Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
New: Newsom Unveils California Redistricting Effort; Trump Calls For Putin-Zelenskyy Meeting After Friday Summit; Pentagon: National Guard Mission In D.C. Is Now 24/7 Operation. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired August 14, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:01]
DANNY FREEMAN, CNN HOST: Yeah, yeah, it's a dance. Really is what it is. More than a soccer game. I feel like.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: There we go.
FREEMAN: That's it. Goal! Goal!
SANCHEZ: That counts. That counts. Right?
FREEMAN: Oh, man.
SANCHEZ: I'm not really sure what to think about the running, though. It is a bit eerie. Even though that was --
FREEMAN: Still faster than me. I'll tell you.
SANCHEZ: Hey, Danny, thank you so much for joining us this week. It was a pleasure to have you.
FREEMAN: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Thank you so much for joining us this afternoon.
THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts just about eight seconds.
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA.
We have breaking news this afternoon. California officially entering the fight, entering the chat over redistricting. At the same time that Texas Democrats are now signaling they'll end their protest against Republican plans to gerrymander at least five Democratic districts out of existence.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D), CALIFORNIA: It's not complicated. We're doing this in reaction to a president of the United States that called a sitting governor of the state of Texas and said, find me five seats. We're doing it in reaction to that act. They want to rig these elections, and they want the power that gerrymandering provides because they know what Donald Trump knows. He's going to lose the midterms.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: That announcement from Governor Newsom allows Texas Democrats to end their weeks long standoff. It saw them flee their state to try to deny Republicans the ability to pass those new congressional district maps.
In a statement, the head of the Texas House Democratic caucus saying this, quote, as Democrats across the nation join our fight to cause these maps to fail their political purpose, were prepared to bring this battle back to Texas under the right conditions and take this fight to the courts.
Newsom's push to redraw the map will not be as easy for him as it was for Republicans in Texas. Under California law, congressional districts are drawn every ten years by a bipartisan commission. To change that, Newsom will have to get two thirds of both chambers of the state legislature to approve putting a ballot measure on the ballot. Valid proposition and then Californians themselves have to vote to change the state's constitution.
It's a gamble, even in a heavily Democratic state, but one that Newsom seems eager to make as he, you guessed it, eyes 2028 and is trying to cast himself as the Democrats' strongest voice against President Trump.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWSOM: He's a failed president. Who else sends ICE? Same time having a conversation like this? Someone who's weak, someone who's broken. Someone who's weakness is masquerading as strength. The most unpopular president in modern history.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: All right. Our panel is going to join us now in THE ARENA. CNN legal analyst, former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams, CNN chief political analyst, former Obama senior adviser David Axelrod, CNN political commentator, former South Carolina State Representative Bakari Sellers, and CNN senior political commentator, former political director for Mitch McConnell, Scott Jennings.
Welcome to all of you. Thank you very much for being here.
David Axelrod, the -- how to put this the posturing, the, the way that Gavin Newsom was looking at that camera, the way that they built that crowd behind him, the way he made this announcement -- I mean, it very much feels like a political campaign speech rally behind this, trying to set himself up as a foil to Donald Trump. Not the first time he's done that.
Is it going to succeed? DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I don't know about
the second I would say this. Certainly, it did look like that. Yes. He seems to be running for president. Yes. Theres a constituency within the Democratic Party that wants muscular, muscular response to the president. He's trying to play that role. It's also true that the president did call the governor of Texas to try and find him five seats because he is worried about the midterms, and it is changing the rules in the middle of the game.
And that's why the California Democrats want to act. And I think that's a different issue.
HUNT: So, Bakari, if that is a different issue, are Democrats playing this the right way? I mean, there is definitely this bipartisan commission to draw these maps exists for a reason. Democrats have spent a lot of time arguing institutions, norms do this -- you know, play by the rules. And he's basically saying, you know what? We're going to throw that out.
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't think he's saying throw it out. I'm not the biggest Gavin Newsom cheerleader, but he's being reactionary to, as David said, this president actually going out in the middle of the census, were not even at a point where you go through redistricting and he's rigging the rules in the middle of the game.
I actually was in the legislature in 2010. I actually sat on South Carolina's redistricting committee. I've actually been a part of a case that talked about gerrymandering that went all the way to the United States Supreme Court. So, I understand this issue intently.
And what we're seeing, though, is I've always said that Democrats and Republicans have like, this is the most unsexy issue that will rip apart the fabric of our democracy. It's not necessarily January 6th. Its not necessarily Donald Trump. It's not these things.
But redistricting, gerrymandering, how we draw these lines will rip away at the fabric of democracy. And that's what we're seeing right now.
If it becomes a free for all. That's why the Voting Rights Act was so important. That's why John Roberts efforts to just pull apart the Voting Rights Act was so important. That's why I believe and this this should be the overarching push and this should be something that Scott Jennings and Bakari Sellers could agree upon. There need to be independent non-elected commissions that draw these lines.
HUNT: So, do you think Newsom is wrong?
SELLERS: I mean, I think Newsom is playing politics. But he's playing politics in response to --
HUNT: Is it good politics for him?
SELLERS: I mean, first of all, first -- first of all, the priority for Gavin Newsom is always Gavin Newsom. So, is it good politics for Gavin Newsom? I'm assuming there's a poll somewhere that says, yes.
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It's tricky politics. And here's why, independent redistricting commissions are actually quite popular with California voters. They like the system that they've set up that they've had for about two decades or so.
It gets different when you say, well, what if we change things to level the playing field with Donald Trump or to fight back against Donald Trump not playing fair when the polls ask that question, California voters say, wait, whoa, whoa, wait a second. But it's interesting. They like what they have. And so, over the next couple of months, it really will be fascinating as to how it all plays out.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I totally disagree with one thing you said. This is extremely sexy. When we were preparing for the show, I --
SELLERS: Thank you.
JENNINGS: I had to put Axelrod under a fan in the green room. You should have seen it back there. It was wild.
AXELROD: Thank you.
JENNINGS: He was getting out of hand.
WILLIAMS: Six minutes of the show --
AXELROD: I mean, he was showing. He was showing me, first of all, first of all, it's 4:00. I guess it is happy hour.
JENNINGS: If redistricting maps are labeled NSFW on access. You're saying.
WILLIAMS: Fifty-four more minutes of this.
HUNT: And here I said it would be fine to not have another woman on the panel.
JENNINGS: Let me -- let me summarize -- let me summarize Gavin Newsom's speech today. Gerrymandering is evil. Please vote for my gerrymandering.
Of course, he failed to mention that its already gerrymandered. Republicans get 40 percent of the vote in California. They have 17 percent of the congressional seats under a supposed independent redistricting commission.
So we're going to gerrymander the gerrymandering.
AXELROD: But that's standard -- that's standard. Scott, Texas is also gerrymandered. So --
JENNINGS: How about Illinois?
AXELROD: Here's the issue. HUNT: Ax always acknowledged Illinois is gerrymandered.
AXELROD: On a regular census, the legislature there gerrymandered Illinois. That's right. It wasn't in the middle of the game.
But let the other side, because I think, you know, you can fuzzy up that. And I think you've got some good political, you know. Theres probably good sense politics behind fuzzing that up.
But here's the problem. And you sort of touched on it, Donald Trump fundamentally does not believe in rules and laws and norms and institutions. He believes in doing what's in his political self- interest, his personal self-interest. And if you are the other party and you are playing by the traditional rules and laws and norms and institutions, you're involved in asymmetric warfare because you've got someone who is willing not to play by the rules while you're playing by the rules, and that's what they're struggling with.
And even more just --
HUNT: One second, Bakari, because to David's point, I want to underscore and play this this something else that Gavin Newsom said here, because he basically made the argument that David is making here. And the way that he put it was rather evocative. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWSOM: We need to disabuse ourselves of the way things have been done. It's not good enough to just hold hands, have a candlelight vigil and talk about the way the world should be. We have got to recognize the cards that have been dealt, and we have got to meet fire with fire.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Not good enough to have a candlelight vigil, he says.
SELLERS: I mean, I agree with that. I mean, there has to be some level of fortitude that Democrats show. And I think that that is the -- that is the palpable type of frustration that you feel from Democrats. They don't see it from Chuck Schumer. They're tired of the Hakeem Jeffries videos that are just kind of in the Netherlands, where he talks with his hands.
Like people want to see this type of reaction. I will say this, though, just to build on David's point a little bit more like Donald Trump is everything that you said, but he likes to win more than all of those things. And if his policies were popular, if he thought he was going to win reelection, this wouldn't be a thing. If Epstein files weren't a thing, this wouldn't be a thing.
So, all of the things that he's doing, he is trying to and he's doing a good job. It's called -- in politics, it's called flooding the zone. Every single day. It's something else. It's D.C., is this -- is that. It's everything else because he's flooding the zone. And if he thought that he could win with a Big, Beautiful Bill, if he thought his policies in D.C. were so important, if he did X, Y, and Z, this would not be an issue.
And I would just offer. If Republicans thought they could win, they wouldn't be changing the rules.
HUNT: I mean, Scott, there is a point. You know, if you don't call Abbott and ask for five more seats, you don't think you need them.
JENNINGS: Well, he's trying to get any kind of advantage that he can.
[16:10:02]
Hardly unusual for a politician or a political party. I totally disagree with you about the popularity of his policies. I think Democrats are on the wrong side of violent crime. I think they're on the wrong side of illegal immigration.
AXELROD: So, today --
JENNINGS: And I think they're on the wrong side of virtually every cultural issue he's put in play. I think we're going to be quite fine fighting that out.
AXELROD: So, the principal issue that people are coping with in this country is the cost of things. Today, wholesale prices jumped a full point, the biggest in three years.
So, you can talk about these other things. But I'll tell you something. You get into those districts in south Texas, I'm going to be curious to see whether the voters that they're counting on are going to stick with them, because these are voters who are working class people who are struggling and who are going to be dealing with the cost of these policies. And I think it's going to be problematic for them.
HUNT: So, one, this sort of just in this is the Governor Newsom press office on the platform. X, they have posted a video and written this. They've started I think -- I don't think this is the first message they've put in all caps the way that President Trump often does on his truth social platform, border patrol has showed up at our big, beautiful press conference. We will not be intimidated.
And, Elliot, there is video of border patrol agents outside. This was a Japanese heritage museum where these officials were speaking. That is -- those are federal resources. It's kind of remarkable.
WILLIAMS: Sure. Now, we don't know why they were there. And that is to Bakari's point of the norms that are upended by Donald Trump, that Democrats sort of are hungry for. No, I'm saying no, we're --
JENNINGS: You don't know why they're there.
WILLIAMS: I don't know why a Democratic press conference --
JENNINGS: Who do you think goes to these things? Of course, you know why theyre there.
WILLIAMS: You know exactly what I was saying.
JENNINGS: The principle constituency of their party. Your party. Go ahead.
WILLIAMS: Not mine. But my point is, I mean, they could be -- they could be doing enforcement action. They could be doing 100 miles within the border action. It could be any host of reasons why they're there. So, I don't --
HUNT: Showing up in tactical gear outside of a event for you know, I mean obviously the president of the United States is in charge of federal resources. Weve seen him make a big show about being in charge of federal resources. Obviously, Newsom is treating himself like an opponent of Donald Trump's, a political opponent to send people to stand outside the event.
WILLIAMS: That is the point I'm making. It's not that Donald Trump necessarily sent the Border Patrol to go after Gavin Newsom because he was having an event. The point that I'm picking up on Bakari was making, which is that these are all norms of politics that have been upended by the president, such as using personal social media accounts to make political points.
Some Democrats are probably receptive to Gavin Newsom tweeting in all caps and engaging in some of --
AXELROD: He was.
WILLIAMS: Sorry?
AXELROD: He did it in all caps?
WILLIAMS: Yes, yes. Oh, yeah. And you know, and calling Trump names and so on. Mimicking the tone.
SELLERS: But I mean for me for me personally, I mean I just think that's silly. And I think that there are a lot of primary voters that will view that as being silly. And I think that the reason that Joe Biden won that race in 2020 as the alternative to Donald --
AXELROD: Yeah, I mean, the question is --
SELLERS: It was -- it was -- it was -- it was -- it was, exactly.
WILLIAMS: And this is -- but this is the very question that is going to characterize Democrats for the next several years, which is, do you want to match that energy or --
JENNINGS: Bizarro Trump, if you will.
WILLIAMS: Bizarro Trump.
SELLERS: I mean -- but to Scott's point -- I mean, Republicans don't win on -- I mean, Scott made a good point. Republicans don't win on substance. They don't win on facts. They don't win on things. They don't win on things like inflation or job creation or crime going down.
JENNINGS: Twenty-four.
SELLERS: They went on --
JENNINGS: They win on inflation.
SELLERS: Because inflation has gone up because of the --
(CROSSTALK)
AXELROD: That's actually concerned about that.
SELLERS: Inflation literally has gone up like the cost of goods has gone up. But even more importantly, when you talk about things like, this is why this is so fascinating, because we're talking about giving redistricting back to the hands of the voters. We're talking about giving redistricting back to the people who elect folks. That's what they do in California. But you have this gamesmanship.
You have Kash Patel saying just weeks ago that the crime rate in D.C. has dipped by 25 percent, but Scott is saying it doesn't feel like it, right? And so, they actually wade into these cultural wars.
HUNT: Well, that's why Biden lost the election on the economy --
SELLERS: Well, Biden lost the election on economy but --
HUNT: -- saying that the economy is great. And everybody kept looking around being like, I can't afford --
AXELROD: And the border.
The question is, now that Donald Trump is doing that and saying no, prices are going down. Weve never had a better economy and so on. I'm having kind of Bidenomics kind of flashbacks.
SELLERS: Deja vu.
JENNINGS: I doubt we've covered it, but just for the record, there is some credible evidence from a whistleblower case today that the D.C. police department has been falsifying the crime statistics. I would encourage --
HUNT : But that's 2020. I know what you're talking.
SELLERS: But every but it doesn't matter. Every statistic that comes out that's counter to any narrative put forth out of 1600 Pennsylvania. If it's counter to that narrative, it's not true, whether or not --
HUNT: According to them.
SELLERS: According to them. And that's my only point.
HUNT: Yeah. Let's show a little bit of this. This video that, that we just got in from Newsom's office, that these officers outside this event. And I think, I mean, my question is just is the point here to intimidate the supporters of a political opponent in a way that's honestly based on their ethnicity?
[16:15:06]
WILLIAMS: I don't know, like I honestly --
SELLERS: Yes, you can say yes.
WILLIAMS: Bakari, I do not know. Having worked for ICE, when you see 50 ICE agents on the street, it could be a host of reasons why they're there. And Gavin Newsom, quite frankly, let me know. Gavin Newsom is making a very smart move there by tweeting out, saying, look, they're coming after us.
SELLERS: Yeah, I respectfully, I've never --
AXELROD: If you were -- if you were the counsel for ice now, would you say, yeah, go to this hang out outside of the governors press conference when he is taking on the president on a redistricting issue. Thats a really good idea. No, you wouldn't do that because the implication --
WILLIAMS: Well, well, if ICE were being controlled by the White House, that was constantly using it to make political statements, then, absolutely.
AXELROD: All right. Well, that's a good answer.
WILLIAMS: I mean, it's a political -- it's a political statement, not a law enforcement.
JENNINGS Might have been guarding some of these illegals are kind of violent, you know, I mean, these Border Patrol agents might have been.
SELLERS: Listen, I will tell you this, though, like I said, like I did say in the green room, I did feel safer today in D.C. because of because of DHS and everybody else. I saw these guys in slacks with penny loafers, and they had the electric bicycles, and they were doing wheelies, and it was like 3 or 4 of them, and I don't know where they were coming from. But I did feel safer --
WILIAMS: Those congressional staffers --
SELLERS: -- knowing --
WILLIAMS: -- mess you up.
SELLERS: -- wheelies on electric bikes.
AXELROD: Though, with these, the concern serious. Everyone's concerned about crime no matter what Scott Jennings has or will say but there is a concern about -- there is the concern about taking all federal resources. The military, FBI, ICE, and so on. And by declaring an emergency and putting them all on the streets
because they you're one step away from something very dark and that so that's why the ICE presence there is something worth noting.
HUNT: Yeah.
All right. Clearly, we're going to have a banner day here on this panel. So please do stick around.
Coming up, guess who called Zohran Mamdani over the summer. The New York mayoral candidate now confirming a previously unreported conversation.
But first, with President Trump now expects in his meeting tomorrow with Vladimir Putin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'll know within the first two minutes, three minutes, 4 minutes or 5 minutes, like we tend to find out whether or not were going to have a good meeting or a bad meeting. And if it's a bad meeting, it will end very quickly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:22:08]
HUNT: President Trump looking ahead to a potential trilateral meeting with the leaders of Russia and Ukraine. But first, that summit with Vladimir Putin is set to start in just 24 hours. The two men will be sitting across from one another for the first time in six years.
CNN chief national affairs correspondent Jeff Zeleny joins our panel now.
Jeff, wonderful to have you.
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Good to see you.
HUNT: This, of course, has been the big question ahead of this summit. Youve seen Zelenskyy go from meeting to meeting with European leaders. Clearly, they all trying to show solidarity with him as everyone waits somewhat nervously to see what comes out of what's going to happen between President Trump and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.
What did you make of the fact that Trump today was willing to talk about in more depth, likely including Zelenskyy later on?
ZELENY: Well, look, if the second meeting comes to pass, that President Trump was talking about in the Oval Office today, that will be a sign that the first meeting actually went well. If there is a meeting with President Zelenskyy and Putin and Trump and European leaders, that will be a sign that peace potentially is in the offing but a lot has to happen between now and then. And I think that all. Eyes obviously are on this meeting tomorrow. But what I am thinking back to is being in Helsinki in the summer of 2018 and that side by side press conference, it just simply was not a moment of strength for President Trump.
But important to keep in mind, it's not the same President Trump. At that point, he was just a couple of years on the job. And as we've seen in instance after instance, he knows the job much more now, for some people would say, for better or worse, but he knows the levers of power.
So, is it a different Trump that goes into the meeting tomorrow or when he's face to face with Putin? Does it kind of revert to the old power structure here? So, I think that's one thing just optically, but actually the substance of it, it's hard to imagine that they could reach some type of a deal where all leaders would be sitting down in short order.
HUNT: Yeah.
AXELROD: If they are sitting down, Jeff, isn't it possible that he and Putin have agreed on something and they're going to try and pressure Zelenskyy to accept.
ZELENY: Like giving up a decent part of the eastern --
AXELROD: Yeah. But there is reason to believe that Putin could be of a mind to make some sort of deal because his economy is in tatters. So, he has some impetus, and especially if the president is willing to carry through, which he hasn't been on his threat to really crank up sanctions. Then, you know, Putin does have an impetus.
ZELENY: Would he agree to sit down with Zelenskyy, though? That's a question.
AXELROD: That's a big question.
ZELENY: So, let's watch a little bit of what happened back in 2018. The time that Jeff was just talking about. And of course, you saw the two of them walking there the moment that was, you know, heard around the world at the time. Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[16:25:05]
TRUMP: My people came to me. Dan Coats came to me and some others, they said they think it's Russia. I have President Putin. He just said, it's not Russia. I will say this. I don't see any reason why it would be.
I have great confidence in my intelligence. People. But I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Extremely strong and powerful. And Scott Jennings, we know that this is not the only place where Donald Trump has demonstrated that. He believes that showing strength and power is something, honestly, that he is influenced by.
What makes you think it might be different this time?
JENNINGS: Well, I accidentally glanced at the front page of "The New York Times" this morning, saw the headline Europe's leaders say Trump backs goals on Ukraine. And I also happen to remember a few weeks ago when he worked with NATO to help get hundreds of millions of dollars of lethal weapons into the hands of the Ukrainians. And so doesn't hardly sound pro-Russia or pro-Putin to me.
I think the president has put out with Putin. I think we ought to pray for peace, hope for the best, and plan for Putin to be a jerk and a thug, which is exactly what he is. But the man has solved six or seven conflicts this year. I think we ought to give him some latitude to operate.
SELLERS: Which six or seven?
JENNINGS: I'm sorry, are you not watching?
SELLERS: Which six or seven?
JENNINGS: Well, we just did Azerbaijan. We did Rwanda, we did Israel, Iran.
SELLERS: Israel, Iran. What peace deal did I miss?
JENNINGS: Ended the 12-day war?
SELLERS: I mean, so six or seven, I mean --
JENNINGS: Living on Earth two.
SELLERS: I mean, no, but Rwanda -- Azerbaijan, Rwanda, what? What are we talking about? I mean, no, I mean, the fact is, the fact is we still have -- we still have a country that's -- we still have a country, a world that's on fire. And this is the problem with --
JENNINGS: Kasie --
HUNT: What are you asking me for, Scott?
JENNINGS: I'm asking you to come in here and tell people the truth. Donald Trump has created a track record this year of helping settle several conflicts.
HUNT: I will show several is a different than six or seven. So I was letting Bakari --
SELLERS: First of all, I will -- I will say this, I will --
HUNT: We did see, Scott, your point after naming something after Donald Trump. We saw Azerbaijan, Armenia sit down. That was a remarkable moment.
SELLERS: It was a -- it was a remarkable.
HUNT: Solved with force.
SELLERS: But it was a -- and it's still not solved. Theres still no peace deal. And actually the hostages are still not brought home in Israel. And they're still uncertain -- there still uncertainty in Gaza and Israel and, and we still have this blazing in Ukraine and Russia. So, I don't -- I want to back away from Donald Trump getting a Nobel Peace Prize.
But this is my biggest issue.
HUNT: Trump would not like to back away from that.
SELLERS: But this is my I think this is one of the largest, larger issues you have with Donald Trump when compared to his predecessors. Joe Biden, particularly a Barack Obama and even his competitor in Hillary Clinton. He does not have the intellect to actually display strength on a stage of this magnitude.
And so when he's standing next to a world leader like Vladimir Putin, he looks small. And so when you have an individual and particularly as he's getting older and he begins to muddle through his words, and I think the quote that he just said recently, there's going to be some land swapping and its going to be for the good of, of Ukraine, and then there's going to be some good and some bad. And he's not sharp or crisp with his words. You're going to see someone who looks small simply because they don't have the intellect to stand on a stage next to someone who is, yes, a thug like Vladimir Putin. And that is going to be the problem. His weakness is going to be on full display.
HUNT: We're over time. I'm going to give you the quick last word.
JENNINGS: Well, I think you're prejudging a meeting before its happened. Number one. Number two, you're not telling the truth about his track record this year. And number three, why can't you just give the president of the United States the chance to operate here? He's earnestly trying to get to a peace deal. Shouldn't we be all hopeful for American success instead of rooting for American failure?
AXELROD: Yeah. No, we should.
SELLERS: And I --
AXELROD: We should want peace in Ukraine that is fair and just to the Ukrainians who are the country that was invaded.
SELLERS: Okay, well, that's -- I wholeheartedly agree with that.
HUNT: Okay. That is a great place to press pause on this conversation. Jeff Zeleny, thank you very much. I really appreciate it.
Coming up next, more on the redistricting fight with California Congressman Robert Garcia.
Plus, President Trump pressing ahead with plans to extend his control of D.C. police if Democrats aren't able to stand in his way.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If he went to Congress and said, you know what? There's this crime emergency. We need the National Guard out there longer. We need to take over Washington, D.C. would you grant it?
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): No fucking way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:33:51]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NEWSOM: We expect that the legislature will move quickly and anticipate by the end of next week that they will complete that work. The maps will present themselves for the next few days. I know people are eager to see the maps. We anticipate these maps will completely neuter and neutralize what is happening in Texas.
This does not go forward. I want to remind everybody, unless one of these other states move forward, there's still an exit ramp.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: California Governor Gavin Newsom providing some more details this afternoon about his redistricting plan for the country's most populous state, warning the state legislature will move forward on it as soon as next week, if any Republican states go ahead with their own redistricting efforts.
Joining us now to discuss is Democratic congressman of California, Robert Garcia. He is the ranking member on the house oversight committee.
Congressman, thank you very much for being here. Really appreciate your time.
Do you support the plan that Californias governor is putting forward here to undertake this redistricting, even after Californias residents voted to have this independent commission do it?
[16:35:00]
REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): Absolutely, 100 percent. And I was one of those that supported it. I have long supported independent commissions. I think we've had a long tradition in California of trying to do the right thing as it relates to gerrymandering, but unfortunately, that's not what's happening now with Donald Trump and with Texas.
And as the governor has said, this is a direct reaction to what Texas is doing in essentially trying to rig the map there, but then moving on to places like Florida and Missouri, and possibly Indiana. And so, we're very concerned in California about how our votes are being diluted and our voice being diluted across the country. And so, we can no longer have this fight with one hand tied behind our back.
If Texas is going to punch back at California, and California has to punch back harder. I think this will pass in November and unfortunately, we're going to have to now take this on in a way that we weren't prepared to before, but is necessary for democracy and to help people across the country.
HUNT: Yeah, I was going to ask. I mean, that's going to be my follow up question. I mean, are you confident that voters will say in November? Well, actually, no, we are fine with this being a political process that's in the hands of the legislators, when not that long ago they took it away.
GARCIA: I do, and I think as I'm talking to folks first, everyone on the ground, I'm talking to is absolutely supportive of this effort and this move. But beyond that, one thing that the governor has been clear about, which I support is this is not permanent. And so, the commission will revert back to will continue to have the independent commission, and that will go back for the next census line drawing that will happen in a few years.
But at this moment, if Texas is going to do this mid-decade redistricting, then we're going to do the same thing. So, we don't eliminate the commission. The commission comes back, but this allows us to match what Texas is doing.
And I think that issue alone is going to allow, I think, for a lot of folks across the state to get on board. And I've seen a lot of different polls out there, but it's very clear is that people understand the danger of what's happening and how this could impact national policy going forward.
HUNT: Congressman, I also want to ask you about something that the government, the governor's office put on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, which was video of border patrol agents outside the event that the governor held with the states senators and other lawmakers.
What's your reaction to the border patrol making a having a large presence outside of that event?
GARCIA: I mean, pretty outrageous, but we already know that Donald Trump is obsessed with having his own personal police force that he can control. I mean, for years, Donald Trump, even when he was president, the first time he's tried to get police departments and other, other law enforcement agencies to do what he wants, now he's forcing it.
Now he's using an active and activating national guard units. He's sending out border patrol agents to do other types of routine police work. He's putting together other law enforcement agencies and sending them out to do deportations, oftentimes against people with no criminal record. And oftentimes against students or U.S. citizens.
And so, to do this kind of show that he's trying to do, which actually ends up harming people, is all about him just trying to enforce his authoritarian vision the way he wants to control law enforcement. So, I think it's pretty outrageous. It continues to use the military and law enforcement for these actions. That was clearly a way of trying to show force against what Governor Newsom is doing.
But we're not going to be intimidated. People are demanding that Donald Trump pull back on his efforts, not just here in California, but, of course, what's happening in Washington, D.C.. And he continues to use the military. He continues to use border patrol. He continues to use local law enforcement for his own purposes. It's highly unconstitutional. We have to continue to call it out and push back.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Robert Garcia, I want to -- we're going to have a longer conversation, possibly about D.C. as we near that 30- day mark and your role on the house oversight committee. But I want to say thank you very much for your time today. I really appreciate it.
All right. Our panel is back, and I do want to talk about, David Axelrod, what he was finishing there, which is at what's going on here in Washington, D.C. I mean, we've seen there were national guard patrols in Georgetown. There was a checkpoint set up and a popular nightlife district. I used to live around the corner from 14th and W Northwest.
We have the -- we have not seen, the presence be sort of all across the city from what we can tell. But rather than these isolated places, what do you think the ultimate upshot of all of this is this display from the president.
AXELROD: That remains to be seen. And whether there's any. I mean, crime has been coming down. Washington still too high. Thats true in most American cities coming down.
[16:40:02]
And frankly, one homicide is one homicide. Too much. So, you know, we'll see if this if this there's actual -- actually any real effect. It's not really clear what they're doing, but the precedent of declaring emergencies and saying, you know, Washington is a -- is a hellscape. And therefore, I am going to send military in.
We saw it in other places. We saw it in L.A. you know, where marines sat around for several weeks, not doing a heck of a lot, but the show of force was clear. And you don't want to normalize, you know, casual declarations of independence.
And then authorization of military in the street, because then you get to the point where you see, you know, folks showing up at political rallies and, and, you know, there's a reason why we keep the military separate. From domestic activities. So, you know, there's a concern about that, but I don't know what the --I'm hoping.
SELLERS: Look, I hope the upshot is somehow this improves. Things will but I, you know, some question as to whether that's the fundamental objective, it won't. And that's not the intent. I mean, look, let's be extremely honest about where we are with crime in this country.
If you look in cities like Little Rock, Arkansas, if you look in cities like Atlanta, Georgia, if you look in cities like Birmingham, Alabama, where you have mayors such as Frank Scott, and you have mayors such as Randall Woodfin, or you have Atlanta, Georgia, Andre Dickens, those crime rates have gone down. Muriel Bowser the crime rate has gone down in D.C.
In fact, go to Baltimore --
HUNT: Well, he has been mayor for a long time. Crime rate went way up.
SELLERS: But you know who I'm quoting? Kash Patel, the FBI director. But even more --
JENNINGS: Go up to come.
SELLERS: But listen. But listen, even more importantly than all of that, let's go to Baltimore. Who was the -- they -- Republicans beat Baltimore senseless. The crime rate under Mayor Brandon Scott is the lowest that it's been in 50 years, Kasie, I'm not making that up. And the way that he did it and this is this is my problem with Republicans. This is my problem with the fact that I know that this is gamesmanship.
The way that he did it was invest in local communities. The way that he did it was making sure that he had after school programs that kids didn't go hungry, that he invested in public school education. Those type of things.
The greatest mayor in the history of Washington, D.C., Marion Barry. What did he do? He had a summer work program. So, teens had things to do. That is the way that you cut crime.
This showmanship is exactly what it is. And to David's point, as someone whose father was actually shot on a night where law enforcement interacted and they shouldn't with young people, in February 8th of 1968, this is a recipe for disaster. My family knows firsthand what happens when you throw the military or the state police. People who are not used to policing communities out there, and they interact with people on this level. And so, look, its politics, but call it that. This is not about lowering crime rates.
JENNINGS: I don't know how many people they arrested last night, but through Tuesday and since August the 7th, they had arrested over 100 people, 43 on Tuesday night, they've gotten several illegal guns off the street. It's not a display. It's a real thing because there are real criminals and real violent people in Washington, D.C. anyone who lives here or visits here knows that.
WILLIAMS: Okay.
JENNINGS: Everybody knows it's not safe. And more eyes and ears. That kid from the White House that got attacked the other day, there were two cops who just happened to be nearby. Had they not been sitting there, maybe he doesn't walk away from getting jumped by people, and more eyes and ears, it's not --
(CROSSTALK)
SELLERS: I believe he was, but I believe he was assaulted by a 15 year old girl.
WILLIAMS: And I've lived here for 20 years, no doubt. And you know, to David's point, any homicide, any crime is a serious one. And we should take it seriously. But we have to acknowledge, and I think we all have to acknowledge, that there are politics behind all of this. And I'll just put a trivia question out to everyone at the table. Chime in if you know the answer of cities with a population of at least 100,000, right? What?
Which one in America has the highest rate of crimes against individuals? Where is it?
SELLERS: It's probably in Arkansas, Alabama --
WILLIAMS: Memphis, Tennessee.
HUNT: I would say it's Memphis, Tennessee.
WILLIAMS: Memphis, Tennessee. Number two. Cleveland, Ohio. Number three, Toledo, Ohio. Number four, as you said, Little Rock, Arkansas. What do they all have in common? They're all in red states, and were not hearing about them.
JENNINGS: Who are the mayors?
WILLIAMS: But what has the president.
AXELROD: Let me ask you, Scott.
WILLIAMS: No, no, no. Has the president made a push to federalize law enforcement in those cases?
AXELROD: Scott --
HUNT: Well, it's also not legal --
AXELROD: Let me ask you a question, though.
WILLIAMS: Sure. But if this were if this were actually something that we're not a political statement against --
AXELROD: Trying to get out.
HUNT: No, no, no, no. Go ahead, David.
AXELROD: No, no.
WILLIAMS: You hear what I'm saying though.
AXELROD: I mean your hometown of Louisville.
JENNINGS: Also a Democrat mayor and a Democrat governor. Go ahead.
AXELROD: Your hometown of Louisville has comparable, murder rates and property. So you're saying it's all about the Democratic mayor and Democratic? Would you advise the president to describe Louisville as he describes Washington? Would you support sending the military into Louisville?
SELLERS: I mean --
[16:45:01]
HUNT: Hold on, let Scott answer.
JENNINGS: Well, Louisville and the District of Columbia are two different places because the Constitution designates --
AXELROD: The president says he can send them into other cities.
JENNINGS: Exactly right. Louisville is a violent place. We had a kid shot at a bus stop. We have an epidemic of violence in Louisville, and it has been under Democratic control for decades, and my states been under Democratic governor for the last two --
(CROSSTALK).
HUNT: We are up way against a break. But okay, last word.
WILLIAMS: Absolutely true. But you can't deny that it's politically advantageous for the mayor to go after the mayors of --
JENNINGS: Can I agree with you on politics? It's good politics to reduce crime.
WILLIAMS: Agree.
JENNINGS: That's why Trump is reducing crime. And I don't understand why Democrats want to keep it the same.
WILLIAMS: He's attacking the mayors in blue cities and blue states. And it's a winner for him. We know.
HUNT: We are going to have to leave it there.
Coming up next here, Zohran Mamdani giving the first details about multiple phone conversations with former President Barack Obama as the Democratic candidate still working to lock down support from top members of his own party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): He's going to have to demonstrate to a broader electorate, including in many of the neighborhoods that I represent in Brooklyn that his ideas can actually be put into reality.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: All right. Just moments ago, Democratic New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani confirmed having multiple phone calls with former President Barack Obama. Mamdani says that the two have spoken a number of times since his primary win in June, where the former president offered advice and about the necessity of hope in dark times.
David Axelrod --
AXELROD: Yes.
HUNT: Obviously, you formerly worked a top consultant and longtime aide to President Obama, and the New York times also reported that you have been to see him, visited with him, along with some other folks in President Obama.
AXELROD: I have no idea, honestly, that these conversations had taken place and it wasn't mentioned.
HUNT: What do you make of it?
AXELROD: Well, first of all, he's the Democratic nominee in the city of New York, and he has ignited a sense of hope and a sense of enthusiasm, particularly among young people.
HUNT: And change.
AXELROD: And change among young people in that city by focusing on the issue that actually is the issue nationally, which -- but it's accentuated in New York, where prices and costs are very, very high and rents are very, very high.
And that is affordability. So I think he's an intriguing guy, and I was happy to sit down with him.
HUNT: Do you think that there are stylistic similarities between former President Obama and Zohran Mamdani?
SELLERS: Wait.
AXELROD: Go ahead.
SELLERS: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to say that out loud. No.
HUNT: No stylistic similarity. Noting the word stylistic, doing -- I meant it to do significant work in my sentence, to be clear.
SELLERS: Mamdani was able to tap into that fervor that David Axelrod is talking about, and he did it in such a creative way. I remember the food truck ad that he did where he talked about the price of food versus what it was, and talking about costs.
However, Barack Obama had a sense of depth, had a swag, had an ability to articulate and connect with people in a way that was pervasive. And you won't see it again. So the answer to that is no. That's first.
Second, I do think that it's okay for Democrats to say that New York is not going to have a good mayor, whether or not its Mamdani, whether or not its Eric Adams, or whether or not it's Andrew Cuomo. Like, we took voters' intellect in New York for granted.
That's why you have a candidate who has an unproven track record to govern as the frontrunner. And I'm glad he's asking people like Barack Obama for support and help. But you also were running people like Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams, who I wouldn't vote for if they were running against Scott Jennings.
JENNINGS: Wow. Wait, did you say you would vote for me?
SELLERS: I would just write --
(CROSSTALK)
AXELROD: Let me just say this.
JENNINGS: I think he's sticking.
AXELROD: I think, Bakari, I mean, he was involved in the campaign in 2008. So, but your memory is just a little bit faulty in that the main principle objection, that main argument that was being made against Barack Obama was that he was young and untested, that he had never run anything, that he was, you know, he wasn't -- he didn't have the requisite experience to do.
And you know, what people said? They said the same old, same old isn't what we want. We don't want to go back to what has failed us on issues like affordability. He spoke to that and he spoke to it in a not just a creative way, but in a hopeful way. There are things that we can do.
Now, I don't necessarily agree with all of his solutions, but I think he's raising the right questions. And I think it wasn't an accident that he won.
HUNT: I actually feel like this is an instance the two of you have tangled a couple of times on this show, but if I listen to you and you haven't spoken on this yet, but I've heard you talk before about it, neither one of you seems to think that Zohran Mamdani would be good for the country.
SELLERS: I don't really care about Zohran Mamdani for the country. I just don't think he'll be a good mayor for New York. And I also think that. HUNT: Maybe I should say for the Democratic Party.
SELLERS: And I think the people in New York and Democrats in New York have this false sense of self. They think that the mayor of New York all of a sudden is going to be the trailblazer for the Democratic Party going forward, and that's just not the case.
AXELROD: I don't think it's people outside.
WILLIAMS: It's a national figure. Think of how many mayors of New York City have credibly run for president of the United States. We can't deny the importance of --
AXELROD: How many have won?
SELLERS: How many have won?
(CROSSTALK)
[16:55:00]
HUNT: I'm sorry.
WILLIAMS: Run down the list.
SELLERS: I mean, Bill de Blasio ran.
HUNT: All right.
WILLIAMS: You can't tell me that Rudy Giuliani is not a national figure --
HUNT: We got a hard out. Last word.
JENNINGS: I do -- I do think the rich white liberals who got Mamdani the nomination are indicative of where the Democratic Party is moving, trying to move it towards this more socialist bent. I know this because they've done the same thing in Minneapolis. They've done the same thing in Seattle. And I think and I think for '28 could be a problem.
HUNT: All right. Here's my heart out sign. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: All right. Jim Sciutto is standing by for THE LEAD. He is in Anchorage, Alaska, of course, the site of tomorrow's summit between President Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Jim, of course, you are in for Jake, who is making his way to Anchorage as well.
