Return to Transcripts main page

CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt

DOJ Suspends Prosecutors Who Described January 6 Attack As "Riot"; Just In: Thune Erupts At Dems On Senate Floor Over Shutdown; Just In: Supreme Court Asks For More Info In Emergency Case Over Trump's Deployment Of National Guard In Chicago; Cuomo: "There's a Quiet Civil War" In Democratic Party Right Now. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired October 29, 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]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Okay, so the company says, in general, since introducing a ban on disruptive parties in 2020, Airbnb has seen an over 50 percent decrease in the rate of parties reported to them globally.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: I didn't realize Airbnb were such party poopers.

KEILAR: Well, for good reason.

THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts right now.

(MUSIC)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA. It's wonderful to have you with us on this Wednesday.

As we come on the air, the history of January 6th apparently still being rewritten by President Trump and his administration. A source telling CNN that the Justice Department placed two prosecutors on leave just hours after they filed a court document describing the attack on the Capitol as being carried out by a, quote, "mob of rioters".

After this -- as of this afternoon, the filing has been removed from the court's docket. Those words mob of rioters that description of what happened on that dark day in 2021 came in a sentencing recommendation for this man, Taylor Taranto. He was inside the capitol building on January 6th, later uploading this video.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TAYLOR TARANTO, JANUARY 6 DEFENDANT: So, we're in the Capitol building, legislative building, and we just stormed it. And -- anyway --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Move!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're insulting us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: We just stormed it, he said. Taranto was just one of the roughly 1,500 people connected to January 6th who President Trump pardoned on the first day of his second term in office. Taranto, sentencing this week. It's for something totally different a conviction on unrelated charges after he was arrested with weapons near former President Barack Obama's D.C. home in 2023.

The now missing memo from the now dismissed prosecutors noted that Taranto's actions came after president Trump posted the Obama's purported address on social media. So the crime that these prosecutors seem to be losing their jobs over, honoring the actual history of January 6th over the objection of a president who has worked to rewrite that history.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They didn't come because of me. They came because of the election. They thought the election was a rigged election. But that was a day of love from the standpoint of the millions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right. Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel's here. We're also joined by CNN crime and justice correspondent Katelyn Polantz.

Katelyn, walk us through this memo that sources say is the reason the sets -- at the center of the suspension of these prosecutors.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Kaise, they say that that is the reason. But we are still trying to get details here on exactly what has happened. There were these two prosecutors who were going to court, and they were going to be the ones standing in front of the judge asking to sentence this man, Taylor Taranto, to a lengthy prison sentence.

But in this situation, when they sent their written argument to the judge yesterday, that document is no longer available, but we were able to access it through a group that compiles public records of federal documents. It says in that filing on January 6th, 2021, thousands of people comprising a mob of rioters attacked the U.S. Capitol while a joint session of Congress met to certify the results of the 2020 election. After the riot, Taylor Taranto, the man who will face sentencing for this gun charges from 2023, he returned to his home in the state of Washington, where he promoted conspiracy theories about the events of January 6th, 2021.

This court filing that says that is now missing. It is no longer available in the federal court record. There are new prosecutors that have popped up in the docket, and the two prosecutors who wrote this are no longer part of that case. It now lists them as being terminated from the case, and also, we know that they have been informed that they are suspended from their jobs, given little reason. But I did get a spokesperson from the Justice Department to provide

this response to this situation at this time saying, "While, we don't comment on personnel decisions, we want to make very clear that we take violence and threats of violence against law enforcement, current or former government officials, extremely seriously. We have and will continue to vigorously pursue justice against those who commit or threaten violence without regard to the political party of the offender or the target."

I followed up on this statement from this Justice Department spokesperson asking, what are you talking about? Are you talking about January 6th, or are you talking about this charge, the charge related to Taylor Taranto going with guns outside of Barack Obama's home in 2023?

[16:05:07]

And I could not get a direct answer on that. It is very unclear at this time what they're talking to -- talking about, because this man is going to be sentenced in federal court for this charge related to the 2023 action and the guns there. But he was pardoned for his role in the riot related to January 6th, 2021 -- Kasie.

HUNT: Indeed. All right, Katelyn, stand by for us.

We're going to continue this conversation with our panel who's here in THE ARENA.

CNN legal analyst, former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams; the host of "The Chuck Toddcast", Chuck Todd; former director of public affairs at the Justice Department, Xochitl Hinojosa; and former Republican governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker.

We're joined on the left side of your screen. If we're all not enough for you, our ARENA text chain, we've got additional analysis from some of our top reporters and contributors, including the former congressman Adam Kinzinger, who, of course, played a critical role on the January 6th committee.

Elliot Williams, let me start with you on the legal aspects of this before we turn to the politics. Is what they're doing this filing standard? How unusual is it to have people removed, have a filing disappear like this?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Pretty unusual. Let's just talk about what a riot is. Under federal law, a riot is an assemblage of three or more people, where damaged or clear and present risk of damage to person or property comes through a risk of violence. January 6th, under federal law, was a riot. Anything other than that calling it anything other than that is misstating the law.

And the Justice Department is free to make whatever personnel decisions it wants, if they do so fairly and lawfully and in accordance with federal law. But they ought not do that for people who are accurately stating the law. Now, we don't know the background behind these people and what you know, what happened in the workplace with them, but they're not at will employees who can be terminated merely because someone says they are. And if they did something wrong, then certainly that's okay. But based on what we're seeing here, this seems grossly inappropriate.

HUNT: Chuck Todd, what does this tell you about? I mean, this is obviously the president pardoned these people on the first day of his second term. This is something that he has focused on relentlessly. And the polling shows that he has changed the minds of many Americans and what they think about what happened that day.

CHUCK TODD, HOST OF "THE CHUCK TODDCAST": Look, it's important to his own identity, right, that somehow January 6th be seen differently, that the 2020 election be seen in the way he views it rather than what reality says. So, there's no doubt this is really important to his own -- his own personal identity.

Look, you know what I struggle with here is I'm trying to understand if you believe the Justice Department acted politically against you over the last four years or against other people, how is it that the answer to what you believe was politicizing is to politicize, right? And what they've done? Unfortunately, here, by politicizing the Justice Department and some sort of projection decision that they've made is you've now -- the real issue you have is who can trust the Justice Department, left and right.

Donald Trump spent four years convincing the right that the Justice Department can't be believed, anything that they do under Joe Biden, anything that happened at the FBI, under an FBI director appointed by Donald Trump, by the way, Christopher Wray.

Well, now the left and the rest of America is going to view -- see this through the same prism. And all we've done is destroy the integrity of the Justice Department for all Americans. It's -- that's the tragedy of this situation.

He's got his political obsession. I can't believe that there must be somebody at the Justice Department who plays January 6th ombudsman and like, scours little things and say, oh, my god, if this gets out, dear leader is going to be upset, we better -- you know, is it like a control F, you know, search and replace function?

XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Even better -- actually even better than that, Chuck.

TODD: Or is an A.I. -- A.I. Ed Martin? Sorry.

HINOJOSA: It is because a reporter, Kyle Cheney, tweeted that line.

TODD: Yeah.

HINOJOSA: And what happened -- has been happening at the Justice Department is that ed martin or someone in the political leadership will see what is happening on the right and what the right really takes hold of. What -- and like a tweet like from Kyle Cheney or from Laura Loomer or whoever it is, and they latch on to that, and what they end up doing is that is how they make personnel decisions. This happened just a few weeks ago with Mike Ben'Ary in EDVA, who is a

prosecutor who was fired because there was a tweet that went out that said that he was objecting to the Comey case. The man never worked the Comey case, and they never bothered to check whether or not he worked the --

HUNT: They just read.

HINOJOSA: They just read Twitter and they -- and they fired him. And so that is what we continue to see. And this is what's happening here and what I've heard from people within the Justice Department is this suspension happened because he needed to get rid of them as soon as possible.

But there's every belief that these employees will be fired.

HUNT: Governor Walker, how -- what -- is it productive for Republicans across the country, for the president and the Justice Department to be focused on this the way they are, or is it not?

[16:10:09]

SCOTT WALKER (R), FORMER WISCONSIN GOVERNOR: Well, if you believe all the unnamed sources. I mean, right now, first off, I actually was not confused by that statement from the Department of Justice. It was very clear they were talking about the charges related to the actions in 2023, not anything to do with what happened in 2021.

HUNT: I think Katelyn was just saying they could have said that, right? But apparently they're not saying that to her. And her reporting.

WALKER: That's pretty clear. That's what the focus should be about. Now, you can argue whether the other language should be in or not, but that doesn't relate to the sentencing. The sentencing is about what happened in 2023, which I think is pretty universal. This person should face consequences for those actions the same way there should have severe consequences against the guy who plotted to kill justice Kavanaugh.

I think if you equate it, set aside the politics, if you make charges against a current or former elected or appointed official, there should be consequences for that.

The other part, just on the politics of it, you mentioned that the polling shows a shift. I think the polling is less about changing what we thought happened that day. But, Chuck, you and I talked about this in the election in 2022. We were in Waukesha, Wisconsin. I remember you asked me about this, and I said it was -- it was largely because -- not because people didn't care about it, but they cared more at that point about how much groceries cost, how much gas costs.

That's where the shift is. I don't think it's because people believe there wasn't significant things that happened on that day, and that some people should face consequences, but it was a shift in terms of as time went by, there were other things that were higher priorities. HUNT: Yeah. I mean, I think it's important to underscore here and

again, Katelyn and team are reporting this out. But again, the phrase is a mob of rioters. And it's worth revisiting what we heard the day that this -- at the time around this happened from Republicans who were at the Capitol on that day because here's how they described it then.

Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): The mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people.

THEN-REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): The president bears responsibility for Wednesday's attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Trump and I have -- we've had a hell of a journey. I hate it to end this way. Oh my God, I hate it. From my point of view, he's been a consequential president.

But today, first thing you'll see -- all I can say is count me out. Enough is enough.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: I mean, Chuck, it's pretty clear that this is what happened, right? It's entirely clear.

TODD: There's a -- there's a new documentary coming out by a gentleman named Raoul Peck called "Orwell: 2+2=5". It's in theaters now. I'll just tell you to check it out.

HUNT: Okay.

TODD: I -- the point being that this, you know, we sit here and, you know, this -- we have this broken information ecosystem. We do have two political worlds that live two different realities and see things differently. You have people. I was -- I was talking with somebody. I was at a conference, and it was a Chatham House rules. But it was about trying to -- what can we do to try to fix trust and everything. And what was amazing was we were talking about the MAHA movement and nobody in that movement for a day knew about the CDC shooting.

HUNT: The Make America Healthy Again.

TODD: It wasn't in their feed -- yeah. It wasn't in their feed.

HUNT: Yeah.

TODD: I mean, we are -- we are so correct. We are so -- you know, this is -- this is a -- you know, this is how much big tech has broken us, you know, and these algorithms have broken us and broken our grasp on reality here. And, you know, again, I don't want to sound dark with the Orwellian stuff, but I'm glad a documentary like that is out there.

You understand how a bad actor can manipulate an opportunity that we have right now. Unfortunately, in the information ecosystem that we live in.

HUNT: I mean, Governor Walker, this is something -- I mean, I don't -- I can't really break confidence, but I will say I had a conversation not unlike what Chuck was describing with a Republican presidential candidate at a high level who experienced some of this from crowds back home, that where basically people in the audience were saying things to him that he recognized as not actually the reality that were all facing.

I mean, January 6th for me, you know, I stood and looked out the window as this mob crawled up, you know, broke the windows and broke in, right? It's not -- like for me, it was an actual reality that I saw with my own eyes. So, when people try to describe it as something else, it feels you know, not possible to conceive of it any other, other way. I mean, those cops were defending all of us that day.

[16:15:01]

Is there any answer to this in our politics? Because, I mean, the reality is we used to be, you know, neighbors and that's less and less true as well, right? These realities are self-sustaining, not just on our phones, but in the places where we live and the people that we encounter every day.

WALKER: Yeah. And it's a challenge. It goes both ways. I mean, you mentioned some of the things you mentioned happened, not for a few hours or a day, but for nearly a month. In my case, the first couple of weeks I was governor of Wisconsin, there was a mob in my capitol that illegally took over the capitol. That was stayed past the open hours, tore down the doors. Even the police escorted them out and put officers at risk as well.

So, I can relate and understand that we face some of those challenges, again, not just for a day, but for nearly a month. And the irony was, some of the people that complained the most in politics were silent about what happened in Wisconsin.

I think back to, Chuck, to your point, though, it's one of those where we used to say cable news. I think now, it's more so social media, where it's -- the people who get the most views and the most clicks are the people who say the most outrageous things.

And I think it'd be healthy for all of us -- I said this after Charlie Kirk's assassination, but I think we need it more frequently than that is, put our phones down for at least a day or two. If it's on the weekends or even during the day, spend more time actually communicating with people as opposed to owning them or trolling them, actually talk to people.

And one of the things I tell the kids all the time, Young America's Foundation, when you have debates, actually listen to what people are saying. And don't just wait to give your talking points but respond. That doesn't mean you can't counter them. But I think that would go a long way for all of us, not just for young people.

HUNT: Yeah, human communication 101. Maybe not touch some grass while we're at it, right? Okay, basics.

I want to thank Katelyn Polantz. She hung around with us through the block. Really appreciate that. And we want to thank THE ARENA chain as well.

Our panel will be back.

Coming up here in THE ARENA, one of the last polls just here in the race for New York mayor. What it says about the final sprint to election day and whether Andrew Cuomo might be closing the gap with Zohran Mamdani.

But first, Republican Senator John Kennedy will be here with us live as a shouting match erupts on the Hill after the Senate once again fails to pass a bill that would end the government shutdown.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD), MAJORITY LEADER: You voted no 13 times. This isn't a political game. These are real people's lives that we're talking about, and you all have just figured out 29 days in that, oh, there might be some consequences?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:21:54]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

THUNE: SNAP recipients shouldn't go without food. People should be getting paid in this country and we've tried to do that 13 times. And you voted no 13 times.

This isn't a political game. These are real people's lives that we're talking about. And you all have just figured out 29 days in that, oh, there might be some consequences?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: That was just a few minutes ago on the Senate floor.

The majority leader, John Thune, getting visibly frustrated on this day 29 of the government shutdown, yelling at his Democratic colleagues over what he says is their unwillingness to open the government.

Just after that moment on the floor, Thune told our Manu Raju that he would personally engage with moderate Democrats, quote, soon to talk about some kind of process to address issues over the Affordable Care Act that have led Democrats to force this shutdown. Thune says this is not a change in his position and that he isn't guaranteeing any outcomes.

Joining us now in THE ARENA, Republican senator from Louisiana, John Kennedy. He sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senator, wonderful to see you as always.

Unusual for Senator John Thune to display the anger that you saw there. Now, he's telling us that he's going to personally engage with Democrats. Why now? What is the change in the dynamic?

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Well, yeah, Thune did get a little hot and bothered. You know, I don't pay much attention to that stuff unless somebody gets stabbed. Then I'll pay attention.

We're day 29 of the shutdown. It's a soap opera. If I were naming this soap opera, I'd call it as the stomach turns, a lot of melodrama. It's not going to end, Kasie. I don't care what anybody tells you. And John can meet with Chuck and this and that and the other, but it's not going to end until enough senators take their egos out back and shoot them. And so far, that hasn't happened.

And I do not see an off ramp. I just -- I don't. If we did agree and I don't think we could, but if we did agree on something on health care, it's got to pass the house. And I don't think. Right. Well, of course the House isn't in, but I don't think it could pass the House right now.

I'm biased, but I think the mistake that Senator Schumer made, when he said, no, I'm going to shut it down. He asked for -- it was such a big ask. I mean, when you add it up, it's like $1.5 trillion and wants us to gut the Affordable Care -- or the Big, Beautiful Bill like a fish. And it's just -- he's so far out there, it's hard for him to get back off that limb. If he had something more reasonable, we might be talking.

[16:25:00]

But anyway, that's kind of where we are. I'm not proud of it. My guess is the American people are thinking to themselves a pox on both of our houses. And I can't blame them.

HUNT: Do you get the sense that there is a change in the dynamic around a willingness to talk that's going on right now? I mean, SNAP benefits in particular? I mean, there's, you know, millions of people in Louisiana who potentially are going to suffer.

KENNEDY: I think -- I think the SNAP issue -- look, I don't want to see people in America go hungry. Nobody does.

I think the SNAP issue will turn up the pressure, which is probably a good thing in terms of getting it settled. And this no disrespect to Senator Thune, but he can have all the meetings he wants to with the Democrats on the Affordable Care Act and make all the deals that he wants to. But he -- he's going to have to sell that to the Republicans in the Senate. I'm not going to vote some way just because the majority leader tells

me to, and more importantly, he'd have to sell it to the House. And that's what I'd really like to see us do. I don't know that Chuck would agree to it. I'd like to see us open back -- open government, back up and have an honest discussion about how we can fix the Affordable Care Act. I mean, subsidies are not the premiums on the Affordable Care Act are going through the roof, something's wrong.

That's an indication that they're not working, and we need to fix it or start over and do something else. But that's not going to happen until, once again, people take their egos out back and shoot them. And so far, they're not willing to do that.

HUNT: So speaking of both the House and the possibility for finding a health care plan that will be affordable for Americans, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene put this up on the X platform this week. She said, quote, "Apparently, I have to go into a SCIF that, of course, a place where you read classified information to find out the Republican health care plan," implying that there isn't one.

And she's been pretty vocal at complaining about this generally. What do you say to her?

KENNEDY: Well, I think the congresswoman first, she's entitled to her opinion. I think she was upset because, the speaker in a Republican House member conference call didn't talk about what he wanted to do. And I understand why he didn't, because it would -- the House is like the Senate. It leaks like the Titanic. I mean, it would have leaked immediately. I get that.

I think a lot of people -- I've certainly been thinking about what we could do to try to fix the Affordable Care Act. There are a number of ideas being batted around association health plans. Bringing back high-risk pools, which have been outlawed under the Affordable Care Act. I think a lot of young people very -- who are very healthy in between jobs would like to buy a high deductible health insurance that's not necessarily long term.

Now, a lot of the insurance companies are not going to like some of these ideas because they're fat and happy and they're making money. In fact, the American taxpayer, the federal government is sending, subsidy checks directly to the insurance companies. That's also one of the things we ought to change.

I have no doubt that we can -- we can come up with something, Kasie. But once again, the longer we go, the egos get involved and people get prideful. And you saw it with Senator Thune and probably now, Senator Schumer is going to going to feel like he's got to bite him back.

And we've kind of -- we're kind of like kids now in the back of a minivan fighting. And it's not a good look, but I've seen it before, and you have to.

HUNT: Senator John Kennedy with an honest if slightly depressing assessment. KENNEDY: The -- this is why the aliens lock their doors when they fly

past Earth, okay? Nobody's impressed with this, but it's not -- it's not going to get better until everybody puts their egos aside.

HUNT: I will -- I will tell my kids in the back of the minivan. This is why they don't get to meet the aliens.

Senator John Kennedy, thank you.

KENNEDY: (INAUDIBLE)

HUNT: I really appreciate your time.

All right. Coming up next, here in THE ARENA, we're going to talk with two of the biggest names in political campaigns with election day less than a week away. The hacks on tap, David Axelrod and Mike Murphy on tap here in THE ARENA live.

Plus, what Andrew Cuomo thinks the race for New York City mayor is really about.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW CUOMO (I), NYC MAYORAL CANDIDATE: The truth is, there's a quiet civil war going on in the Democratic Party right now. I believe that far left will destroy the Democratic Party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:34:20]

HUNT: All right. News just coming in from the Supreme Court about an emergency case of whether President Trump has the authority to deploy the national guard to Chicago.

CNN Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic joins us now.

Joan, I understand this is a pretty rare step that the justices are taking. What have we learned?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: It is and it's big news because, Kasie, we have been waiting for an order from the Supreme Court over the validity of Donald Trump's deployment or effort to deploy the National Guard in Chicago. But as you know, there are disputes going on, not just in Chicago, but in Los Angeles and Portland and other cities over just what is Donald Trump's power to come into with the national guard as part of his anti-immigrant agenda, and what the Supreme Court said today, out of the blue, is that it wants further briefing on the question.

[16:35:04]

And the bottom line for anyone who's been concerned about what's going on in the cities, whether, you know, supporting President Trump's efforts to deploy the guard or against it, we will not have an answer from the Supreme Court until at least November 17th.

The briefing schedule the justices set out won't end until then. And here's the question they're asking -- now, President Trump has invoked a provision of federal law that would allow him to deploy the guard when regular forces. And that's the key phrase here, Kasie, when regular forces are unable to enforce the laws of the land and the question the justices are asking is what is regular forces mean?

The Trump administration is saying regular forces would mean like ICE and civilian federal agents at the scene, whereas the challengers are saying that would only mean actually members of the military and they -- the Supreme Court has obviously seized on that concern, which also was raised by Georgetown law professor Martin Lederman, saying, take a look at that phrase. It may mean that Donald Trump doesn't even have the power to deploy the guard there at this point.

HUNT: Interesting.

All right. Joan Biskupic for us with that update, Joan, thank you very much.

All right. So, let's turn to this story. One week from today, the Democratic Party may get a better idea of what their future will look like after three key elections in New York City, New Jersey and Virginia. Is 34-year-old Democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani, the new face of the Democratic Party? Or is it one of the centrist gubernatorial candidates on the ballot? Former CIA analyst Abigail Spanberger, or Navy vet Mikie Sherrill?

Republicans, of course, are going to try to make this decision for them. But the party, let's be realistic, is facing a stark internal divide over how to try to best try to win back power ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

For a sense of how these candidates would represent themselves and their party, look no further than who's appearing on the candidates' Instagram feeds. You can see there, people like Josh Shapiro, Bernie Sanders, AOC, the party split -- is something that Mamdani opponent, a longtime member of the Democratic establishment, hoping to take advantage of.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: The truth is -- there's a quiet civil war going on in the Democratic Party right now. That's what this election is about. It is that civil war. I believe that far left will destroy the Democratic Party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: Hmm. Joining us now in THE ARENA to discuss, CNN chief political analyst, former Obama senior adviser David Axelrod and Republican strategist Mike Murphy. You may know them as "The Hacks on Tap", the name of their podcast.

Gentlemen, so happy to see you. Thank you for being here. Axe, let me start with you --

DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Good to see you.

HUNT: -- because this is, of course, your party. Is Andrew Cuomo, right?

AXELROD: Listen, I think there is a quiet revolution going on or a civil war going on, but it has a lot to do with how people live and the cost of living. And Mamdani has focused like a laser on that issue of affordability in New York. And that's really propelled him forward in this race.

I think that Cuomo is trying to stir particularly Republican voters in that city who he's now splitting with Curtis Sliwa, the Republican nominee. And he needs some of those voters to win the election. But I think Andrew Cuomo has proven that he can play it round or play it square, whatever works in the in the moment.

You know, he was not talking about the left so much, during the primary campaign, but we'll see what happens. What you said is absolutely true, though, and Murphy knows this because he's that's his tribe. That if Mamdani wins and I expect that he will win, the Republicans will try and paint him as the face of the Democratic Party, and they will paint him as far left as they can paint him.

And Democrats will talk about the races in Virginia and New Jersey, and say, we're a big tent party. So, I think that's what you can anticipate.

HUNT: Mike?

MIKE MURPHY, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Yeah, no, I think David's got it right. The -- I wouldn't call it quite a civil war. I mean, this is sort of typical when you're out in the cold because the other party controls Congress and the White House, you have a lot of time to bicker because there's a vacuum to fill or, well, what the hell are we and how do we win an election?

So they've kind of evolved in this harder lefty coalition in New York, where I think Mamdani is going to win. And he's kind of the glove, that sort of fits New York. Well, in more swing states like Virginia that lean Democrat -- you know, Spanberger is a great candidate. She is a good formula for the Democrats in a lot of places. And New Jersey, a Democratic state, kind of has somebody in the middle.

So, you know, we've kind of got the local market leading it, though there's no doubt there will be a lot of attention on Mamdani. He's already pushed the idea of affordability at the top of the national political agenda for both parties to use.

The question for him is going to be, what does it look like a year in when you know the people's nonprofit grocery stores and some of the things he's promised, will he do it? How will they work? And then if there's failure, you can absolutely bet the Republicans will pounce on it and try to make him the defining leader of the Democratic Party. HUNT: Yeah. So, let's talk for a second about New Jersey, because

acts this is one place where you can really see the Trump effect playing out. I mean, if we can put up the margins for Democrats in the last three presidential elections, Joe Biden won in 2020 by 16 points in New Jersey, Kamala Harris only won by six points. And if there's going to be a surprise on Tuesday, I mean, obviously perhaps Cuomo could overperform with some of the polling is showing that would probably be considered a surprise. But if Mikie Sherrill comes close to being taken down by the Republican opponent in that race, it's also going to be a pretty tricky story line for Democrats.

And it's not out of the realm of possibility that that could happen. What do you think is going on there?

AXELROD: Well, look, Jack Ciattarelli, the Republican candidate almost beat the sitting governor. Four years ago, Phil Murphy. So, he was competitive then? You know, Jersey is a -- is a -- is a largely a, you know, it is a state that is reacting to a lot of what's going on in Trenton.

And one of the questions that I think is going to be on the ballot is this is an election about change. There's no doubt about it in Jersey. But as a change from the Democratic governor in Trenton, Murphy, or is it change from Trump?

They have a -- they have a tradition in Jersey of throwing a party out after two terms. So, it would be kind of precedent breaking for Sherrill to win that race. I think she will, but I think it's more likely to be as close as the presidential race or somewhere in there. It's a different electorate, so she may do a little better. But I don't think it's going to be any blowout.

HUNT: Mike, what do you think.?

MURPHY: I smell the whiff of expectation setting in the air from my spin master buddy here. But he's right. I don't think it will be as good as Virginia will be. New jersey does buck governors. I did the race against Florio in '93, right after Clinton got elected. And in that one, there was also energy about send the president a message, which often happens in midterms. I think it will happen next year.

And, you know, that wind is actually behind her back is the Democrat against a Republican White House. So, I think she's going to win. And I -- but I agree with David. I think it's going to be fairly close, 52, 53, 54.

HUNT: Axe, do you think there's going to be any lessons to take from Tuesday that are going to apply, or could apply into the future? Is there anything you're watching for that will tell us something into the future, or are these just going to be representative -- representative of this moment in time?

AXELROD: Look, we always, you know, we're always hungry, desperate for tea leaves and stuff to talk about before the actual election comes. And now the next one is the midterm elections. And people are going to look at this. I think if Democrats were to lose one of those governors races, I

think that that would be viewed as, ominous for Democrats. I'm not sure how much all of it means. These midterm, these off-year elections are a different electorate than even midterm election. And midterms are different than presidential.

But here's the thing -- current course and speed, Democrats should take the House next year. There's a three-vote margin there, very small. Historically, the party that's out of power wins the midterm elections. When the economy is bad, when the president's not terribly popular, they win the election. And that would -- that on the natural, that's what should happen.

The question is, with Trump's redistricting, with the Supreme Court decision coming that could roil the maps relative to the Voting Rights Act and how states have to respect that, that could force some more redistricting at the end of next year. What Trump does in terms of encouraging governors to change rules in those states, to favor his candidates in terms of how votes are counted when they're counted, and there are a whole range of things that he will do, because he also knows that on the natural, he would lose the House next year.

So, this is -- you know, I'm not sure the midterm elections are going to tell us much of anything in that regard.

[16:45:06]

I mean, not the midterms, but these elections --

MURPHY: I think it'll be -- it'll be huge who wins. Just -- and it'll be very atypical for Trump to win the midterms, as David said.

But, you know, it is possible. If anybody can screw it up, it's the current Democratic Party, though I think the real tea leaf is going to be -- and this is a historically important one, who the parties nominate in early 2028, I guess in the summer, the conventions, because you have a double open seat and nothing defines the political party like a presidential open primary.

And the Dems have one for sure. You know, maybe Trump will strap himself to a tank and go around in circles somewhere, but assuming you know, the Republican thing is open, I'm not sure Vance is it for sure. Both parties will find out who they are in that primary process.

AXELROD: One thing before we go, Kasie, the one election that we didn't discuss is the proposition in California --

HUNT: Oh, yes. Good point.

AXELROD: -- on whether or not they'll redistrict and if they -- and if that proposition passes, Mike talked about '28. That'll be a big win for Governor Newsom and his coming race for the nomination.

HUNT: Indeed, one that at least --

MURPHY: Yeah, you know, really elevate him. HUNT: Yeah. At least he's being honest about the fact that he's

thinking about it or seem to be past. It drives me crazy when everybody pretends that they're not running, and they obviously are. So, props for that.

David Axelrod, Mike Murphy, thank you guys both. And of course, you guys can hear more --

AXELROD: Good to see you, Kasie.

HUNT: Great to see you guys. I hope you'll come back and do this live version of the podcast "Hacks on Tap". That's part of the Vox Media Network. And you can get new episodes every Tuesday. It's one of my favorite podcasts out there.

All right. Coming up next here in THE ARENA, a new poll shows Donald Trump getting uncharacteristically low marks from Republicans on a certain issue. We'll explain.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:51:16]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Over the years, many presidents have made changes. This obviously would be the biggest change, but this was something they've wanted for at least 150 years. I thought I'd bring this out because -- this is going to be probably the finest ballroom ever built.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: One week after President Trump's demolition of the east wing of the White House, we have the first polling that tells us a little bit about what American, the American people think of the saga. Yahoo News and YouGov found 57 percent of Americans disapprove of the demolishing of the East Wing to make way for Trump's ballroom. Among Republicans, 55 percent approve, 23 percent disapprove. About a quarter of them aren't sure what they think.

But when asked the same question again, if told that there was a quote from Trump saying, quote, the east wing is being fully modernized as part of the process and will be more beautiful than ever. His approval among Republicans does tick up to 60 percent.

Our panel is back. We're also joined again by our text chain.

Chuck Todd, I mean, honestly, the, the just 55 percent of Republicans approving of this is very low for Donald Trump. Among Republicans. People seem unhappy about this. He polls higher on other issues.

TODD: Well, look, I mean, in all seriousness, on these issues, this -- the danger on these issues are not the -- what he's doing itself. It's the -- is he focused on this and not on me? Is he right? Like, I think we've all, you know, and this is always the danger of any presidency is that you get caught up in what you're doing. You know, Donald Trump's more worried about trying to get his peace

prize, more worried about trying to, you know, you know, flying overseas. You know, I'm old enough to remember when George H.W. Bush was doing all this stuff at the end of the Cold War and flying all over the world and, and Democrats just started playing the --

HUNT: He forgot how much milk was, right?

TODD: Yeah, but what about me? And I think that's what -- he seems so intent on, you know, building a monument to himself. And there's, I think, going to be a commemorative coin coming out of the Treasury Department.

HUNT: Oh.

TODD: And it's like, what are you doing about my rising grocery bills, about my rising electricity bills, right?

HUNT: Yeah.

TODD: That's where these stories become really dangerous.

HUNT: This poll shows that 75 percent of Americans, Elliot, think that the Trump administration's focus on lowering prices is not enough.

WILLIAMS: Yeah. Look, let me take an unpopular position here. And I think most Americans had no idea what the East Wing was prior to about a week ago, right? No one probably if they said, hey, the East Wing is going to go away, would not care and did not care.

HUNT: The power of a picture, Elliot.

WILLIAMS: Well, no, but the rubble -- the rubble is awful for the president and everybody. And it looks like part of the White House is being destroyed.

But let me say again what I said yesterday on the program, Kasie, the justice department is being destroyed. People care about pricing. There are bigger fish to fry in America than a major renovation happening at the White House, however gaudy and Trumpy it is, there are just bigger things that people need to focus on.

HUNT: So, I mean, Governor, do you think these images mean -- do people in Wisconsin react to these images?

WALKER: Well, whether they're for or against it -- I mean, you can go through all the things he said about Teddy Roosevelt and his relative, Franklin Roosevelt, and all the changes they made. There have been plenty of changes over the years.

I think it goes back to the heart of what both of you just said, which is polling. Donald Trump beat Kamala Harris, at least in my state, because I could say, a gallon of gas was a buck and a quarter more at my quick trip than it was four years earlier, because my kids were playing $1,000 more on their mortgage than they would have when Donald Trump was president the first time.

For him to -- not just get poll -- polls don't matter. He's not running again. What they matter for is next November in the midterms. And if he's going to sustain the House, I think the Senate is in pretty good shape considering the map. But keep the House, which is difficult because Ronald Reagan, even after he won 49 states, still lost the House two years later.

[16:55:02]

If he's going to keep the House, he's got to get refocused like a laser beam on what does it take to lower prices? People see this. They don't think that. He's got time to do it, but it's trade, it's taxes, and it's terrible government spending. He's got to focus on.

HUNT: All right. Thank you to THE ARENA for joining us for this.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: All right. Thanks to my panel for being here. Thanks to all of you at home for watching as well.

If you missed any of today's show, you can always stream THE ARENA live. Catch up later in the CNN app. That's a little new.

We also, of course, still have our podcast. You can also follow us on X and Instagram @TheArenaCNN.

Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD", both live and also on streaming.