Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Dow Closes Up But Tariff Fears Stocks In Red For Quarter; Trump: "Not Joking" About Third Term, Despite Constitution; White House Says "Case Has Been Closed" On Signalgate. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired March 31, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:03]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: A mental health therapist telling CNN a stuffed animal can - maybe not that one, that one's creepy. But nonetheless, it can provide comfort in the face of anxiety, not just for kids, but for people of all ages.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Experts say the pandemic brought this into sharper focus, with sales of Plush Toys spiking 21 percent among adults as people sought relief from the isolation of lockdowns.
You can seek relief from isolation with THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT, which starts right now. Thanks so much for joining us.
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: It's boom versus bust. Let's head into THE ARENA.
Right now, new CNN reporting inside the talks over tariffs. President Trump weighing the final details ahead of Wednesday's expected announcement. Wall Street mostly fighting its way into the green, hoping the president's trade gamble will lead to an American boom and not a bust.
Also this hour, not a joke, and also not legal. The president insisting he's serious about a third term, even though the Constitution says no way.
Plus, case closed? The White House says they're done with their internal investigation of Signalgate as a new report reveals some internal struggles for the national security advisor.
Republican Congressman Mike Lawler, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, will be here live in THE ARENA.
(MUSIC)
HUNT: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt, welcome to THE ARENA. It is wonderful to have you with us on this Monday.
As we come on the air, President Donald Trump appears to be gambling with success, making some pretty big bets and hoping they pay off. Right now, Wall Street is on edge. Two of the three major indexes edged into the green today, including the Dow. Although we can now officially say that stocks have had their worst start to the year since 2022, and it is not, at least for now, everything the president has been predicting.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think we're going to have an economy that booms, the biggest boom we've ever had in this country.
The next Trump economic boom begins the moment the polls close.
This place will be booming.
I think this country is going to boom, Boom Town USA. We're going to boom.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Boom, as in the opposite of bust. That's what he means. But could it be the kind of boom that destroys instead?
Overnight, Goldman Sachs nearly doubled their odds of a U.S. recession sometime over the next year, saying the chances of that happening are now better than 1 in 3. If you've ever been to a casino, those odds not so great.
We are getting a new example today from the Detroit free press of just how real the anxiety is. The paper is reporting on an internal memo executives at General Motors and Ford sent to their employees, essentially trying to calm everyone down, acknowledging an impact on their manufacturing footprint, and vowing to be, quote, nimble in the wake of the tariffs' announcement.
That memo actually went out the same day, the president's trade adviser told us this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETER NAVARRO, WHITE HOUSE SENIOR COUNSELOR FOR TRADE & MANUFATURING: The Big Three so-called American companies, GM, Ford, Stellantis, they're not -- they're not really American companies. In fact, they have less --
HUNT: General Motors isn't an American company?
NAVARRO: They have less American content in their cars than some of the other companies that are operating in America, like Honda.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Of course, the worry for everyday Americans is that things like cars will get more expensive. When asked over the weekend if the prices on foreign made cars were going to go up, the president said this, quote, I couldn't care less. I hope they raise their prices because if they do, people are going to buy American made cars. We have plenty, just not any made by Ford and General Motors, according to his trade adviser. Anyway, the president may not care, at least right now, but we know
that voters do. The economy, particularly how expensive everything is, is consistently the issue that people say is most important to them. And even Republicans who fully support the president but don't love his tariffs are preparing people for a bumpy road.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JAMES LANKFORD (R-OK): The economy. This is kind of like a kitchen remodel or a bathroom remodel. Theres a bit of a mess at the beginning, but everybody has a long-term look of where we're headed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: I don't know if you've ever done a home remodel of your kitchen or bathroom, but if you have, you know that it basically never goes to plan. It usually takes more time, more money, more aggravation than you thought it would.
But anyway, the president's rolled the dice on tariffs is a gamble for both the present, your present, our present, and our future. Trump -- the president is also placing a bet on his own future.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Will you clarify? Are you planning to leave office January 20th, 2029, or are you saying you might not?
TRUMP: Go ahead. Any other questions?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Yes. He is now openly moving ahead with circumventing the Constitution to somehow try to be president for a third term?
We know this is not something new. Trump has been talking about a third term since he lost reelection the first time, but it's just been shrugged off as kind of eh -- LOL. "The New York Times" had reported last month that Trump brings it up as a way to aggravate Democrats, and that it's not serious.
[16:05:03]
But this time he said, quite literally, quote, I'm not joking in an interview with NBC, adding that there are, quote, methods where he could have a third term. What might those methods be? It seems like only he knows, but we know that it is the latest, not normal thing in a very not normal time.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR, SUPREME COURT: Once norms are broken, then you're shaking some of the foundation of the rule of law.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Our panel is here. But first, lets get straight to CNN's Jeff Zeleny, who is live for us from the White House.
Because, Jeff, we do have some new details about how the president is considering, apparently multiple plans to try to implement these reciprocal tariffs. What do we know?
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Kasie, these plans are coming into slightly sharper view here as they're setting up. We're getting closer to what the president has branded "Liberation Day".
We do know that this is going to be a major event held on Wednesday in the Rose Garden, the first event of this new administration in the Rose Garden. And going into that, we are told the president is hearing from a variety of his advisers. And we know that there's been a lot of differences in opinions on the narrow sense of what types of, of tariffs of these should be, should it be across the board at 20 percent?
There are people who believe that, that Peter Navarro is one of them. You had him on your show last week, but he also makes the point that you just played there about what is an American, a car. Thats a pretty good metaphor for all of this.
It's very hard in this global economy to tell exactly what is entirely American-made and what is not. This is a hybrid. That is how this economy is created. That's why this is a much more complicated.
But there are others inside the administration, the treasury secretary and others, who believe that a more sort of country-by-country approach is a better way to go. That, of course, is complicated as well. So, we also do not know if Mexico and Canada are -- are going to be go back to those 25 percent tariffs that the president has pulled back a couple of times.
So, one thing we know the president believes in tariffs. He also believes in them as a message to a change, and, you know, sort of a push back and forth. But on Wednesday, in the Rose Garden, we will see what "Liberation Day" means to Donald Trump.
HUNT: Okay. Jeff Zeleny for us at the White House -- Jeff, always grateful to have you. Thank you.
All right. We have a great panel today. Former federal prosecutor, CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams; Annie Linskey, White House reporter for "The Wall Street Journal"; former Democratic Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan; Marc Short, the former chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence; and David Remnick, who is the editor of "The New Yorker". He also joins us.
Welcome to all of you.
David, I really want to dig into this great interview that you did with Chris murphy. In that it really sort of sets kind of a big picture stage for all of these conversations that we are having and what the president had to say on Sunday also seems to really underscore this. There is this has been this sense. Well, it's all just a joke to Trump.
What did you make of his comments and how would you explain what you understand about where Chris Murphy is? The Democratic Party is, and what we should be looking at today.
DAVID REMNICK, EDITOR, THE NEW YORKER: Well, I think Chris Murphy fears that the Democratic Party and the opposition to Trump is pretty listless and confused. And he's trying to do his part to energize it. In interviews with me and other appearances. And he even says that it's a matter of months, not even a year, where we will determine whether or not were going to have a free and fair election in 2026, much less 2028, and that the president intends, in various ways, to try to erode the capacity of the Democrats when it comes to 2026.
Now, as far as his remark about maybe having a third term, I think this can, in gentle terms, be called yet again, the great cliche of our era, moving the Overton Window.
In other words, what Trump does is something so outrageous that then sinks in and we spend our time thinking that it may be possible. And sometimes it is. Look at his remarks about Gaza that maybe the thing to do is ethnically cleanse Gaza and make it into a Trump casino. And then when asked if he's kidding around, he's not kidding around.
And suddenly you find that in Israel itself, 70 percent of the populace starts to think this might be a good idea. And I think he sees that rhetorical gambit as a as a policy triumph. Over and over again, he uses the outrageous which he's trafficked in for decades as a tool of politics and a tool of power.
[16:10:01]
And, of course, the ultimate goal here is to undermine liberal democracy, as we've understood it for, for so long. And in its place to put in place a more particularly American autocratic, means of governing. And that is an immense, historical shift, not just in rhetorical terms, but in political terms. And it's an immense danger.
HUNT: Marc Short, I want to bring you in on this, because obviously, elections are choices between two people, right? Two parties, but really two people. In the case of the presidency, obviously the American people chose Donald Trump in spite of the many flaws that had been, you know, on display in our public life.
However, when you think about what David Remnick is positing there, I continue to go back to January 6th, which I know you experienced very personally. I did it in my own way, in a less intense way than all of you did, of course. But -- and our country experienced it.
Part of, I think for me what mattered so much about that day was that I had spent years with many people telling me, oh, it's not actually as bad as you think it could be. This, this -- it's all fine. I mean, he says that in public, but we're working on this in private. Like, it's just -- just calm down. Everything is going to be okay.
And then on that day, we experienced something collectively that I think if you'd asked Senator Rob Portman, for example, or Senator Mitch McConnell, we experienced something that everybody thought was absolutely impossible.
So, my question to you is, do you think David's right in how Trump is shifting this conversation about what's okay in terms of how long a president can serve?
MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: Yes, I think he's -- he's very gifted at being able to shift the natural -- national conversation I think that the events of January 6th, the perception of the American people, the days after January 6th is very different than it is today. I think he's done an effective job of recreating -- recreating what that narrative is.
Having said that, I'm not convinced he really wants to run for another term. I do think he wants to shift the conversation because he doesn't want to be a lame duck, and this helps to make sure that he continues to have influence with his agenda.
So -- so, yes, I agree that he's changing the narrative. I'm not convinced that that's really a pathway to become a third term president.
HUNT: Congressman, what do you think?
TIM RYAN (D), FORMER OHIO U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Yeah, I agree. I, you know, again. He doesn't want to talk about the stock market. He doesn't want to talk about the economy. He doesn't want to talk about inflation. So, he's a master at the smoke and mirrors. And I think this is a perfect example where the Democrats unfortunately continue, and that's serious.
So, you can't just say, well, they take the bait because it is a serious thing and he is capable of doing it. That's what makes you crazy.
But the Democrats have got to be very, very disciplined in in their approach to this. They've got to keep it on the tariffs. They've got to keep it on the economy and inflation and those bread and butter issues that we lost so much ground on.
And is that -- is what he's saying important? Yes. Can we live there? No, because people in Youngstown, Ohio, aren't worried about that. They're worried about the bread and butter issues. And you got to stay on those, or you're going to continue to be in the wilderness, and they're going to continue to vote for a guy like that.
HUNT: I want to come back to that with you, because I want to talk about tariffs in the auto industry.
But first, Elliot, I want to play a little bit of what Chris Murphy said to David Remnick on this podcast about democracy and its death. And then you can tell us whether any of it would actually be legal. Listen.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP) SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): This is how democracy dies, that everybody just gets scared. You make a few examples, and everyone else just decides to comply.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
HUNT: So, is he right? And would our legal system go along with it?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I mean, there's a question for Marc Short. It's not just the legal system. It's whether Republicans in Congress and around the country will go along with it. It's the most important thing that Chris murphy said. There was that last line at the end about complicity. It's how do people react to this behavior.
You know, it's interesting. You know, in response to the conversation you all were having earlier, I think I'm the only person here with parents from a different country, I think, and forgive me if.
HUNT: It's certainly true for me.
WILLIAMS: Right. Now, I know where your parents, unless we treat Michigan as a different country, you know.
RYAN: That's a whole other conversation --
WILLIAMS: Oh, Ohio, right. No.
HUNT: He's definitely from a foreign country of Ohio. Yeah.
WILLIAMS: Foreign --
HUNT: Continue.
WILLIAMS: Honestly, it should shock nobody who has immigrant parents or has a significant number of relatives in another country how autocracies happen. And it should shock no one that, people come into power and that governments can change and shift and that there can be protests on the -- on the one sacred seat of government. This happens all over South and Central America all the time. It happens in Eastern Europe.
And the idea that we as Americans think that somehow we are immune from these big shifts in government, it's almost American arrogance. And I don't say -- it's not a criticism of anybody here, but I just think we grow up thinking that America is in some way special. But you're seeing it now and it's playing out.
[16:15:00]
ANNIE LINSKEY, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Yeah. And, you know, I was talking to somebody who's sort of in the Trump world today about this very topic, and he said to me, look, this is just Trump trolling. This is what he does. This is classic Trump. He does it all the time. And I said to him, okay, give me an example. What's another example?
And he said, well, Greenland, of course. And I was like, okay, great. The vice president was just there. So, I think that one thing we have learned over ten years of covering Trump is that when he says something, it we should take it seriously.
WILLIAMS: Yeah. Now, you know, in fairness though, he says something and Democrats lose their mind.
LINSKEY: Yes. Yeah, that's a good point.
WILIAMS: It's important to take the temperature down and focus on things like that.
LINSKEY: But those are two different things. I mean, one is politically, what is the smartest way to react to it. And as a Democrat, you know, you have some, you know, wise words in that regard. But from where we sit, I think that what we've learned is to take a --
HUNT: David Remnick, I mean, on this question. And, you know, we started off talking about tariffs and, you know, the cost of living and how, you know, the congressman here is saying that's what Democrats should focus on.
On the tariff question. We have seen him be both consistent in saying he wants to use this power and then completely inconsistent in terms of actually following through on the deadlines that he sets for himself. It seems like perhaps he's going to actually follow through with this April 2nd one. But is this not part of why it is so hard to figure out when he is actually going to do what he says he's going to do, and when he's just saying something for the sake of it.
REMNICK: Consistency is for other people. Consistency is for other politicians to be judged on this is an entirely different animal. Donald Trump is something that we haven't seen at that level of politics ever. And earlier, one of your panelists used the phrase arrogance that this is American arrogance, that we are somehow immune from history.
I would put it a slightly different way. With respect, I think it's American innocence that in some way we are just such a lucky land. That for 250 years, we have not faced this kind of threat in the same way, arguably. And so, for us to hear this coming out of the mouth of somebody who came to fame, as a TV huckster, as, you know, the star of "The Apprentice" and a guy who's a B.S. artist in so many ways.
We don't take it seriously somehow. We think that we're immune from these trends. I -- it always occurs to me, like I began my journalistic career in a in an era of optimism where the best possible things, liberalization was occurring all over the world.
Right now, the opposite is happening -- nativism, nascent authoritarianism, the undermining of the rule of law. What threatens us on the grand scale is a threat from all over the world, all over the world. This is a global trend. And just. And Trump is just -- has these
particular skills that apply in an American context that bedazzle so many of us.
HUNT: Yeah, it's -- it's remarkable. You put it that way. I mean, I came of age at the wall was falling. Europe was becoming a place where you were using one currency instead of the mark and the pound and the franc, et cetera. You could travel to places like Syria and China easily. And that is really starting to change in dramatic ways.
David Remnick, I'm so grateful to have had your perspective on the show today. I do hope you come back. Thanks very much.
REMNICK: A pleasure to be here.
HUNT: Everyone else is going to stand by.
I do want to know, what are you hearing to all our sources and friends, you know who you are. Check your inbox.
Here's our question for you today. We have asked this before. We -- I'm sure we'll ask it again. Will Trump run for a third term? Is this real? Is this not?
You have until the bottom of the hour to send us your thoughts, tips, exclusives? If it's the wrong question, tell us that, too, and we're going to let our viewers in on the conversation coming up later on in the hour.
But up next here, case closed. New reporting on how the White House is handling the now infamous Signal leak. And Republican Congressman Mike Lawler will be here in THE ARENA. We'll get his take, up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:23:38]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: Mike Waltz continues to be an important part of his national security team, and this case has been closed here at the White House as far as we are concerned. There have been steps made to ensure that something like that can obviously never happen again, and we're moving forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: The White House announcing today that the Signal-gate matter is closed, as far as they're concerned. That as "The Wall Street Journal" reports, that while Trump decided not to fire National Security Adviser Mike Waltz over the group chat, he remains on very shaky ground inside the White House.
The president reportedly unloading expletives and blaming Waltz in private conversations. "The Journal", also reporting, quote, waltz has created and hosted multiple other national security -- sensitive national security conversations on Signal with cabinet members, including separate threads on how to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine, as well as military operations.
The lack of accountability, apparently angering constituents. At one town hall over the weekend, they lashed out at Republican Congresswoman Victoria Spartz after she refused to call for the resignations of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, or Mike Waltz.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CONSTITUENT: Would demand the immediate resignation of Pete Hegseth, Michael Waltz and the rest of the group chat?
REP. VICTORIA SPARTZ (R-IN): I -- so let -- let me just address -- no, I will not do that.
(BOOS)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[16:25:03]
HUNT: All right. Joining us now is Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
Congressman, thanks so much for being here.
REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): Thanks for having me.
HUNT: Are you comfortable with the idea that there\s going to be no accountability in what happened here?
LAWLER: Well, look, when we look at national security incidents in recent history, including in the Biden administration, where 13 U.S. service members died as a result of the disastrous withdrawal in Afghanistan, and not one single person was fired or held accountable. I think, for some of my Democratic colleagues to be demanding resignations here is a little bit ridiculous.
HUNT: I certainly -- I completely understand the deaths of those service members is absolutely not comparable at all to anything that was conducted on a phone. I totally understand that.
But I think the -- the challenge here is that there's a risk that something similar could happen if this continues to occur. Are you confident it's not going to anymore?
LAWLER: Which is why when this story broke, I made very clear that that should not have occurred. I do not think whether its classified or sensitive, that any type of discussion like that should occur using Signal, despite the fact that CISA had issued a directive under the Biden administration in December of 2020 for to encourage folks to use end to end encryption and use Signal apps like Signal. NSA has since put out, you know, guidance saying not to do that in certain instances. Obviously, I think this was a very clear example where it should not
have been utilized. I think those safeguards should be put in place. And, obviously, it was an embarrassment for the administration. Should it result in the firing of the national security advisor? In my opinion, no.
HUNT: Let's talk a little bit about the economy. Obviously, something that's on everybody's minds right now. The markets did seem to recover a little bit, but there was a comment from President Trump over the weekend in a phone interview with NBC, and they quoted him as saying this. Quote, he was asked what would happen if automakers, foreign automakers raised their prices because of tariffs.
He says this, quote, I couldn't care less. I hope they raise their prices because if they do, people are going to buy American made cars. We have plenty.
Now, I asked Peter Navarro, his trade adviser, about these car companies, and he said that the American companies are not actually making -- are not American, partly because they're bringing their parts from other -- some of their parts from other places. He said Honda was more American.
The bottom line here is that cars are made in all sorts of places because of the way our system is, and these, he seems to be saying, I couldn't care less that your prices are going to go up. Do you care?
LAWLER: Of course I care. Prices obviously are the biggest driver of concern for the American people. Its frankly why Republicans were successful in the November elections. The cost of living under Democratic rule in Washington and in states like New York has exploded. And you look at, for instance, the average mortgage cost up $1,000 a month. Under Joe Biden, costing people an additional $12,000 a year.
So yes, cost to me is the single biggest issue. Obviously, we've seen inflation come down. We've seen the consumer price index come down.
There is a lot more work to be done, which is part of what we're focused on in reconciliation. I think the president's point on tariffs is this ultimately, you have countries like India, for instance, which have very high tariff rates. You have countries like Japan that manufacture cars, but that put barriers in place to U.S. cars going into their country. You have Europe putting price controls on American prescription drugs.
When we talk about fair trade and free trade, we don't actually have it because a lot of these countries, including allies, have put restrictions on U.S. goods going and being exported. And so, what we are trying to do, and what the president is trying to do, is actually level the playing field, bring down overall costs.
Yes, I -- I understand the market is a little skittish and concerned, obviously, but I think in the immediate short term, the objective obviously is to force behavioral change from these countries. And if they're not willing to do that and tariffs do go up, the objective then, of course, is for Americans to purchase American made products.
And so that's why when Chuck Schumer, for instance, stood at a press conference holding a bottle of Corona and talking about how the impact on the cost of Corona. Well, we have Budweiser, we have bud light, we have American made beer. Certainly, that obviously is in the marketplace. And we want American companies and jobs to do well.
And so, yes, we want an economy that works. We want trade that is free and fair. We want prosperity around the globe, but it requires these countries, including many allies, to start playing by the same set of rules.
[16:30:09]
HUNT: Congressman, we were just having an extended discussion about some other comments that the president made in this interview that he said he is quote, unquote, not joking when he wants to run for a third term. Do you think President Trump can run for a third term? Should he and would you support him?
LAWLER: Well, as a Republican, I and many would not be open to the idea of Barack Obama running for a third term.
And so, I think the -- folks have to be careful here. If you're starting to question the constitutionality of this, my view is that the Constitution is very clear. You can serve two terms as president.
And, you know, if it was good enough for George Washington, its good enough for everyone else. And I fundamentally believe the president was elected here to do the job. I think he's doing it well. But he needs to focus his effort and energy on this. And I think some of my Democratic colleagues need to learn to stop taking the bait on everything he says.
HUNT: All right. Last but not least, are you going to run for governor of New York?
LAWLER: I have -- I've given it a lot of thought. Certainly, a lot of folks have encouraged me to do so.
New York under Kathy Hochul has been a disaster. We lead the nation in outmigration, have the highest tax burden, the worst business climate. Crime is up. The migrant crisis has crippled our economy.
The governor is proposing a $260 billion budget, up $100 billion.
HUNT: You have thought of this. You got your talking points down.
LAWLER: But we'll make a decision in the coming months. I haven't -- I haven't made a decision quite yet.
HUNT: Well, we'll see if you can lift that SALT tax increase and use that on the campaign trail.
LAWLER: That's critical. And the president is fully on board with us doing that. And that obviously matters to New Yorkers. The high cost of living is the top issue.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Mike Lawler, very grateful to have you in the arena. Thanks very much for being here.
All right. Coming up next here, Elon Musk throws a lot of cheddar for Wisconsin Supreme Court election. We'll explain.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:36:32]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELON MUSK, TECH BILLIONAIRE: We got to pull a rabbit out of the hat. Next level. We're actually going to have a steady stream of rabbits out of the hat, like its an ark of rabbits flying through the air. And landing in a voting booth. Thats basically what's needed is, is -- is we need to generate an anomaly in the matrix.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Because I guess we're living in the matrix now.
Elon Musk was campaigning and handing out million dollar checks, that's a real sentence, in Wisconsin for a state Supreme Court candidate. Musk and groups associated with him have poured more than $20 million into the race that is set to decide the court's majority.
In turn, Democrats trying to make this race a referendum on Elon Musk.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SUSAN CRAWFORD, WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT CANDIDATE: As a little girl growing up in Chippewa Falls, I never could have dreamed that I'd be running against the richest man in the world.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: It is one of three key races were going to be watching closely tomorrow, as Florida also holds two special elections to fill House seats vacated by Matt Gaetz and Tim Walz.
Our panel is back here.
And, Marc Short, I mean an incredible amount of attention. We should not lose sight of the fact that Tesla is going to have a major case pending before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Theres some, you know --
(LAUGHTER)
RYAN: Minor detail.
HUNT: Self interest potentially at play here --
RYAN: Redistricting.
HUNT: And redistricting, yes.
How do you see it?
SHORT: Well, look, I think that -- I've never been a proponent of campaign finance limitations, even when it was George Soros spending a lot of money a decade ago. And Democrat.
HUNT: George Soros has also been spending in this race, actually.
SHORT: He has been $2 million. I do still think that the reality is that there should be full disclosure. And I think that people who end up injecting themselves in the race become a campaign issue. And I think that's, you know, that may not work out to the benefit of Republicans in this case, even though Elon Musk has benefited a lot of Republicans helped get a lot of elected this last cycle by making yourself a campaign issue. It's less so.
I still think Wisconsin is going to come down to the two issues that elected Donald Trump, the border and the economy. And I think there's good grades on the border. But I think that the president's economic and trade agenda is one that's counterproductive. That could have consequences on Tuesday.
HUNT: Well, so, say a little bit more about that because there's also this piece where we have two house races in Florida in like very Trumpy places, right? Like Matt Gaetz district is plus 37 for Republicans. Mike Waltz is plus 30.
And yet they're forced to pull at least Stefanik's nomination because they're worried about kind of the landscape across the board. Is -- is that the economy?
SHORT: I think it is, Kasie. I think the reality is that a lot of Americans elected him to secure the border and to bring back the economic policy of the first administration that I think the deregulatory approach, the tax relief approach was incredibly successful. But the tariffs were targeted toward China. This blanket approach, there's news today that Japan and South Korea are partnering with China now in trade negotiations against the United States.
When we targeted China, it was because you helped to rally other nations to isolate China. This trade agenda is so economically illiterate. Its also from a national security perspective, is basically rallying countries that should be our allies to Chinas side.
And from an economic perspective, you're now seeing it's not just the markets. You saw a steel manufacturer on Friday announced 1,200 layoffs. We all say this is to benefit steel workers. And then the administration a couple of weeks ago says, you know what? In order to lower the price of eggs, we're going to start importing eggs. How is that consistent with the notion you're saying you're going to basically put up a moat around the world and have massive tariffs if you're, on the other hand, saying, really the way to lower prices is to import eggs? [16:40:07]
It doesn't make sense economically and from a national security perspective, it's devastating.
HUNT: Tim Ryan, you've seen in your own communities, you've talked a lot about this on the campaigns that you've run, the impact that free trade had, part of why -- you know, we got here was the NAFTA free trade agreement, and it did really impact those communities. But considering now what those companies need and the jobs they are able to provide, what is the right balance here in your view?
RYAN: Well, no matter what you decide, like sticking to a policy would probably be a decent start and giving companies a chance to implement the tariff or whatever over the course of, however, a -- years probably.
HUNT: Takes time.
RYAN: It takes -- it takes time. And the knee jerk thing, I think, is what's really causing a lot of the problems. But me and Mark we're just talking about Trump actually had a signature achievement in his last four years.
Was the U.S. -- the Mexican-Canada trade agreement, where there were labor standards for Mexico to lift up their workers? They're giving them the right to organize, so much so that Rich Trumka and the AFL- CIO signed off on the trade deal, which was never happened in my 20 years in Congress.
So, you're actually kneecapping your own economic trade agenda that you spent a lot of time building? Last time that was working out fine.
Now, if you think and I'm -- look, I'm a pro-union Democrat from, like, the Mahoning Valley. But if you think these factories are going to pick up from the maquiladoras in Mexico, for they've been there for the last 30 years, and you're going to move them back to Youngstown, Ohio, that is just not going to happen.
And so, I think there's got to be some level of honesty with -- with what you're doing here. You need to do the chips. Like how do we get to the high-end manufacturing. You're -- you're going to screw up your inflationary agenda too, because, all of a sudden, prices are going to go through the roof.
You're pissing off our allies in the world, like even the great economist Joe Rogan is like, what are you doing?
SHORT: And you're reelecting the Liberal Party in Canada.
RYAN: Yeah.
SHORT: I mean, conservatives were going to win. We were going to win for the first time in -- since Harper.
RYAN: There's -- there's no strategy here. And let me just say just to tie the Elon Musk, you know, cheeseheads tariffs, all of this breaking news coming together.
HUNT: Tie it together, put a bow on top and then we'll go.
RYAN: Right now, it's like -- they're just news stories, right? You're just -- you're cranking out news stories. But they are starting to lay the groundwork for a real argument against them.
You've got a billionaire running around giving out checks when he has cases pending before the court. I'm from Ohio. Michigan, like we're Big Ten Midwest states. People in Wisconsin aren't going to -- aren't going to go for that.
WILLIAMS: Either way, it will be read as a success for Democrats only because Republicans had to spend money there. And the narrative is they should have won these seats and they didn't. And or they won them by a big amount and did not.
RYAN: Could be. But you're raising prices. You're in bed with billionaires and you have no economic agenda. Thats laying off steelworkers. Thats not going to bear well for you.
HUNT: All right. Coming up next here, we've got a blunt message from President Trump to Vladimir Putin.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:47:47]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I was disappointed in a certain way. Some of the things that were said over the last day or two having to do with Zelenskyy, because when he considers Zelenskyy not credible, he's supposed to be making a deal with him. Whether you like him or you don't like him. So, I wasn't happy with that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Quote: Disappointed in a certain way. That wasn't quite as harsh as the way Trump characterized it in a phone interview with NBC over the weekend, when Trump said he was, quote, very angry and, quote, pissed off at the Russian president for criticizing Zelenskyy's credibility. Something Trump would never do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: A dictator without elections, Zelenskyy better move fast, or he's not going to have a country left.
I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job.
If you didn't have our military equipment --
VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: You invited --
TRUMP: If you didn't have our military equipment, this war would have been over in two weeks.
ZELENSKYY: In three days, I heard it from Putin in three days. This is something --
TRUMP: Maybe less.
ZELENSKYY: In two weeks. Of course, yes.
TRUMP: It's going to be a very hard thing to do business like this. I'll tell you.
If he's capable of making peace, which he may or may not be, but I want somebody that's going to make peace. Again, he doesn't have the cards.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: So, Annie Linskey, I guess Donald Trump is just at everybody now because he clearly was angry at Zelenskyy. Now he's apparently angry at Putin. How do you read how and why he's doing this right now?
LINSKEY: Yeah, I mean, I feel like this is maybe, maybe one area where Donald Trump is beginning to sound almost like every other American leader who has had to deal with Vladimir Putin in the last 2 or 3 decades. I mean, there's this sort of frustration that he's showing. And, you know, it's funny because when you rewind, maybe, I don't know, 3 or 4, maybe, maybe four weeks. I remember being in a cabinet meeting with Donald Trump, and it seemed like that he and his administration were on the verge of a peace deal. And that is, you know, we're just so far away from that in this moment.
WILLIAMS: Yeah, it's you know, we were talking earlier in the hour with respect to the economy and tariffs. And what is our position as a country like, do we support them do we not? And it's the uncertainty that is frustrating voters.
You know, if you were to ask people now what does Donald Trump think about Vladimir Putin or what is the American posture toward Russia vis a vis Ukraine?
[16:50:07]
I think the answer is not entirely clear, because the narrative changes so much coming out of the White House. And I think it's, you know, it's just adding to a lot of the chaos and uncertainty that I think people are beginning to find a little bit frustrating.
HUNT: So, John Bolton, the one-time national security advisor in Trump, the first Trump administration, recently had this to say about how he understands Donald Trump's relationship with Vladimir Putin. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN BOLTON, FORMER TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: He thinks he and Putin are friends. Putin doesn't think they're friends. He thinks Trump is an easy mark and he thinks he's manipulable.
It's not inevitable that Putin's going to get everything that he wants. He could make a mistake, but the odds are in his favor now. And I think he does want to slow roll things because he believes momentum on the battlefield is flowing in his direction.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Marc Short, you obviously worked in the first Trump administration with the vice president, Mike Pence. Do you think Bolton is right about how Trump thinks about Putin, and how are we seeing it play out here?
SHORT: I think that Bolton's right, that there is a big departure from the first administration policy toward Russia in the second administration, regardless of the rhetoric in the first administration.
We canceled Nord Stream 2. The Biden administration immediately put it back in place. The Trump administration took out more than 100 mercenaries of Russia in Syria when Obama had said, don't cross a red line. The Trump administration sanctioned a lot of Russians.
The quick start of this second administration has been one that has given every overture toward Putin. And this is a man. If you look at him, he's not just a brutal dictator. He has authorized the raping of women in Ukraine and the stealing of children and bringing them across the Russian line and scattering them across the country to have a clear-eyed view of Russia would be important for this administration. And right now, it appears in their effort to try to get some sort of peace deal.
They're basically abandoning the principles that have made, I think, America great on the foreign stage. And I think that that there is a significant departure. And so, whether or not I agree with Bolton's view of the way he looks at it, I do think that right now, the president looks weaker in this moment of having given more to Putin. And -- and I think that the first administration policies are more clear.
HUNT: Interesting.
All right. So earlier, we asked our sources and friends whether Trump will run for a third term. So here's what some of you had to say. One Democratic campaign operative wrote in this, quote, he's never walked away from anything on his own terms. It has the side benefit of owning the libs. There is no instrument to actually stop him.
One anti-Trump Republican campaign operative writes this, quote, not a joke, but will not happen. A Vance-Trump ticket would lose. If it didn't, Vance would double cross him and continue as president. A little bit of a some -- some -- some joking underscores that there.
Congressman, you talked about this a little bit earlier in the show as well. There does seem to be some cognizance from more Democrats that I talked to. Now there is an awareness, and I think this may be like the root of the frustration that you have to do. As you said, you can't overreact to every single thing that Donald Trump does. But on the other hand, the base of the party is saying, you look like you're not doing anything.
What is the right balance?
RYAN: I think you got to play the long game, I really do. And I mean, I know that the base is -- is going to be upset. Maybe if you're not talking about the issues of the day. But you have to lay the groundwork. You have to start laying the narrative for the 2026 election. And that has got to be an economic argument, because we have bled working class people and started with white working class, and now it's black and brown working class.
So, if we don't get right on the economics and, you know, we all agree on a lot of these other issues too, but that's not what people are voting on. They're voting their pocketbook. We've seen it time and time and time again.
And when Democrats get off an economic message, we lose. You know, there's a reason Barack Obama won Ohio against Mitt Romney is because Romney was the wealthy, you know, Bain Capital guy.
HUNT: I was there. Corporations are people.
RYAN: Right, the whole thing.
But that's, you know, that's what the Obama campaign understood. Thats what the Clinton campaign, Bill Clinton campaign understood. And it's -- it's plain as day for us. He's running around with billionaires. He's going to cut taxes for rich people. And prices are still going up.
HUNT: All right. There you have it. I guess we'll see.
All right. Coming up here, something totally different, the drive thru winner and loser.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:59:17]
HUNT: All right. Welcome back.
Winner, winner, chicken dinner? I'm sorry. What? If you are looking for a meal in a hurry, I have to say, I'm not sure this meets my definition of I'm sorry. What? Because I actually wasn't surprised. But new research does show that the lines at Chick-fil-A move the fastest, and that they consistently get more orders right with a 92 percent accuracy rate, since 2019.
Burger King and McDonald's come in next, 88 percent apiece. KFC struggling a little bit, 81 percent. How does Chick-fil-A keep the top spot? Apparently by dispatching elite drone-equipped analytics squads to assess each of their restaurants. Of course. I don't -- I mean, I guess this is, you know, news you can use, right? You want your -- your order quickly and accurately. This is a great option.
Jake Tapper is up next.
Jake, nice to see you.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST, THE LEAD: What up?
Chick-fil-A, most accurate apparently in America.
TAPPER: Okay. I don't really go for that stuff. It's just -- it's gross. Not Chick-fil-A, specifically. Fast food in general. Sorry advertisers.
Kasie, appreciate it.
HUNT: Chili's, if I'm on the road, that's -- that's just me.
TAPPER: Except for our advertisers, they're all delicious.
We'll see you back in THE ARENA tomorrow.
HUNT: See you.
