Return to Transcripts main page

State of the Union

Interview With Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC); Interview With Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin; Interview With Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ). Aired 9-10a ET

Aired May 24, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:01:10]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST (voice-over): Turning point? President Trump says he's closing in on a deal with Iran.

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Perhaps a little bit later today, we'll have more to say.

TAPPER: But does Iran agree? Some in his own party are raising concerns, as Trump also confronts a GOP crisis over his weaponization fund.

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): This is just stupid on stilts.

TAPPER: Republican Senator Thom Tillis joins me next.

Plus: soul-searching, Democrats' dismal diagnosis.

REP. JARED MOSKOWITZ (D-FL): We couldn't even do the autopsy correctly.

TAPPER: As they grapple with what went wrong.

SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): This is our test. This is our moment.

TAPPER: Are party leaders up to the challenge? Democratic Senator Cory Booker ahead. And heating up, tens of thousands of Californians under evacuation orders, as a large chemical tank threatens to explode. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin joins me on that and on rollbacks to regulations on air and water coming up.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is watching the art of the deal.

President Trump again says he is very close to a deal with Iran, but, as of this morning, it is not clear yet that Iran is on the same page. A person familiar tells CNN that the emerging memorandum of understanding would theoretically open the Strait of Hormuz, unfreeze some Iranian assets, and include commitments by Iran to not pursue a nuclear weapon and enter into negotiations on how to give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, while pausing any new enrichment.

For its part, Iran has yet to confirm any of those details, and we are waiting to see if they have actually moved on any of these stubborn sticking points.

In the meantime, several top Republicans panned what they thought they understood about the deal last night. Republican Senator Ted Cruz saying he was deeply concerned and urging President Trump to hold the line. Trump's former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo saying that it sounded like something out of the Obama administration's playbook, which prompted a nasty response from the White House communications director.

This all comes at a politically perilous time for President Trump here at home after Republican senators were in something of an open revolt last week over the president's so-called anti-weaponization fund announced by the Justice Department that could dispense more than a billion dollars of taxpayer money to anyone deemed by the Trump administration to have been unfairly targeted by the government, which, as of now, seems very much as if it could include January 6 rioters who were convicted of beating up police officers.

Here with me now is North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis.

Senator, thanks so much for joining us on this Sunday morning.

Let's talk about Iran and this potential memorandum of understanding with Iran. Your colleague Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker said -- quote -- "The rumored 60-day cease-fire with the belief that Iran will ever engage in good faith would be a disaster" -- unquote.

I know that the details are vague at this point, but, from what you have heard about this deal, would you support it?

TILLIS: It doesn't make sense to me. I'm not too far away from where Pompeo is, to be honest with you, and I support what Chairman Wicker says.

Look, we were told about 11 weeks ago by Hegseth and the Department of Defense that they had obliterated Iran's defenses and it was just a matter of time before we had the nuclear material. Now we're talking about a posture where we may accept the nuclear material remaining in Iran? How does that make sense at all?

Also, a 60-day cease-fire and expecting that they're going to clear the Strait of Hormuz before the terms of the deal are established also seems questionable to me. There are a lot of things that need to be explained. And, as I have said before, any agreement with Iran that isn't subject to ratification, ratification by Congress, is going -- I think going to be doomed to fail, just like the agreement we're trying to replace, which was the failed agreement by Obama.

[09:05:11]

TAPPER: It is on unclear as of now that the Trump administration is going to be able to get a better deal than Obama got without even having to fire a shot.

You just mentioned Secretary Hegseth. Do you think the president has been advised well by Secretary Hegseth on this?

TILLIS: No, I actually -- if you take a look at the assessment that Hegseth gave -- at the end of the day, regardless of who collected the information, Hegseth owns it by being secretary of defense.

When you tell the president that you have obliterated Iran and you're in a position to pretty much dictate terms, and now you see what we have, when you see Hegseth pull back on operations in Poland, when Ukraine -- when Russia is raping, killing, murdering, torturing countless people in Ukraine, when you see these mistakes made by Hegseth, I have -- I actually -- I think, with all these mistakes in total, it's beginning to make Kristi Noem look like a five-star recruit.

TAPPER: So, let's turn to what happened a few days ago.

You and some of your Republican Senate colleagues had a heated meeting Thursday with acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. This was over the Justice Department's so-called anti-weaponization fund. Cruz has since described the meeting as -- quote -- "fireworks at an epic level" and -- quote -- "one of the roughest meetings" he's ever seen in his entire Senate tenure.

Tell us about the meeting.

TILLIS: Well, look, I have been in a lot tougher meetings than this one.

And the other thing is, people were not mad at Todd Blanche. They were mad at this bogus agreement, the 1776 agreement, that he had very little to do with. But, as I said earlier, I stand by it, it's stupid on stilts.

Look, you're talking about people who assaulted Capitol Police officers on January the 6th, were then convicted. Many of them pled guilty or they were convicted by a jury of their peers. They could be eligible for this.

Look, if you're talking about a fund that helps a man who was arrested and lawfare used against him at a school board meeting and was found innocent, that's fine. Help them out. Pay them back. In fact, I think that they should seek redress through the agency that brought the lawsuit.

But this is just -- it's horrible politics. It's horrible timing. And Todd was there to try and explain it -- or, I should say, the acting attorney general. It was a tumultuous lunch, but it was by no means the most tumultuous one that I have seen.

But I do think that there was a very large number of people that said, look, we got to tackle affordability. We have got to have a coherent strategy in Iran. We have got to start looking at Putin as a real threat to the Western world, and this is all a distraction.

And some people even think it may look like self-dealing. I think whoever advised the president on this being a wise idea should not see -- they should not plan on coming in the office on Monday if they're working for me. It was a bad idea, and there's no way you're going to make it better in its current form.

TAPPER: So, there's a wider context here on the January 6'ers, because, on Friday night, the Justice Department moved to dismiss indictments against the Oath Keepers who had faced the most serious criminal charges after January 6.

The Justice Department is also now deleting old press releases from the Web site about January 6 defendants, which they're calling partisan propaganda. And then, in addition to, obviously, all the pardons that the president gave out to January 6'ers, including those who beat up cops, some of them are now saying that they're going to apply for this payout from the anti-weaponization fund.

And I guess the broader question I have is now, is the Republican Party now the January 6 party? Is the Republican Party a pro- insurrection party?

TILLIS: No, I don't believe so.

Now, there's a question right now. Earlier this week, I was called a RINO by the president. And I will tell you, if the Republican Party stands for standing with insurrectionists who assaulted police officers, turning a blind eye towards Putin and what he's doing in Russia, negotiating a deal that may be subpar to the Obama deal, then don't call me that Republican.

Just call me a conservative. And I'm waiting for my Republicans to come back, if in fact they think they can argue that effectively. They can't. The American people want right-of-center conservative policies that have been successfully proposed by this president.

But these distractions are harmful to our chances in November. And anybody that gets in the way of my colleagues, Republican colleagues, getting reelected are a problem.

TAPPER: Does Congress have the authority to stop this $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund?

TILLIS: I think that it wouldn't surprise me, if we get back to reconciliation, and I believe that we should, because the underlying bill funding Homeland Security, because the Democrats have refused, even shut down our government, we have got to get back to it.

[09:10:07]

But I wouldn't at all doubt that there will be amendments to rescind the agreement and to defund it, to do whatever they can.

And it's a shame, because what Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, was coming to the lunch for was describing the anti-fraud funding that they wanted that we're not -- there's no way that we're going to be in a position to fund $1.5 billion for an anti-fraud division, when we have got this bogus 1776, I called -- I call it a payout pot for punks, that you just can't have those two equivalent numbers at the same time.

It makes no sense. So, it's politically tone-deaf. Whoever did it should be fired. Let's figure out a way to help people who are victims of warfare, but not people who were convicted by a jury of their peers or pled guilty to assaulting a police officer, please.

TAPPER: I wonder -- you mentioned how the president was attacking you as a RINO.

In addition, of course, the president defeated Senator -- pushed to defeat Senator Bill Cassidy in his Republican primary in Louisiana not long ago. And now the president's endorsing the challenger, the ethically challenged Ken Paxton, in his race against incumbent Republican Senator John Cornyn, and there's a chance that Cornyn is going to lose his primary on Tuesday.

Is there going to be pushback, not just from you, but from Kennedy -- I mean, sorry, not Kennedy -- from Cassidy and Cornyn, Senator McConnell when it comes to all sorts of things, the ballroom, the anti-weaponization fund, anything else?

TILLIS: Well, number one, I hate that Bill Cassidy lost. He's a great American, great senator, and I still look forward to working with him through the remaining tenure, our tenure here, in the U.S. Senate, Cornyn the same thing.

And to call Paxton ethically challenged is to call Jeffrey Dahmer suffering from an eating disorder. This guy is an empty suit and will do us no service by being in the U.S. Congress. I hope that Texans realize how tough John Cornyn is, how pro-Second Amendment he is, how pro-limited government he is, how pro-America first he is.

And when they go to the polls on Tuesday, I hope that they know that they have got a great American who deserves reelection, and the other guy is going to be nothing but an anchor on our conference for as long as he's in the U.S. Senate.

TAPPER: And last question, though, is there going to be something of a you only live once YOLO caucus of Republicans on their way out the door that President Trump has helped pressure and instigate?

TILLIS: Well, it's -- you know, what I try to tell everybody, folks, if you're not running for reelection, then that one filter that you need to make sure your words are measured so that the Democrats can't use it against you and maybe some Republicans, you have just got to have that extra filter.

And I'm telling you, it's great not having it, so that you can you can get the same point across, but now you can use unambiguous words. And I'm being unambiguous on Paxton. He is a failure. He doesn't deserve to be in the U.S. Senate.

And John Cornyn is one of the most powerful, one of the most influential, one of the most patriotic members I have had the privilege to serve with over the last 11 years.

TAPPER: All right, Senator Thom Tillis, YOLO with the bolo.

Thanks for joining us. We appreciate it.

TILLIS: Thank you.

TAPPER: Why can't Democrats get out of their own way? Democratic Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey says his party needs some big changes. He's going to sit down and talk with me about that next.

And then the threat of a huge chemical explosion outside Disneyland. The EPA administrator is coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:17:47]

TAPPER: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

As President Trump is trying to ink a deal with Iran and confront growing signs of friction within the Republican party, for Democrats, disagreements and second-guessing have become something of a way of life.

Joining us now, Democratic senator Cory Booker, who's on the ballot himself.

Your primary is in little over a week. Do you have a primary?

BOOKER: No, I do not have an opponent.

TAPPER: OK. So you're going to win?

BOOKER: God willing.

(LAUGHTER)

TAPPER: So, let me just, ask you a question about Iran, because, obviously, we're still waiting for details. So, there's so much I can ask you.

But it appears to include a 60-day cease-fire, this memorandum of understanding with Iran, reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, an Iranian commitment to not pursue nuclear weapons. Now, the president's been very critical of the deal that Obama struck with Iran.

Is this better than the deal Obama got with Iran?

BOOKER: So, we haven't had an official briefing, but this is what I'm seeing that has me so outraged right now, is the president said he went into this to deal with their nuclear program.

This does not deal with that. Before he became president the first time, they had no highly enriched uranium. They had sent it out. Now they have it because of him.

Number two is, he criticized roundly that the deal that got rid of their nuclear program, or at least their highly enriched program involved getting $50 billion for Iran.

Well, already the president's balance sheet is letting more than $14 billion go through that, during this conflict, he allowed them to sell oil. And this deal alone, easing of sanctions on Iran, allowing them to get billions of more, the same deal he criticized, he's already doing worse than.

Giving Iran more money, as he has said, will allow them to do things like fuel their proxy -- terrorist proxies. That's why this war is wrong. He's got us in a situation that's worse than it was before, a more extreme regime. The Strait of Hormuz now is a leveraging point for them.

This weak nation has put America in a stalemate, and Donald Trump is being played as a fool that he is for getting us into this in the first place.

TAPPER: Let's talk about some politics, because, obviously, the Democratic National Committee was kind of forced to release this autopsy report, such as it was, that it commissioned about the 2024 campaign. They were forced because CNN got a copy of it and was reporting on it, so they released it.

Now, it's not a really very impressive report. It doesn't even mention President Biden's ill-fated decision to run for reelection, not to mention any of his aging issues. It didn't mention tensions in the party over Israel-Gaza.

[09:20:06]

And I guess my question is, how can the Democratic Party hope to win tomorrow if it won't even honestly confront the problems of yesterday?

BOOKER: Well, first of all, I have had frustrations, as you and I were talking off camera, with the Democratic Party for a long time.

And the DNC has got to do a lot better if they're going to meet this moment in history. What I see when I travel around, though, is not people concerned with the Democratic Party. And my advice to the party leaders is that, be less concerned about the party and far more concerned about the American people.

The American people have lost trust because of all politics as usual. People are suffering, people are hurting, and they're going to support the leaders. And I'm seeing this in Talarico, in Ossoff, in Cooper in North Carolina, that those leaders are stepping up and saying, I don't give a damn about parties. I care about people. You cannot lead the people if they don't trust you, and that's what's

lacking right now with the party apparatus. But the people running out there that I'm running around this country trying to support, they're building real trust with the American people, and that's my hope.

TAPPER: So what's the message from Leader Schumer or Leader Jeffries on helping the American people?

I mean, I cover this for a living, and I'm not sure there's a coherent message about, elect Democrats because this is what we're going to do. I mean, I know you all hate Trump, but what else?

BOOKER: Well, that's, again, plainly what I have been saying. You are not going to win this election just by what you're against. You need to start articulating who you're for and what you're for. Have a vision that's compelling that not only engenders trust, but makes sense for the American people.

TAPPER: You still have faith in Schumer to be in charge of your party?

BOOKER: I am telling people left and right we are five months out from election. What is going to make the Republicans gleeful is if we're talking about each other in the Democratic Party and not talking about the realities that Americans are facing.

I am tired of all this machination about party politics. We are in a crisis right now, millions of Americans losing their health insurance, their costs skyrocketing. I talk to more and more New Jerseyans who are barely staying afloat. Enough of normal party politics.

We need to focus on the people, and the Democratic Party desperately needs new leadership, and that's what's exciting me about this cycle. It's not only new leaders emerging, but a new vision for our party. But you can damn well be sure that I'm going to be talking about what our party needs to do to change and what -- our party needs to go.

And the biggest issue for me, and I think what makes me frustrated with politics as usual, is the massive corruption going on in all three branches, from a Supreme Court that's taking unlimited gifts from billionaires who have interest in matters before them, to congresspeople trading stocks and accepting corporate cash and corporate PAC money, to a president who is setting records for being the greatest grifter in chief we have ever seen.

We need real change that engenders trust again in American politics, but, more importantly, in the people that are standing up right now and saying we need change.

TAPPER: But when you say you need new leadership, who? Who? I mean, new leadership suggests, first of all, that the old leadership, the current leadership, is not delivering.

So you haven't said you want Schumer to go, but that's a -- kind of a subtext of it.

BOOKER: No.

TAPPER: Who is -- who should be leading your party?

BOOKER: Look, again, this is why primaries are helpful, and this is why people who want to lead right now need to be stepping up and putting a vision before the American people.

I see that in the people I'm going to campaign for. And even in New Jersey, I'm rolling out new vision, get rid of income tax, federal income tax for the families. Your first $75,000 should not be taxed. That would give about 10 percent more income to most Americans, and I put out a plan to do that.

An anti-corruption policy that makes literally senators not be able to trade stocks. It's why I don't take corporate PAC money. It's why I don't take issue area PAC money. We need to start talking about why billionaires and the biggest corporations, we had 88 last year, pay no taxes of our biggest corporation, while firefighters or military people serving right now are paying a higher effective tax rate.

The system is rigged. People feel that, and they need leaders that speak to that pain and have a vision to get us out of it.

TAPPER: All right, Senator Cory Booker, Democrat of New Jersey, good luck in your primary running against nobody.

BOOKER: Let me just say, it's Memorial weekend.

TAPPER: Yes.

BOOKER: And we have lost four soldiers in this war. There are people every day...

TAPPER: Thirteen, 13 soldiers.

BOOKER: Thirteen soldiers, excuse me -- 14, actually...

TAPPER: Yes.

BOOKER: ... that are putting their lives on the line right now. We need to remember the 14 just recently lost.

But you and I are both literally sitting here. Freedom of the press, freedom of speech, all of those things were paid for by the sacrifices of our ancestors. This is a weekend that's not a weekend off. We should actually be focused in centering their sacrifice, especially right now that we're at war and there are people in harm's way.

TAPPER: Amen to that.

Thank you so much, Senator Cory Booker. Appreciate it.

Could a toxic tank of chemicals explode in California? I will ask EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin about what efforts are being made to stop it and much more next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:29:26]

TAPPER: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

Just about five miles away from Disneyland, 50,000 Californians have been forced to leave their homes, as authorities race to prevent an overheated tank filled with a highly toxic chemical from exploding.

Joining us now to discuss, Environmental Protection Administration Administrator Lee Zeldin, whose team is in California working to prevent a disaster.

Thank you so much for joining us, Administrator Zeldin.

What can you tell us about efforts to keep that tank from exploding and the air quality in the area, where people are complaining that they feel sick?

[09:30:02]

LEE ZELDIN, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ADMINISTRATOR: The Orange County fire authority is the lead agency.

You have all levels of government, local, state, federal, working together. EPA has personnel on the ground, air monitors deployed in the local community. We have been involved in the modeling of different scenarios.

We're being told that the tank will fail, but there are different scenarios as to what that means, the most catastrophic scenario being an explosion that results in other tanks to explode. That's the reason why you see such a big evacuation that's been done in the surrounding areas.

I'm being told this morning that the most likely scenario is one of a low-volume release, where the local authorities are going to be able to monitor, neutralize, and contain the threat. The Orange County fire authority is working to keep the temperature of the tank down. That is very important.

Keeping it under 85 degrees is key. And, right now, this is an emergency response. This isn't yet an environmental response, and the scale of that environmental response will be determined based off of what happens when that tank fails.

TAPPER: OK. Well, keep us posted on that.

I want to talk now about some of the deregulation efforts that you and the president have been talking about. I know you framed the easing of restrictions on refrigerants as an effort to lower grocery prices, but critics say the cost of groceries is largely high right now because of tariffs and obviously because of the soaring gas prices since the start of the Iran war.

So what would you say to critics who say that this effort when it comes to refrigerants is trying to address the wrong problem behind higher grocery prices?

ZELDIN: Well, listen, at EPA, our focus as it relates to this regulation is implementation of the AIM Act, which was passed and signed into law in 2020. It requires a phase out of HFCs 85 percent by 2035.

EPA has the responsibility of putting forth the regulations to implement that. The last administration went with a very aggressive timetable, more aggressive than what the law had required and after members of Congress had debated, deliberated on what would be the right phase-out.

As a consequence, whether it's grocery stores, many of which are small grocery stores -- they operate off of a much smaller margin. And you're talking about the semiconductor industry, but also average everyday Americans and the refrigerants that they need.

And one of the problems with the way that this phase-out has been getting implemented is that, if you have a part that goes down, if you need something serviced, if you need a supply, we believe that you should just be able to fix that part, rather than being required to get a whole new system.

That's really been the main economic impact that we have been concerned with, and we're trying to provide that flexibility, while still following our statutory obligation under this law and implementing the AIM Act responsibly.

So, as far as the grocery stores, that's $800 million worth of the $2.4 billion of savings that was announced this week between the technology transitions rule, as well -- which was finalized, as well as a proposed rule related to refrigerated trucks.

That was -- that piece, the Biden administration had operated off an assumption that refrigerated trucks have less than 15 pounds of refrigerants. They actually have more than 15 pounds of refrigerants. So we're working to deal with that bad assumption that was made.

Again, $2.4 billion of savings is very consequential, and we're happy to do it while following the law.

TAPPER: Earlier this month, you also drew criticism from environmentalists and also the MAHA movement that has been backing President Trump for the repeal of limits on four specific types of what are called forever -- forever chemicals in drinking water.

Now, I know you have said that the Biden administration rushed those regulations, which left the regulations open to being struck down in court. But the EPA's own Web site, your own Web site, notes that current scientific studies have shown that exposure to certain levels of PFAS may lead to -- quote -- "increased risk of some cancers" -- unquote -- "and damage to the body's immune system, hormone disruption, decreased fertility, developmental effects on children."

Do you really not have any concerns about these chemicals in drinking water? ZELDIN: Well, you happen to be talking to someone who was a member of

the PFAS Task Force in Congress, voted for the PFAS Action Act, had a lot of PFAS issues in my own congressional district that I have been tackling -- that I was tackling for a long time as a member.

We are keeping the limits on PFOA and PFOS. That deadline is 2029. We are going to be going through a public comment period, because we have received concern from some of these systems. You have rural water systems that might have five employees and installing a new treatment plant. They have concerns over the costs.

[09:35:04]

Congress is talking about tackling what's called passive receivers, which it's a good cause for them to be able to take up because, instead of polluters paying, you have a local water system passing off the cost to a rate payer, and people have to pay to clean up PFAS from their own water supply. So that's another good issue to tackle.

So they can request an extension of up to two years, but this is the most studied forms of PFAS, PFOA and PFOS. Now, you mentioned the four chemicals. This is a proposed rescission. The reason why is that we inherited litigation, because the Safe Drinking Water Act has a sequential process, a preliminary regulatory determination, a final regulatory determination, and then a proposed regulation.

We have to follow that process. There are multiple public comment periods in that process. When the Biden administration set the limits for these four, they combined steps, which you're not allowed to do under the Safe Drinking Water Act. That's why we inherited that litigation.

We're fixing that. And, by the way, at the end of this process, you might end up with stricter limits than what was set previously. We're just going to follow the Safe Drinking Act to a tee. It's going to be more durable of a solution.

If we didn't go through this process now proactively and we fight the litigation and then we lose the litigation and then we have to go through this process anyway, you actually will end up losing years of setting the limits on these four.

But fighting PFAS is important. We have announced a lot of grant funding, State Revolving Fund funding for this. The amount is into the billions. We provide a lot of technical assistance as it relates to this.

We -- our researchers, our dedicated career scientists are involved in a lot of important PFAS research. So this is a big focus of this agency, and it will continue to be for the long term.

TAPPER: EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, safe travels out there. Thank you so much.

ZELDIN: Thank you, Jake.

TAPPER: And, on this Memorial Day, sir, thank you for your service.

ZELDIN: Yes, sir. Thank you so much.

TAPPER: President Trump may be missing his son's wedding, but he says he's on the verge of making a deal with Iran. My panel weighs in next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:41:39]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUBIO: There is the possibility that, over the next few hours, the world will get some good news, at least with regards to the straits and to -- and with regards to a process that can ultimately leave us where the president wants us to be. And that is a world that no longer has to be in fear or worry about an Iranian nuclear weapon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: From Rubio's mouth to God's ears.

Secretary of State Rubio says he hopes an agreement to end the war with Iran, open the Strait of Hormuz, end Tehran's nuclear ambitions could be reached today.

My panel joins me now to discuss.

So, Axios is reporting that the deal would be a 60-day cease-fire, the strait would be reopened, Iran would be able to freely sell oil. Negotiations would be held on everything difficult, the nuclear program, capturing it all.

What do you -- what do you make of it all?

XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, this is -- I mean, Donald Trump said that this war would last two to three weeks. Now we're looking at this war lasting potentially until Labor Day.

If there is a 60 day cease-fire, this is not a long-term solution, where the JCPOA had a long-term solution.

TAPPER: Translation, JCPOA is the Obama Iran deal. Sorry. Keep going.

HINOJOSA: Yes, sorry for the dorky acronym there.

(LAUGHTER)

HINOJOSA: In addition, I think the biggest question on the nuclear on the nuclear part of this has also been deferred. And so what the JCPOA gave us was actually some certainty on that, while that is going to be kicked down the road, including sort of sanctions relief.

It's kind of they're putting some sanctions relief on now, instead of having Iran actually deliver something, which, again, seems very weak and seems like we're giving everything to Iran, instead of actually getting something out of them.

TAPPER: So, Scott, it's not just Xochitl or Senator Booker criticizing what they have heard of this deal. It's Ted Cruz. It's Mike Pompeo. What do you -- and, earlier, Thom Tillis. What do you think?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I wouldn't get ahead of the president on it. And what I have heard Secretary Rubio say this morning is that the administration, the president would never sign off on a deal that didn't have an end result of his principal objective, which is no nuclear weapons for Iran.

That's the number one issue. That's what they have engaged in this activity for. So I'd be shocked if they don't have a way to get to an ultimate scenario where Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon. And if Iran is serious about that, that's great.

I'm dubious. I don't know that we will ever have peace with these people. I mean, they chant "Death to America." I don't think they're going to wake up one day and decide that that was wrong and change their minds about that.

So, calling this a peace deal, to me, what you're trying to put in place is a situation where you have a security situation and a monitoring situation to keep them from ever being able to actually bring "Death to America." That's why I think the mission was righteous in the first place.

So, for me, number one issue, no nuclear weapons for Iran. I hope we get there.

TAPPER: Let's hope we all get there, yes, of course.

I want to bring in a former Democratic Congressman Joe Cunningham, who has a new book out called "Life of the Party: How Democrats Lost America's Trust and How They Can Win It Back."

So, the Democratic autopsy, the DNC autopsy came out because CNN got it and we were reporting on it. So they put it out there.

FMR. REP. JOE CUNNINGHAM (D-SC): Yes.

TAPPER: A pretty unimpressive document. Doesn't even mention Joe Biden's decision to run for reelection, divisions in the party over Hamas and Israel.

What was your take? And how can Democrats lose America's trust? I'm not going to read the whole book live on air, but tell us.

(LAUGHTER)

CUNNINGHAM: Well, look, I wasn't too surprised. You know, it's like the kid who didn't read the book giving a book report that's both incomplete and late. So I wasn't too surprised.

[09:45:00] It should have been released a lot sooner, the autopsy, but when you when you get right down to the core of it, right now, the favorability of Democratic Party is at 20 percent. And we have the wind at our back with 11-point advantage going into the midterms, but that's not enough.

Like, Democrats cannot just count on not being Trump or being against Trump. It has to be about something larger. And we have to show folks that we learned something from this past election, when President Biden was too old to run for reelection, and the majority of Democrats said that, although there wasn't a spark of courage among elected officials, save for Dean Phillips.

What did we bring out that and what did we learn from that? I think the Democratic Party should wrap its arms around age limits for politicians. It's incredibly popular. It would be nice for once to plant a flag on the right side of an 80/20 issue for once of the Democratic Party and drive that home and build some momentum on that.

TAPPER: You, you're a pollster by trade. What is the Democratic Party's -- why aren't -- I mean, Trump is unpopular at 37 percent, Democratic Party unpopular at 20 percent.

You heard Cory Booker laying out some things that I guess he thinks the Democrats should start talking about, no income tax for people who make -- for the first $75,000 of income, et cetera, et cetera. What do the Democrats need to do to improve their standing?

KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, right now, part of the reason why Democrats' numbers are so bad is because large numbers of people who think of themselves as Democrats are looking at the leadership of their party and saying, this is amateur hour. This is incompetence. This is, what are we even doing in the face of a threat that they view as large as Trump?

And what I think is fascinating is, Democrats are probably going to have a pretty decent midterm, and it will not be because of a single thing that the Democratic Party has done. It will be in spite of everything that the Democratic Party has done over the last two years.

TAPPER: So it'll be because of high prices and dissatisfaction with Trump?

SOLTIS ANDERSON: They have been given a gift in the things that have happened in terms of the high prices, a number of actions that the administration has taken in the last especially couple of weeks.

I mean, they are really -- both parties seem to be in a race to try to hand the midterms to the other side.

TAPPER: And you heard Thom Tillis talk about how he's going to take on this anti-weaponization fund, and he hopes that it's blocked. And you heard Ted Cruz talk about how it was a pretty ugly meeting.

President Trump does seem determined to talk about a lot of things and create a lot of news that doesn't have to do with bringing down prices.

JENNINGS: Yes.

And the truth is, they have some things to run on. I mean, the jobs reports the last couple of months have been good, the prescription drug stuff they have done, bringing down prices.

TAPPER: TrumpRx, sure.

JENNINGS: That's really good. Lots of people in the country are saving money on that. So they actually have a story to tell.

Those things have been pushed down to the bottom of the conversational food chain lately.

TAPPER: By Trump. By Trump.

JENNINGS: So you would hope, in the context of an election, you want to talk about the things that are going well that voters would like.

On the weaponization fund, I'm not surprised he's having trouble with the Senate. It was unruly to begin with, and now you got a couple of more people that don't really have any reason to get out of the way on something like this.

It's $1.8 billion as well. I would expect the Senate would want to know how that's being spent. That's usually what they do. So, I think Trump's instinct that the government has punished people unfairly is actually true. The Supreme Court did rule that hundreds of people after January 6 were over or unfairly prosecuted.

The question, is this the right mechanism, and was it handled correctly with the legislative branch? And, obviously, the Senate blew up this week over it.

TAPPER: Sochi, you worked at the Justice Department under Attorney General Merrick Garland. Now they're taking down a bunch of the press releases about the arrests and indictments and prosecutions of people who beat up police officers.

HINOJOSA: Yes.

TAPPER: Let us grant, just for the sake of argument, that some people were overprosecuted, just for the sake of argument.

But we're talking about Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and people who beat up cops here that could get -- that are going to apply for some of this money.

HINOJOSA: Yes. And these are people who have also committed crimes again.

We have seen several people who were there on January 6 who were convicted under the Biden administration who have been rearrested on other crimes. The reality is, is that juries -- there these people were convicted by juries, and none of those convictions were overturned.

And so I think it is critical to point that out and to show these people did harm on January 6, and both sides of the aisle for quite some time at the very beginning actually praised putting these people into prison. It wasn't until Donald Trump said, no, they were overprosecuted, whatever, pardoned them, all of these things.

Now the Republican Party is switching gears on this. I think, on this Weaponization Committee, the interesting part of this is, the Justice Department did not weaponize these folks in the last administration, but there has been weaponization in this administration.

And I don't know if they're going to apply for the fund.

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Let me just bring in Congressman Cunningham in the minute we have left.

Do the American people care about that issue?

CUNNINGHAM: Well, it's a bad signal that the president is focused on that, cash for cowards, the people who beat up police officers.

Restitution is for victims, not for convicted felons. So it shows that he's taken his eye off the ball of the economy. Americans' bank accounts are being drained while they fill up their gas tanks. Health care prices are out of control, and American dream is being pushed too far out of reach, for folks because of private equity in the housing market.

[09:50:08]

These are the concerns that are facing everyday Americans. If Democrats are laser-focused on that, they can be even more successful in midterms.

TAPPER: All right, thanks, one and all, for being here. Appreciate it.

Up next: The cost of war, the actual, true cost of war, we're going to break it down for you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:55:00]

TAPPER: This Memorial Day weekend, I want to take a moment to remember the U.S. service members who have been killed just this spring during Operation Epic Fury in the war against Iran.

Master Sergeant Tyler Simmons, Captain Ariana Savino, Tech Sergeant Ashley Pruitt, Captain Seth Koval, Major John Klinner, Captain Curtis Angst, Sergeant Benjamin Pennington, Sergeant 1st Class Nicole Amor, Sergeant 1st Class Noah Tietjens, Captain Cody Khork, Sergeant Declan Coady, Chief Warrant Officer Robert Marzan, and Major Jeffrey O'Brien. On this weekend especially, we at STATE OF THE UNION and CNN and the

Tapper family, we are profoundly grateful for their service, and we are moved by their selflessness. And we hope their memories will be a blessing to their friends and families.

And, to all of you watching, we hope you will have a meaningful Memorial Day as we all take time to reflect on those who make the ultimate sacrifice for our country and for our freedom.

Thank you for spending your Sunday morning with us.

"FAREED ZAKARIA GPS" starts next.