached in '98, Dale Bumpers, the former governor and senator from Arkansas gave the speech, the last speech in the impeachment trial.
[16:25:06]
And he said, whenever anybody says to you it's not about the sex, it's about the sex. Okay? Whenever a politician says to you, I'm not thinking about running for this or that, it's usually he's thinking about running for this or that. And he's certainly thinking about it. But I would take the field against Vance. I don't think Vance is going
to run. And honestly, the president just put a pair of concrete overshoes on him when he gave him this choice assignment of trying to sell this Iran deal. Do you think Donald Trump said, oh, I'm not going to go to the signing. I think I'll run back to Washington. JD will handle that.
You think if he thought this was a winner, he wouldn't be there? Absolutely not. So he's giving Vance a real chore here.
GRAVES: I'll tell you what I love. I love the fact that he walked straight into the lion's den. I do. I think that was fantastic.
He went on "The View". He knew it wasn't going to be a friendly audience. He was dealt a lot of hard balls, and I didn't watch the whole thing, but the bits and pieces that I saw, I thought that he did a great job knocking them out of the park.
So keep in mind, most politicians refuse to go into those lion's den- type environments like that. He walked straight in, and I thought that was --
HUNT: I'd just say it was a lion's den for Kamala Harris as well, maybe because of her own making. I mean, like, the worst clip she had in the campaign was on "The View".
AXELROD: It was a cat's den when she went in there, and she still had a hard time. But I did wonder about that one quote of his. I don't know if I heard it right where he said, everybody's welcome into our coalition as long as you're a citizen. Isn't that what he said? Did I hear that right?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yeah, no, that's his basic premise.
HUNT: And that you're here legally, yeah.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: And that you're here legally -- I mean, it's a very -- everyone's welcome and then and then it gets smaller and smaller and smaller who he actually means. That's what I'm saying about the way that he --
(CROSSTALK)
GARCIA-NAVARRO: -- he way that he's messaging is always layered is what I'm saying.
HUNT: Can we actually talk about that? Because I know you did talk to J.D. Vance at one point, Lulu, and here's what he says in his book about, you know, he -- when he was running for Senate in Ohio, he told Tucker Carlson during an interview that the country was run by a bunch of childless cat ladies which naturally was something that people remembered and it was something that came back up again. But in the book he says quote it's okay to admit error one of the dumbest things I ever said came when I argued that, quote, "childless cat ladies across the Democrat Party were running our country into the ground."
But this is not how he handled it when you talk to him.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: No, it wasn't. When I brought that up before the election, he defended it. He said that it had only been a very short amount of time that he had actually argued that, but that it was an important point to be made. He doubled down on it.
And this is -- you know, you can look at this as showing growth, or you can look at this as actually a pitch moving forward where he's trying to dispel the controversial things that he might have said in the past and turn over a new page because he's opening himself up to a new electorate.
HUNT: Let's watch what the president has had to say about J.D. Vance, because this, of course, is -- if the Democrats have a dozen with no clear leader in that sort of pack of potential candidates, Republicans still have very much a clear leader. And attempting to curry favor or be the favorite of the sitting president is going to be very much a part of what we're going to be watching going forward.
Here is what Trump has said about Vance potentially being his successor in 2028.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS HOST: Do you view Vice President J.D. Vance as your successor, the Republican nominee in 2028?
TRUMP: No, but he's very capable. I mean, I don't think that it, you know, I think you have a lot of very capable people. So far, I think he's doing a fantastic job. It's too early. We're just starting.
REPORTER: Do you agree that the heir apparent to MAGA is J.D. Vance?
TRUMP: Well, I think most likely, in all fairness, he's the vice president. I think Marco is also somebody that maybe would get together with J.D. in some form. It's too early, obviously, to talk about it, but certainly he's doing a great job, and he would be probably favored at this point.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
HUNT: Jonah, do you think the president favors J.D. Vance at this point.
GOLDBERG: You hear rumors that he doesn't like him that much, but the basic point is, like, that's Trump trying to avoid being a lame duck, by keeping the different factions fighting amongst each other. And I don't really blame him for that. Presidents have often kind of -- I mean, Barack Obama was not exactly chomping at the bit to say, yeah, I'm going to endorse Joe Biden when he was his vice president.
But look --
HUNT: Well, the opposite, actually.
GOLDBERG: Yes. He didn't do it. Right. But my point is the idea -- why I think David might be right that
Vance doesn't run is the only reason you would vote for a third Trump term is basically for four more years. The idea that a president who's in a high 30s, low 40s is going to have an heir apparent who has to defend on the campaign trail everything about an unpopular last two, three years of a presidency, is very unlikely.
(CROSSTALK)
[16:30:09]
GOLDBERG: There have only been two sitting vice presidents to successfully run for president, Martin Van Buren and George H.W. Bush.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: But don't you think that's why you're hearing all these leaks of Vance privately expressing all these doubts about the Iran war and all these other things?
AXELROD: Lulu, that never, ever worked.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I'm just saying.
AXELROD: He came to the dance with a guy. He's stuck with a guy.
But I loved that Lindsey Graham put out a statement yesterday saying, I want to talk to the architect of this deal with Iran, the vice president, J.D. Vance.
So that tells you something.
HUNT: It does tell you something.
All right, coming up next here in THE ARENA, new CNN reporting about just who in the White House expressed concern about Iran holding up its end of any deal with the U.S. as Congress and basically everybody clamors for details on this tentative agreement.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARRIS: This is a war of choice. This is a president who has proven himself to be entirely self-indulgent. And we will see what happens in the coming hours and days in terms of the negotiation, and really, it's a concept of an agreement.
MICHAELSON: But to be clear, if you were president, you'd never start this war.
HARRIS: Absolutely not. Absolutely not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:35:50]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): This has been an epic disaster for the American people. This war has been an epic disaster for American national security. This agreement will be proof positive to the American people of what an absolute dumpster fire this war has been from start to finish.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Lawmakers on Capitol Hill not happy that no one has yet to actually see what's in the U.S.'s memorandum of understanding with Iran. Not members of Congress, not journalists, not even our closest Middle Eastern ally, Israel, who asked to see it but was told no by the U.S. That's according to a source.
And now, new reporting just into CNN that nearly every single senior White House official, J.D. Vance, Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio, Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, all expressed concerns over the past two weeks that Iran would not hold up its end of the bargain.
Sources tell our Alayna Treene that Hegseth and the CIA director, John Ratcliffe, were among the most pessimistic. But the team ultimately reached a consensus driven by the president to get this general agreement in motion.
Now, this is a general agreement that Trump's hometown paper, "The New York Post", called this morning a mystery deal. The president, though, assured earlier today that we will see the text in the next couple of days.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'll not only release it. I'll probably have a press conference and read it to you word by word so that the press covers it accurately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Joining me now in THE ARENA, someone who sat across from Iranian negotiators for years as one of the architects of President Obama's 2015 deal with Iran, former deputy secretary of state, Ambassador Wendy Sherman.
Madam Ambassador, thank you very much for being here with us today.
I want to just start with the big picture question here. I mean, what does it tell you that the terms of this memorandum of understanding are still a mystery?
WENDY SHERMAN, FORMER DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, I think it tells us that they're very nervous about what's in it and how it will be seen. My own sense is the president wants this victory lap on Friday when they have a in-person signing with the vice president, ostensibly, and then have the markets and the price of oil go down during the week, and then Friday night or into Saturday morning maybe we'll finally see it.
And the things that have come out that purport to be the agreement, it is very broad. It is very rough, conceptual.
And it's interesting, Kasie. I went back and read the president's speech when he pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the ostensibly Iran nuclear deal that I was privileged to be part of negotiating. And he said the following, which is really important. It's really the litmus test for what comes.
He said that we lifted sanctions too quickly, when in fact what we think is going to happen is that sanctions, some sanctions, will get lifted immediately, particularly oil sanctions so Iran can export. That they should stop all of their action in the Middle East, don't see that really as going to be part of this. That we gave them billions of dollars, which of course we didn't, but ostensibly there is frozen assets released up front and a $300 billion investment fund to come, that we had nothing about missiles or counterterrorism.
All of those sanctions remained on Israel by President -- not on Israel, on Iran by President Obama, that our inspections were not adequate when they were in fact the toughest in the world. So we'll see what President Trump comes up with.
And most importantly, that this was about the Iranian people, which is ostensibly why President Trump got into this devastating war and this loss for American credibility. And I don't think the Iranian people have gained much of anything.
HUNT: One thing the world gained was a piece of information, the ability of the Iranians to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, the ability and the willingness of them to do so.
[16:40:06]
And CNN -- we here at CNN reported today that the U.S. intelligence now assesses that they can do that at will, basically going forward. What is the impact of that reality?
It's huge. Our military was spectacular. There's no question about it. But Iran understood they could use asymmetric means.
We all have known, every administration, Democrat and Republican, has always known that the Strait of Hormuz and attacking our bases and attacking our partners in the Gulf were always risks, and why no other president did such a crazy war that got the strait closed down, shooting at our bases, shooting at our allies and partners in the Gulf, and really ending up costing American taxpayers, American treasure, and the world an enormous amount. Disastrous war, and so far, a pretty pathetic piece.
HUNT: What do you think is going to be the ultimate end game here around the nuclear program?
SHERMAN: I don't know, Kasie. I thought it was quite remarkable that the president at the G7 said, well, you know, this, quote/unquote, "uranium dust," we don't really need to deal with it. It's underground. That has been his whole mantra throughout this process, that Iran can
never get a nuclear weapon, that America has to deal with all of its nuclear plans, all of its nuclear processes, and this highly enriched uranium, all of the stockpiles of enriched uranium. And it remains to be seen whether the president tends to do any of that.
HUNT: All right, Ambassador Wendy Sherman, thank you very much for spending some time with us today. Appreciate your expertise.
SHERMAN: Thank you.
HUNT: All right, head here in THE ARENA. It's a pool you might not want to get into this summer, even after a $14 million renovation.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:46:34]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LARA TRUMP, FOX NEWS HOST: I think you talk to people who live in D.C., and they will say that it was just overrun with algae, and it was green.
TRUMP: It is disgusting. I'm using swimming pool material. It's going to be blue, beautiful blue, which is what they always wanted.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So that interview took place before President Trump had the reflecting pool refilled and painted. This is what it looks like today. Safe to say it's not a beautiful blue. Algae blooms have haunted administrations for decades.
A spokesperson for the Interior Department told CNN that an ozone nanobubbler has been installed, and it has successfully destroyed the algae bloom that has plagued every pool reopening. Earlier today, workers were also seen pouring hydrogen peroxide into the reflecting pool.
The renovation getting mixed reviews from visitors.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It looks exactly the same, so I'm really unclear what exactly was done.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I never seen the water like this. I was able to see the bottom all the time.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was excited to see it, but I mean, it just looks swampy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: It just looks swampy, Jonah Goldberg. GOLDBERG: Yeah, I was saying during the commercial about the drain the swamp metaphor.
AXELROD: Yeah, the metaphor just leaps out at you.
GOLDBERG: It kind of reminds me of one of my favorite island headlines, at least one that's safe for family TV, was world's largest iceberg hit by metaphor.
The way this administration sets itself up to not be able to talk about affordability is just kind of stunning -- the ballroom, this thing, the UFC fight, whether you loved it or hated it, whatever. It's just -- they get stuck in this messaging that just isn't about the stuff that Republicans want them to talk about.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Can I just say something that I am baffled by, which is we are right now having the World Cup. I have covered World Cups in other countries. Like, this is a gimme for this administration.
If you want to actually show goodwill and being a good host and being a global partner, like, why isn't he at the matches? Why isn't he doing something with that?
I mean, to me, there's just, like, so many cell phones. to use a little bit of football speak. Yeah, I agree with you. This is just one of many.
GRAVES: I don't know why we're talking about reflecting pools right now. With all the things that are going on, including the World Cup, I don't think this is a major issue. I will tell you, if you take a few steps back, having been in and out of this city for decades now, the city looks the best I've ever seen it. It is safer than it has been in years. And I think those are all fantastic things that helps everyone.
HUNT: Congressman, I mean, look, I think it's in the interest of all of us that this reflecting pool look beautiful. I think that the challenge here is that the president spent a lot of money on this saying, you know, it was going to look a certain way.
Now obviously, it doesn't, but it takes place inside this bigger context, right, of a president that is focused on his own legacy in many ways, when Americans are struggling, and this is part of kind of the narrative around, as -- well, his ballroom, which is something that -- I'm going to play -- I want to play what Trump has said recently about the ballroom, because it's -- well, just listen to Trump.
This is all the things he said about the ballroom and how much it was going to cost you, the taxpayer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And I'm paying for it. I'm paying for it.
The country is not -- we're donating a $400 million ballroom. Myself and donors are giving them free of charge, for nothing. [16:50:02]
We did this no charge to the taxpayer whatsoever.
Rich people and people are putting up the money. Zero taxpayer dollars.
We didn't ask for any tax money. We have no taxes. This is taxpayer- free. We have no taxpayer putting up 10 cents.
We're putting up $400 million to do the ballroom section of We are putting that up privately.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So -- I mean, "The Post" is reporting that it's actually going to be $600 million, and the taxpayers are going to foot half the bill for that, while at the same time, gas, groceries are more expensive than they've ever been.
GRAVES: So let's break this out. Number one, you just had the alleged drone attack or attempted drone attack for the UFC fight, a terrorist attack right here in Washington, D.C. The White House was built, the wing was built in what, the 1940s? Do you really think the security apparatus there is appropriate?
Do I believe that there are components of the White House, that the Secret Service, that the military and others should be funding?
HUNT: Congressman, listen -- it's what Republican members of Congress are raising flags.
(CROSSTALK)
GRAVES: Let's point out exactly what the president said. The president, in his own quote that you played here on TV, said, the segment of the ballroom, $400 million being put up by private donors, including the president that doesn't take a salary.
AXELROD: Congressman, just little bit of history. When I was in the White House, I got a call from Donald Trump. And he called to say he wanted to build a ballroom. And he said, we ought to have those shitty little tents. Can I say that?
GOLDBERG: It's too late.
HUNT: It's too late.
(LAUGHTER)
AXELROD: Roll that back.
HUNT: Donald Trump is president, so that ship has sailed, like, you know --
AXELROD: Where you have the state dinners, he said, you need a ballroom, let me build a modular ballroom for you, you could take it apart and put it together, and so on.
He never raised security. He never raised security when he started talking about building a ballroom. He is obsessed with building a ballroom. This just became a convenient way to divert public money into the project because it became much more expensive and he couldn't extort enough from the donors to pay for it.
And look, this whole thing -- all of these issues have to do with what he tells us and what actually happens. And there is usually a pretty big gap between what he promises, relative to these kinds of things and what he delivers. So it becomes a pattern that makes people very cynical and very jaded.
GRAVES: The president's not taking a salary. They're going to put up 100 millions of dollars in private funds to pay for a ballroom. You're going to have upgraded security apparatus that protects the security of the United States. I think --
AXELROD: He's backed by the way --
GOLDBERG: Do you think he's losing money on the presidency? I mean, you said twice now that he's not taking a salary.
GRAVES: He's not.
AXELROD: He's billions of dollars richer than the day he walked --
GOLDBERG: He's using the presidency to sell crypto.
GRAVES: They're putting up hundreds of millions of dollars for this. You have a security apparatus that's going to be improved.
GOLDBERG: And he used the UFC thing to push his crypto thing, which he bilks investors from. His family has made billions of dollars off of the presidency, and so he has a talking point that he isn't taking his salary. It's not like he's taking a vow of poverty.
GRAVES: Are you talking about Hunter Biden? What are we talking about?
(CROSSTALK)
GOLDBERG: Trump has made vastly more from the presidency than Hunter Biden and everything.
GRAVES: Look, bottom line is, you said that the president is not abiding by the commitments. I think that based on the quote that you heard, he is absolutely fulfilling the commitments that he said.
AXELROD: Just to tie -- just to tie this whole discussion together, back to the metaphor. When you have a president who has these projects, these pet projects, and he is going to big donors who have policy questions before him, when he is doing business with people at the same time that he is running the government that polices them, when he is making deals with foreign governments on behalf of the United States, at the same time that he and his family are making private deals with the same entities, that reflecting pool with the algae is really a metaphor of the way he is governing. And that's the point that Jonah's making.
So I appreciate the fact that you're trying to defend him. But we ought to acknowledge that these are problems. It worries me about what commitments were made by these donors who have big policy and regulatory issues that they're concerned about, you know --
(CROSSTALK)
GRAVES: David, all I'm saying is that the premise here was that the president was not fulfilling his commitment. I'm saying that he is. And I think that the facts show that.
HUNT: So, Congressman, we don't want to turn this into a pile-on by any stretch. I think the question I have for you is to take it --
(CROSSTALK)
GRAVES: -- pile on.
HUNT: To take it -- no, to take to the politics of it, okay? When I talk to your former colleagues on Capitol Hill, Republicans, you know, 56 percent of Americans told "Washington Post", ABC News, and polling that they oppose the ballroom project. I take all your points defending the president, but when you talk to Republicans running for reelection, this is something that they will say privately has broken through as a problem with their voters.
GRAVES: Yeah. And I hear you. I'm just telling you, when I go around Louisiana, I have never heard a single person say anything about the ballroom at all, number one.
Number two, I think it's important for us to understand the security conditions, to understand what, as we know, there's actually a bumper -- a bunker, excuse me, under the ballroom. I think there's security implications.
HUNT: There certainly are security implications, yes, for sure.
All right. On that note, we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: Thanks to my panel. Really appreciate you all being here. Thanks to you at home for watching as well.
Don't go anywhere. Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".
Hi, Jake.
