Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Voters in Six States Head to the Polls in Key Primaries; California Voting in Governor and L.A. Mayor Primaries; Secretary Mullin and Top Democrats on Senate Panel Clash in Tense Exchange; NYT: Hegseth Strikes Female and Black Navy Officers from Promotion List. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired June 02, 2026 - 15:30   ET

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

[15:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Primary season is heating up as voters in half a dozen states are heading to polls today. In California, two hotly contested races are taking center stage. The one for governor and the race for Los Angeles mayor.

Recent polling shows three candidates leading the field to replace Governor Gavin Newsom. Democrats Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer along with Republican Steve Hilton. For L.A. mayor, incumbent Karen Bass is in a tough battle against L.A. City Council member Nithya Raman and former reality TV star Spencer Pratt. The top two vote getters in both races wind up advancing to the general election in November.

Let's discuss with Peter Hamby. He's a founding partner of Puck News. Peter, thanks so much for being with us. Starting with the governor's race, this has been a ride.

[15:35:00]

Obviously, the frontrunner for most of the race, Eric Swalwell, had to drop out facing sexual misconduct allegations. Then you have former Fox News host, Republican Steve Hilton, sort of dominating the race, at least leading polls. Who do you think winds up taking the top two spots going head to head into November?

PETER HAMBY, FOUNDING PARTNER, PUCK NEWS: Well, Boris, since it is election day, I should point out that a big problem with this field is that Democratic voters in this state have been pretty unenthused about the choices. They've been holding on to their ballots until the last few days. They're starting to come in.

But up until a couple days ago, this electorate looked whiter, Republican, more independent. Now Democrats are kind of closing the gap. But after Eric Swalwell left the race, and before that, remember, Kamala Harris decided not to run.

Senator Alex Padilla decided not to run. And this is a Democratic state. Democrats tend to win in November. Steve Hilton, who's endorsed by Donald Trump, would have a very hard time winning the election if he makes it out of the two-person runoff after this week. So, look, after Swalwell dropped out, the big dynamic out here that

every Democratic voter and every Democratic consultant wants to talk about is that voters just kind of moved to Xavier Becerra, the former HHS secretary, also a member of Congress from here in Los Angeles. And he was attorney general of the state. And a lot of Latinos moved to him, too.

And the race has just kind of been stuck for about a month. Tom Steyer, who is also in the mix here, has spent over $200 million of his own dollars. He's a billionaire, a climate activist. But he's been met with some skepticism because he's running as a leftist, and lots of leftists don't like billionaires. Another miscalculation, I think, Boris, on his part, and again, we'll see if he makes the runoff, is that this state is very progressive.

Like, make no mistake. But as one consultant put it to me, it's a little more liberal than leftist. And Steyer has been running as an anti-corporate, anti-billionaire, Medicare-for-all-style candidate.

Again, it's an awkward fit for him as a billionaire himself, but he is still in the mix and has a lot of money to spend down the stretch to get out the vote.

SANCHEZ: When it comes to L.A. mayor, I mean, as you put it, California is among the bluest of states, but Spencer Pratt has sort of changed the dynamic in that race. He's grabbing a lot of headlines. He's doing interviews all over the place.

His supporters have been putting out these AI videos that have gone viral. But is his candidacy more than hype? Do you see him making the November ballot?

Oh, gosh. Perhaps a rhetorical question. Can you hear me, Peter?

HAMBY: I can hear you if you want to hear me in the dark, and I can answer that question. Go for it. Try it out.

Yes, we'll try it out. Cover me with some good B-roll, Boris. But look, Spencer Pratt, the question that you just asked the question, is this just online hype?

Can he outperform Donald Trump's number, which was 25 percent in 2024, in the city of Los Angeles? But there's so much online content, all of the national money and clout chasers that are all in for Spencer Pratt. Is it really resonating here in the city?

I think it is, actually. But the question I have is, is this a phenomenon just of kind of white Republican-slash-independent, maybe conservative-leaning Democrats even, who are homeowners in this city? And does he have any real nonwhite support, particularly in Latino and black neighborhoods in this city, that Karen Bass, the incumbent mayor, is trying to use to win the election?

SANCHEZ: Peter Hamby would have loved to see you for that response. A great response, covered with pretty adequate B-roll, I should say. But thanks for joining us, Peter, appreciate it.

HAMBY: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Of course. So, a new report says that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has blocked some officers from military promotions, and it's who is being blocked that is raising concerns and questions. That story is next.

[15:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: The secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin faced lawmakers today, and it did not take long for things to get heated.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Will you or will you not implement court orders?

MARKWAYNE MULLIN, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: If we didn't think that courts were politicized, then I would probably be able to answer that. But we see courts over and over again that use their bench for their political opinion, not just the rule of law. And we can see that because we see how many times there are restrictions.

MURPHY: I didn't say orders. You will pick and choose which court orders you obey based upon whether you believe that's going to be politically --

MULLIN: No, what I said -- no, no, don't put words in my mouth.

MURPHY: What are you saying, then?

MULLIN: What I'm saying is we'll enforce the law, and we're never going to break the Constitution.

MURPHY: You just said that you will not follow every court order because you --

MULLIN: No, no, Chris, Senator, don't start putting words in my mouth. That's not what I said. I said I will never break the Constitution. We're going to enforce the law.

MURPHY: Will you implement court orders when they tell you to stop?

MULLIN: You're making an assumption on court orders I haven't seen.

MURPHY: Will you or will you not?

MULLIN: I am going to enforce the law, and I'll never break the Constitution.

MURPHY: I think, listen, if you're a Republican or a Democrat on this committee, you should be really, really freaked out. MULLIN: We should be really concerned about the rulings that come out of the courts and how often they get overturned.

MURPHY: Our federal system falls apart if you are telling me that you --

MILLIN: They fall apart when you have a judge that makes a political opinion from a bench, and they're outside the law, too. Not all judges are above the law, but sometimes they think they are.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Holmes Lybrand has been closely watching this for us, so what else has been said?

HOLMES LYBRAND, CNN REPORTER: That's right, Boris. So this exchange is really key, this question of you have over 90 rulings against DHS. Before Markwayne Mullin joined as the secretary of the department, he's saying he won't break the Constitution.

[15:45:00]

But he's not explaining what that means, and he's using this line that's really been used and touted by the president, especially of blaming the courts for their politicization. We've also seen Mullin address the claims that he would maybe shut down airports, at least international airports, by removing customs officers. He was pressed on that, but he's still not giving an answer on whether or not he plans to implement that. So we're still watching this hearing.

A lot more is going to unfold. Senate Democrats are really, really pushing on these issues of following the law and addressing this concern, especially about the airports and letting people in, and whether or not this could be a political football of shutting down these things for democratic-run cities that don't want to comply with what Mullin thinks they should for immigration enforcement.

SANCHEZ: Holmes Lybrand, thank you so much for the update there -- Brianna.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: The New York Times is reporting that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth blocked several female and black Navy officers from being promoted to the rank of admiral. He reportedly recently removed nine officers from a promotions list. Three are women and two are black men.

Four others were white men. All had been selected by a board of senior Navy admirals to be promoted from captain to rear admiral or one-star admiral. The Times also reports the move appears driven by Secretary Hegseth's anti-diversity stance rather than based on merit.

It cites current and former defense officials who say the secretary's actions could violate rules covering the promotion system.

I'm joined now by retired Army Lieutenant General Karen Gibson. She formerly served as the director of intelligence for U.S. Central Command. General, we should note that the Times also reported back in March Hegseth did a similar purge in the Army on the list of colonels promoted to brigadier general. So these are all promotions from the 06 rank to the 07 rank that are among the most competitive in the military. Before we talk about the effects on the military of this, can you first just explain for people who aren't aware, which is almost everyone, the highly competitive process that these folks are going through to be elevated to these ranks and how unusual it is for the Sec Def to interfere in it?

LT. GENERAL KAREN GIBSON, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Yes, so it is. It is a highly competitive process. And even to have reached the rank of colonel or Navy captain, those officers will have been through many screening boards to select them for previous assignments, both for promotion, for special schooling and for command.

And so by the time they are selected to be a flag officer, either an admiral or a general, they've really been scrutinized many times. I have sat on a number of boards to include promotion to general, and it is really a very thorough and competitive process. I would pause, though, Brianna, and point out that the secretary, while this is unprecedented, it is legal and it is within his authority to do this.

Civilian control of the military is one of the hallmarks of our democracy that we're very proud of. But it's rather unprecedented to reach down so much. And I know we're going to talk about some of the implications about that.

But it is not illegal. And again, it is within his authority to do this.

KEILAR: Yes, very important to note. So when you look, though, at who, Hegseth is disproportionately bumping off of these promotions list. And I know that we're talking about, you know, it's a few women here, a couple of black officers here.

But we have to remind people that there are actually not that many female Navy admirals, not that many black Navy admirals. What conclusion do you draw from who he is targeting for this?

GIBSON: So I'd say a couple of things. One, he said that we need to select based on merit and the most capable, with the highest potential to lead our military formations. And I can tell you that in every one of the many, probably over a dozen boards I've sat, race and gender was never a consideration, nor were we ever given quotas for that.

In fact, we were sometimes given quotas for operational fields. We need X number of admirals who can drive submarines or fly jets or something, but never by gender or race. I think what this does, though, and in particular coming on the heels of similar action in the Army, it kind of raises a couple of concerns.

One, one might assume that he is no longer trusting or doesn't in this area trust the judgment of his most senior Navy and Army leaders who have developed this list after scrutinizing hundreds of officers, that he doesn't trust that judgment. I think a second thing, again, coupled with some of the other removal of in particular women from some key leadership roles shortly after the administration came in or other comments that are made, it might lead some to believe that women are not suited or don't deserve to lead in these positions.

[15:50:00]

And I think that flies in the face of over 100 years of dedicated, brave, committed service by thousands and thousands of patriotic women who have chosen to serve their country and demonstrate a tremendous ability to do so.

KEILAR: What message might this send to younger officers, especially women and service members of color? Because that's one of the concerns that I hear so often from people who look at this and are concerned. Also the enlisted service members that they lead.

GIBSON: Yes, so, you know, I think there are kind of two concerns there. One, is on the part of those who are considering whether or not they want to join a service and may feel I don't want to be part of a system that isn't going to value me. Certainly that's not what the secretary has actually said, but it's a conclusion that some may draw based on his actions.

And then I think I would have concerns about some of our officers who remain and continue to serve. If it appears as though things are being introduced with a political screening or other agendas other than competence, what it actually may do is introduce politics into a system. In this case, the promotion system that is designed specifically to remove or minimize political considerations.

And I think those are two deleterious effects that we might face over the long run.

KEILAR: Taxpayers have also invested so much money. I mean, just when you think over the years, right, because at this point, these individuals have spent 25 years in their service branch. So taxpayers have been investing millions upon millions of dollars in getting these individuals to this level of expertise that other generals or admirals have looked at them and said, these are the people, the best people for the jobs.

How should taxpayers be looking at this in terms of concerns about waste?

GIBSON: Well, you know, I would actually beg to differ there in that for each person that is selected as an admiral or general, there's probably another six to eight who are fully qualified to do that and not in only a very tiny number of them will get that. And so, you know, the efforts that they have put forth to secure the nation thus far are not wasted in that regard. But it is, you know, it does cause one to raise eyebrows when such a high percentage of women and minorities are removed from promotion lists, both from the Airforce -- or the Army and the Navy, and sends a message, I think, that there are certainly some of our leaders who don't believe women belong in these roles.

KEILAR: But it does end a career, right? I think we should explain to people if they don't get this promotion, it effectively ends a career. But it also sounds like you have confidence there are other people waiting in the wings to step into roles if there are roles that are vacant.

GIBSON: I absolutely do. We have a deep bench. We have a deep bench.

But it can be demoralizing to those below them if it is perceived that the reason these people were removed was not based on their merit but based on the color of their skin or their gender. And certainly, again, every promotion board I have ever sat, every selection board, every retirement board, that has been our paramount consideration has been to select the very best officers. And I think it sends a message that you don't trust that that's what your senior admirals and generals are doing.

KEILAR: Lieutenant General Karen Gibson, so great to speak with you about this. Thanks for being with us.

GIBSON: Thank you.

KEILAR: Still ahead, drug tunnel discovery. Check this out here. A federal investigation uncovering this. Yes, a very sophisticated system between Mexico and California. We'll have details next.

[15:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Take a look at this video. Officials just uncovered a suspected drug smuggling tunnel connecting Tijuana, Mexico, to San Diego. The elaborate passageway includes lighting, ventilation, reinforced walls, even a rail system.

This is about 2,000 feet long, 55 feet underground.

KEILAR: U.S. officials say the exit point was inside a San Diego store, and agents seized $45 million worth of cocaine. Four men are facing a range of charges that carry up to life in prison, and that tunnel is being destroyed.

Rescuers in Laos are hoping that advanced imaging equipment can help them find the two remaining people who are believed trapped in a cave for two weeks.

SANCHEZ: Teams are hoping to use the tools to explore a newly discovered shaft that may provide a clearer understanding of the underground cavern's layout. Remember, a total of seven villagers got trapped in the cave when it flooded. The five who got out over the weekend have been helping teams map out this underground system.

Today, some of those survivors reunited with one of their rescuers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(VIDEO OF SURVIVORS REUNITING WITH RESCUERS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: The villagers embraced the cave diver who is wearing the black t-shirt there after they were discharged from the hospital. Really a triumphant return to fresh air for these folks after being trapped underground for several days.

[16:00:00]

There were fears that there was issues with malnutrition, perhaps getting sick from the water that they were forced to drink, just that underground tunnel water. But fortunately, it seems like they're OK, still hoping the best for their two friends.

KEILAR: Yes, hoping.

"THE ARENA" with Kasie Hunt starts right now.

END