Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Just In: Stocks Rally As Optimism Grows For End To Iran War; Gas Hits $4 As Trump Tells Nations To "Go Get Your Own Oil"; Judge Rules White House Ballroom Construction "Has To Stop!"; Iran War Creates Cracks In Trump's MAGA Base. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired March 31, 2026 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:02]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Yeah, that's the only reason why my bracket is still alive, in fact.
Don Riddell, thank you very much.
DON RIDDELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: All right.
KEILAR: THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts right now.
(MUSIC)
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. Welcome to THE ARENA. Kasie Hunt is off. I'm Abby Phillip. It's good to have you with us today.
As we come on the air, U.S. markets are closing out a major rally. The Dow is up more than 1,000 points with the S&P and Nasdaq showing even stronger gains. All of this brought on by a statement by the Iranian president that Iran is ready to end this war in exchange for security guarantees. That's according to Iranian state media.
And at the very same time, Americans are feeling the brunt of these rising prices at the pump. The national average price for a gallon of gas is now $4.02. That is the highest it's been since 2022, and it's an increase of more than a dollar since this war began.
And there is no sign that these numbers will go anywhere but up from here. As a few ships have made it safely through the vital strait of Hormuz and petroleum facilities across the Middle East have come under attack, you're seeing oil, gas and jet fuel all becoming more expensive for everyone.
But President Trump has a simple solution for this. He says, quote, "Go get your own oil". The president telling America's allies to, quote, "build up some delayed courage, go to the straight and just take it. You'll have to start learning how to fight for yourself," he says. "The USA won't be there to help you anymore, just like you weren't there for us." That's a quote.
That's a message that was echoed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth this morning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: He's pointing out this is an international waterway that we use less than most, in fact, dramatically less than most. So, the world ought pay attention to be prepared to stand up. President Trump's been willing to do the heavy lifting on behalf of the free world to address this threat of Iran. It's not just our problem set going forward. Even though we have done the lion's share of preparation to ensure that that strait will be -- will be open.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Breaking news right here on CNN, sources are telling CNN that the president and his administration are now increasingly of the belief that they cannot promise to reopen the Strait of Hormuz as a prerequisite for declaring mission accomplished in this war. This morning, "The New York Post" spoke with the president about the strait, and he told them, quote, "I don't think about it, to be honest. My sole function was to make sure that they don't have a nuclear weapon. They're not going to have a nuclear weapon. When we leave, the strait will automatically open," end quote.
And as that happens, Central Command announced the arrival of the addition of U.S. forces to the region with almost 2,000 marines believed to be aboard the USS Tripoli. These latest reinforcements are only increasing speculation that American ground troops could be sent to Iran before this war is really over.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: As far as President Trump and boots on the ground are, I don't understand why the base, which they have already, they understand, wouldn't have faith in his ability to execute on this. We're not going to foreclose any option. You can't fight and win a war if you tell your adversary what you are willing to do or what you are not willing to do to include boots on the ground, maybe negotiations work, or maybe there's a different approach. But the point is to be unpredictable in that certainly not let anybody know what you're willing to do or not do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: All right. Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel is here with me, along with CNN business and politics correspondent Vanessa Yurkevich. She is at a gas station here in New York.
And also with us, CNN's senior White House correspondent, Kristen Holmes.
Kristen, let's go to you first, because we have some new reporting that's coming in just at the top of this hour. Take us through what you're learning about what the White House is currently thinking about, whether or not they can reopen this critical Strait of Hormuz before this war is over.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, I do want to go back to what he told "The New York Post". The idea that he doesn't think about the Strait of Hormuz is almost laughable, because his entire administration has been talking about ways to get gas and oil prices down. So, it's something that they're talking about nonstop, and certainly thinking about nonstop.
So, as you mentioned, the reporting shows that Trump's administration is -- increasingly believes that they cannot open the strait as a prerequisite or promise to reopen the strait as a prerequisite to end this war.
And to be clear, they understand how important it is to actually open this up, not just for ending the war, but also to try and lower those increasing gas and oil prices. They believe this is absolutely critical, 20 percent of the world's oil goes through the Strait of Hormuz.
But President Trump has started to tell the people around him that he believes that our allies should be helping more with reopening the strait, that that should be partly their responsibility, saying that we actually rely on it less than some of these allies.
And when you look at all of this and the way President Trump is looking at all of this, you can see that this is all really based on the self-imposed deadline, this four to six-week deadline.
And these officials have started to understand that you cannot achieve all of the military objectives that they have routinely been laying out and get the Strait of Hormuz closed and end the war. So, what they're trying to do now is focus just on those military objectives by trying to lean on our allies to help with Strait of Hormuz.
PHILLIP: A critical piece of reporting there. Kristen Holmes, thank you for that.
Vanessa, let's go to you at the gas prices, because this is where we're seeing the impact of this all. I mean, 20 percent of the world's oil goes through the strait of Hormuz. Not a lot of oil that Americans are consuming, but still a dollar more at the pump that people are paying than they were paying a month ago.
VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS & POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, certainly. And I just want to start on Wall Street. We just had a really large rally. This is over unconfirmed reports that Tehran -- Iran was looking for ways to end this war. And traders have been incredibly headline-sensitive recently. And we saw the Dow closing above 1,100 points. The S&P up over more than 180 points. And the Nasdaq closing almost 800 points up. That's 3.8 percent.
So, investors hopeful that some of those reports actually turn out to be true. But here at the gas pump, not -- not as much excitement. That's because the national average right now is $4.02 a gallon. That is up 3 cents in just the last day and up more than a dollar in the last month. Here in New York City, folks are paying right over my shoulder, $4.09
a gallon. And a lot of the folks I've been speaking to here are using their cars for work, so they don't really have a choice. You have Lyft drivers, Uber drivers, people who own small businesses who use their car every single day and really can't get around paying these higher prices unless they choose to stop driving altogether. But then, of course, Abby, they risk their livelihood.
Now, oil prices have been above $100 a barrel for the last week or two, and that has trickled down to gas prices, even though, as you mentioned, there is enough supply here in the United States, oil trades on a global market, and that's why it's been pushing gas prices here in the United States so much higher.
Analysts we've been speaking to say the only way to bring down these oil and gas prices is to reopen that Strait of Hormuz. But analysts have also told us in the next couple of days, they do expect gas prices to rise by about another 10 cents. And creeping towards that $5 a gallon, something we haven't seen since 2022, during the war with Russia and Ukraine, the last average, the last record average was $5.02.
We're not there yet, Abby, but those are the concerns if this war drags on -- Abby.
PHILLIP: Yeah, I mean, there are a lot of analysts saying that this could get a whole lot worse, depending on how long this conflict continues.
Vanessa Yurkevich, Kristen Holmes, thank you both very much for all that.
My panel is here with us in THE ARENA. CNN political analyst and host and editorial director at Vox, Astead Herndon; CNN senior political commentator Ana Navarro, CNN political commentator, and the former communications director for vice president Kamala Harris, Jamal Simmons; and with us, CNN senior political commentator, Scott Jennings.
We're also joined by CNN military analyst, retired Colonel Cedric Leighton, who is standing by for us.
Starting here in this room -- I mean, this is pretty important what's happening with the Strait of Hormuz, the prospect that they could walk away from this war with the strait under the control of Iran, what does that mean?
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, it contributes to the idea they're just making it up as they go. They didn't give Americans a solid case about why we're going to a war. We don't really know what the goals are. They've been changing the ball on who's going to pay for it, who's not going to pay for it, all along the course.
And the president is doing press conferences from the aisle of Air Force One, from the tarmac. I think they look -- they think that looks like he's in action and things are moving, but that's not what it looks like. It looks haphazard. It looks not planned.
That leaves people feeling very uncertain. They're making it up as they go. And that's not what Americans want when it comes time for war.
PHILLIP: How could they not have foreseen that Iran would do exactly what they've always threatened to do, which is close the strait?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I'm sure they did. I mean, look, it's a war. And the other side gets a vote in this. But right now, we're winning and the American people know we're winning.
The Harvard-Harris poll yesterday, three quarters of Americans say we're winning this war. And large majorities of Americans know that Iran is a threat and that this was a righteous decision.
And I know we've had this conversation on the air many times. We'll try one more time. No nukes, no missiles, no terrorism, no aggressive navy. These have been the objectives from the beginning and right now -- and right now -- and right now we have B-52 bombers circling Iran, refueling over Iran. And they can do what they want at will. We have total air supremacy. And by the way -- by the way --
PHILLIP: Sure, but Iran is still closed.
JENNINGS: Yeah. And the --
PHILLIP: The Strait of Hormuz is still closed.
[16:10:00]
Iran is still in control of basically the global oil market at this moment. They are determining how high the prices go. They're tolling ships to go through, allowing people who they like to go through. As long as they pay a toll, they are making twice as much money as they were making before this war started.
JENNINGS: Well, if --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: So, there is --
JENNINGS: -- the ayatollah, I think he would agree.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Listen, Scott, I'm just asking you to respond to that fact. And what -- what do you think it signals about the success or the failure of this operation? If we walk away and Iran still is holding the proverbial gun to the head of the global oil market in perpetuity?
JENNINGS: The success of this operation will be based on whether they have no nukes, no missiles, no terrorism exporting, and no aggressive navy. And apparently, the people that we're talking to are wanting a security deal. And the White House will tell you that they can't talk about the details publicly because its delicate, but they feel very good about the diplomatic conversations that are going on right now.
But there is no doubt we have defanged this regime, and that is bringing them to the table for diplomatic conversations. I would hope it would include Strait of Hormuz talk when we're there.
PHILLIP: Let me play what Nikki -- let me --
(CROSSTALK)
SIMMONS: Why don't Americans support the president? You make a very clear case, but I'm not sure the president makes that clear case. Why don't Americans support him in this effort?
JENNINGS: I think he and Secretary Rubio and Secretary Hegseth and General Caine have made a clear case every single day. And according to the Harvard-Harris polling I saw yesterday, vast majorities of Americans think Iran is bad and that we're winning. And so, I think they're actually making the case.
PHILLIP: They also don't support this war as well. That's what the polling shows.
(CROSSTALK)
ANA NAVARRO, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Donald Trump has historic lows at this moment. He's got historic lows with independents. Harry Enten did a report today. He is negative 45 with independents.
Look, you do make a clear case and you argue that they make a clear case. They don't, Scott. As much as you would like to say that they do, they don't.
I have heard that it's regime change, that it's not regime change. I've heard that we're now on the third regime. I mean, there's so many things.
And still to this day, the president of the United States has not had an address to the nation where in a very serious fashion, he clearly articulates what we are doing, where we are on this process. And when we are getting out.
Instead, he does it from Air Force One. He calls it a little excursion. He calls it a nice little stay. Those things are not comforting for Americans, and the polls are showing it.
JENNINGS: Well, I would just say I wouldn't telegraph to the enemy the date and the time that we plan to end the conflict.
NAVARRO: Nobody is saying date and time.
JENNINGS: But we don't know and we shouldn't tell them. Even if we do know, we wouldn't want to tell them.
NAVARRO: He didn't prepare our allies, and now he wants the allies to help. There was no coalition of the willing. There was no talk with allies. He didn't prepare Americans for this. Americans don't know that the hardship that they're going to you know, for how long this hardship is going to last. And they didn't know the hardship was going to come.
He has not told Americans anything that makes us feel better about what is going on. What he's trying to do is turn it into a little excursion. And that's just simply --
PHILLIP: Well, here's what he said to "The New York Post" today. He says, "I think it will automatically open". He's talking about the Strait of Hormuz.
But my attitude is I've obliterated the country. They have no strength left. And let the countries that are using the strait, let them go and open it, because I would imagine that whoever's controlling the oil will be very happy to open the strait.
It's hard to even know what to make of this. And actually, you know, I would -- I would give him a little bit of credit here, because in a way, when I look at what the markets are doing and how they are responding to the prospect that this war could end soon, they seem to think that a war in which Iran still controls the Strait of Hormuz means that actually, oil markets might come back to normal.
So -- so they actually might seem to think that that's what's going to happen here.
ASTEAD HERNDON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I mean, we've clearly seen markets respond to the president in a way that has been somewhat of a favorable rally today. But we don't know what comes tomorrow. I mean, that's the -- that's the point of the credibility loss that we've seen. That's the point of the lack of planning that we've seen.
I think it's vitally important to say that at the time in which he's using the kind of allied pressure to reopen the strait, he did not prepare kind of allies for this moment. He did not prepare the American people. And I don't think it's in question, kind of, that most Americans see this as a belligerent war from an out-of-touch White House.
We have seen kind of a net aggregate polling show negative 17 points in terms of disapproval over approval, in terms of the response to this war. You've seen Donald Trump's approval rating even among his own base reach, record lows in terms of who is even the most supportive of him. That down numbers down to 22 percent. That's the lowest he is seeing.
I think that's -- I think it's particularly surprising to me too, because he's playing into the same kind of issue that got Joe Biden in trouble in '21, 2022, because these type of rising gas prices are something that Donald Trump was warned about.
I mean, I interviewed John Bolton a couple of weeks ago. He's telling me about how he kind of put these exact things in front of him, that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz, retaliate against allies that would send energy markets higher. And Donald Trump did not have a plan for that. And he's seeing the kind of public impact because of that lack of planning.
SIMMONS: Let me just say this. If they do send American troops, marines and soldiers into the Straits of Hormuz or into Iran, and we start having the unfortunate case of people not coming home alive, you think his numbers are bad now -- every family member, every friend of one of these people is going to be up in arms about this war.
[16:15:14]
They don't understand why we're there and what we're supposed to get out of it.
PHILLIP: I think it's pretty clear that would be deeply, deeply unpopular on the left and on the right.
I want to play. This is Nikki Haley, and I'm going to ask Colonel Leighton to respond to this. She's suggesting that they can't just walk away now.
Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NIKKI HALEY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: I think leaving now would make Iran stronger because then they would have control over all of the ships. Right now, they're only allowing Pakistani and Russian ships pretty much to go through, and they're charging for it. So, it would allow them to have the money again, to do the proxies to build the ballistic missiles back, to do the nuclear production. And I think that president's come too far to stop now. I think you finish it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Colonel Leighton, what do you make of what she's saying there? Is she right?
COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: In part she is, Abby. One of the things about this is that the way in which the Iranians have used their asymmetric advantages has actually been quite interesting, just from an observer's point of view, because, as Ambassador Haley pointed out, they are actually taking control of the Strait of Hormuz. They never had that type of control where they charged tolls and controlled other aspects of maritime movement through those -- through that strait. So it is, you know, a significant advantage that the Iranians have right now because of that.
As far as, you know, going in and doing more and in essence, taking things out, that gets to be a bit more problematic. Now, we're in kind of a situation where, from a military perspective, you have several very bad options that you could do. Yes, the large portion of their navy has been decimated. A large portion of their air force has been decimated.
But the problem is, is that they operate asymmetrically. And to really get rid of those asymmetric advantages, such as with drone warfare and their missile capabilities, that takes a lot of -- a lot of firepower, and it takes a lot of precision targeting. And we'd have to be there for quite some time to really affect the kind of change that Ambassador Haley is talking about.
PHILLIP: Yeah, a lot of not so great options on the table right now for the president in terms of what to do, which is perhaps why he keeps insisting that the war may just be coming to a close one way or another.
Retired Colonel Cedric Leighton, thank you very much.
The rest of my panel, stay with me.
Coming up for us in THE ARENA, we're going to talk to the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Adam Smith. He was just briefed again today about the war with Iran.
Plus, the breaking ballroom news. What a judge is ruling today on this big presidential project that the presidents been touting.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it'll be the finest ballroom of its kind anywhere in the world. A lot of people are giving it really good reviews. Some are giving it reviews without even seeing the building.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:22:33]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: The upcoming days will be decisive. Iran knows that this new regime, because regime change has occurred, should be wiser than the last. President Trump will make a deal. He is willing, and the terms of the deal are known to them. If Iran is not willing, then the United States War Department will continue with even more intensity.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: That was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth this morning declaring five weeks into the Iran war that the coming days will be, quote, decisive in the conflict. Shortly after Hegseth's comments, President Trump told "The New York Post", quote, we're not going to be there much longer. We're obliterating the shit out of them right now. And it's total obliteration."
Joining me now is the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Adam Smith of Washington.
Congressman, appreciate you being here.
CNN is reporting at the top of this hour that the White House recognizes that they may not be able to reopen the Strait of Hormuz before the end of this war. The president has been telling staff, according to "The Wall Street Journal", that they may need to end the war, that he may be open to ending the war without reopening the strait. If he were to do that, do you think that that would be a victory for the United States or a victory for Iran?
REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): Well, clearly not. It would not be a victory for the United States. I mean, we entered this war with three big problems with Iran. Well, four, actually, but three that directly affected us. One, their pursuit of a nuclear weapon. Two, their ballistic missile program. And three, their support for terrorist organizations in the region. The fourth one was their brutality towards their own people.
And now that we've entered this war, we have a fifth, and that is their chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz, which they had not exercised. I was listening to the comments earlier from the president and Secretary Hegseth about how -- well, the rest of the world, you can just come, come get your own oil, make your own plans. You didn't help us.
Well, the rest of the world will say we had our own oil until you came in and blew the whole thing up and started a full-scale war in the Middle East.
So yes, that has exacerbated the problems. And now the challenge of getting a connection between our very successful bombing campaign. And there's no argument with the success, of degrading the Iranian capability, connecting that to those four things. What does that do to stop Iran's nuclear program, stop their ballistic missile programs, stop their support for terrorist groups, and reopen the Strait of Hormuz?
[16:25:03]
The connection between those two things has not been linked. Now, Secretary Hegseth says, we're negotiating a deal. We have sufficiently punched Iran in the face that they are going to capitulate. There is as yet no clear evidence that that's going to happen. And that's the dilemma we're in right now.
PHILLIP: So is it your view that the United States should cut its losses at this point and end the war, or should it continue? And if it continues, what should be the objective at that point?
SMITH: Well, that's the problem. And I've talked to a lot of people. I've spoken to some of the ambassadors from the Gulf states, and that's what they all say now is, look, you started it. Please finish it.
But then I asked, well, what do you mean by finish it? And they don't have a clear answer other than the hoped for outcome that Iran ceases to be a malign actor in the region. But what are we going to do militarily that's going to get to that result? And that's what nobody has an answer for, and that's the concern. So, what I think we ought to do, I think we ought to negotiate a
ceasefire in the short term, because the impact on the global economy I mean, were talking about $4 a gallon gasoline here in the United States. Much of the rest of the world, they're running out of gasoline, period, because as Secretary Hegseth correctly points out, most of the rest of the world is more dependent upon the Middle East that we just blew up.
So, the effects of that are enormous and devastating to much of the rest of the world, not to mention the fertilizer problem, which is complicated, complicated to get into. But it's really creating problems. So, get a ceasefire and then, yeah, we have to try to negotiate the best settlement we can get, but it's highly debatable whether or not what are we at now, four and a half, almost five weeks of war. Whether or not those five weeks of war have really put us in a better position to get a better deal or not, it certainly has allowed Iran to wake up to the reality that their chokehold on the strait of Hormuz, they're more willing to play that card now than they were before this war started.
So yeah, ceasefire, negotiate the best settlement you can do because the war is really costing a lot for much of the world, including us.
PHILLIP: So, you've been receiving some regular briefings last week, and I told you will be receiving one again this week. When you sit in front of folks from the administration of the department of defense, are you hearing actual evidence that regime change has occurred, as Pete Hegseth has said, and as President Trump reiterated again today?
SMITH: No. Yeah, no, I mean, it's really -- I mean, I guess technically, yeah, the regime has changed. You went from one ayatollah to another ayatollah. You know, a couple dozen leaders have been killed and replaced with a couple dozen other leaders.
But in terms of any meaningful change in the policy of Iran, no, we have no evidence that that has clearly happened at this point. And that's a challenge. You know, we hear a lot about the success of the operation in terms of degrading Iran's military. And again, agreed.
But that isn't really what we were looking for. We were looking for a fundamental change in the Iranian regime's behavior in the region towards Israel, towards us. And no, they have not presented any evidence.
I will say for the most part, the Pentagon says, hey, that's not our department, okay? That's, you know, diplomacy policy. We just hit targets and we reduced their capability.
As far as the strategic effect of the capabilities that we're hitting the Pentagon, for the most part, says, again, not our department. And then what you hear from the president and others is really confusing. And all over the map about whether or not the Iranian regime is really changing in any fundamental way that would benefit us in the region.
PHILLIP: All right. Congressman Adam Smith, thank you very much for talking to us today. Appreciate it. SMITH: Thanks, Abby.
PHILLIP: And up next in THE ARENA, the first reaction from President Trump just coming in after a federal judge put a big pause on the White House ballroom project.
Plus, how top administration officials are trying to plug the holes of any cracks that may be forming between the president and his MAGA base when it comes to this war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: I don't understand why the base, which they have already, they understand, wouldn't have faith in his ability to execute on this. Look at his track record of pursuing peace through strength, America first outcomes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:33:50]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I said, if I do this again, I'm going to get a ballroom built and we're putting up our own money with the government is paying for nothing. You probably hear the beautiful sound of construction to the back. You hear that sound? Oh, that's music to my ears. I love that sound. Other people don't like it, I love it, Josh. I think when I hear that sound, it reminds me of money.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: This news will not be music to the president's ears. A federal judge has ruled that the construction for the White House ballroom has got to stop. The ballroom has been a major pet project for this president in his term. His second term. Just this morning, he was posting new renderings on Truth Social.
Judge Richard Leon, a Reagan appointee, wrote, quote, "The president of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of first families. He is not, however, the owner!" That's an exclamation point.
"President Trump claims that Congress has given him authority in existing statutes to construct his East Wing ballroom project and to do it with private funds. I must therefore grant the national trusts motion for a preliminary injunction and the ballroom construction project must stop until Congress authorizes its completion."
[16:35:04]
CNN's senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, joins our panel. Elie, tell us more, because I actually was a little bit surprised,
having not dug into the particulars of, you know, federal property construction, but the statute seems to make it pretty clear that you do have to go to Congress to build something like this.
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, Abby, so the judge says right away, in the opinion, this is a novel issue of law. There's not a heck of a lot of precedent. But ultimately, this case is about separation of powers. Who gets to decide, as between Congress or the president.
Now, as a starting point, the constitution clearly gives congress power over Washington, D.C., over federal property and federal buildings, and over appropriations. So, there has to be some law that would allow this.
Now, Donald Trump's administration has pointed to a law that allows the White House to make certain alterations, if authorized by Congress. And, in fact, the Trump administration tries to argue that this ballroom qualifies as a, quote, "alteration". But the judge says there's a couple problems with that.
First of all, it's way beyond the scope of what we typically understand to be an alteration. Usually, that means an upgrade to the HVAC or the plumbing or minor repairs. And second of all, the total amount of money that congress has allocated to the White House for this for construction and upgrades in a year is usually about $2.5 million. Yet this ballroom costs $400 million.
So, the judge has said for now, this construction has to stop because it's really up to Congress and not the White House.
PHILLIP: And the president, he's weighed in, as you can imagine, with this lengthy Truth Social post. He's lashing out at the National Trust, the group that brought this lawsuit. What do you think is going to happen now?
HONIG: Well, so a couple of things. First of all, surely the administration will appeal. The judge even has said that he anticipates there would be an appeal. It'll next go to the to the court of appeals for the D.C. circuit and then potentially up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
But I think a lot of people are wondering what's going to happen on the ground right now. As it stands right now. We essentially had the demolition. We had a rubble pile. Now we have a foundation that's been put in place, and the judge has said all construction has to stop until and unless one of two things happens, until and unless an appeals court overrules me and says you can resume construction or until and unless the president goes to Congress and the judge says towards the end of the opinion.
Go ahead, Mr. President. You can go to Congress if Congress authorizes you to do this, then you're good to go. But unless and until that happens, the judge has put a stop order on this construction.
PHILLIP: All right. Elie, stand by for us. I'm bringing it into the room here with our panel.
Trump does have control over the Congress. He could go ask them to do this. Why not?
HERNDON: I mean, if Donald Trump wants include Congress in some of his decisions, whether it be from Venezuela or to the ballroom, he has shown no interest. And actually, we know that this portion of his term has been motivated by the feeling that Congress has stymied him has been a barrier to success.
I think the question is, why does he care? Why does he care so much about the ballroom or some of the more odd things like, you know, acquiring Greenland and such. And I think it's a person obsessed with legacy.
I think this is a person who wants to see his name go up on the 51st state, or wants to see a portion of his own vanity reflected, or his presidency reflected in brick and mortar. And so, frankly, he is willing -- seemingly willing to flout a separation of powers and norms, certainly, to get to that point.
NAVARRO: I mean, sure, it could pass Congress. I mean, would you like to be a Republican in a swing district at a time when a lot of Americans can't afford health care, can't afford groceries, can't afford gas voting on approving this mammoth ballroom? I mean, do people understand the size and scope of this ballroom? The biggest ballroom in America right now is like roughly half the size of what he is proposing in this ballroom.
"The New York Times" had an article the other day where it looks like architects haven't even reviewed -- outside architects reviewed this design, their steps going up to nowhere. People are having all sorts.
PHILLIP: More columns than anyone could ever have asked for, for whatever --
NAVARRO: The height of it, the scope of it. I mean, you're talking about 10,000 people, fitting 10,000 people in a ballroom at a time. Again, when Americans are hurting so bad.
I think this judge is doing Donald Trump a favor because I find that so incredibly tone deaf and galling that at a time when he's being asked about Iran, he's going around with a picture of this ballroom.
Most people his age show you pictures of their grandkids. This guy pulls out a huge picture of his huge ballroom.
PHILLIP: I mean, we're in the middle of a war, and that is such an important point. And the president is walking around with giant renderings of a ballroom that no one has approved, that he just has come up with his out of his own mind.
[16:40:00]
Just -- there is a tone deafness here and its part and parcel. I mean, with all the other things. His name is going on an airport in Florida. Okay, fine. He wants to put his name on the Kennedy Center, which is also going to be challenged.
He wants to put -- he put his name on the Institute of Peace. He's signing currency, which has never been done before from a sitting president. This is stuff that you see in non -- let's put it this way -- non-Democratic nations, not things that you see in the United States of America.
JENNINGS: Are you guys really that mad about the ballroom? I mean, honestly, there's a giant hole in the ground. Now, what are we going to do? Just leave it there?
When you get the government involved in building stuff, ask the people in California what happens when the government gets involved in building stuff. You don't build anything. There's a big hole. I agree. He could go --
PHILLIP: It's just like saying, we burned down the house. What are we going to do? Yeah, I guess we have to rebuild it. I mean -- I mean --
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: He's building a private contributions.
PHILLIP: I think it's fair for Americans to be upset about tearing down the East Wing.
NAVARRO: I think has tremendous historical value that nobody even bothered to save anywhere. I am pissed at what he's done to Jackie Kennedy's garden, isn't my the thing -- I'm most pissed off about. No, I care a lot more about the people that have gotten killed in the streets of Minneapolis, but I think it's pretty outrageous that he is acting like a king.
JENNINGS: Should we leave it?
NAVARRO: And destroying his --
JENNINGS: Should we leave it?
NAVARRO: Leave what?
SIMMONS: Well, maybe we should leave it.
JENNINGS: We leave a hole in the ground.
NAVARRO: Maybe we should have --
SIMMONS: Maybe we should leave it for two or three years.
NAVARRO: No, maybe we should ask -- maybe we should ask architects and a -- and a board --
JENNINGS: They have architects.
NAVARRO: -- people that know this.
PHILLIP: Maybe he should go to Congress.
SIMMONS: Maybe he should go to Congress. Listen -- listen --
JENNINGS: I don't mind that. If they want to -- if they want to approve it, fine. It's being paid for by private donations.
SIMMONS: That's what he says now.
JENNINGS: If Congress needs to put a single line in a bill that says, by all means, build a ballroom, fine with me. You could probably get the Republicans to do that.
PHILLIP: Why do you think --
JENNINGS: Every president has wanted, by the way, a bigger and better facility.
PHILLIP: But why do you think Trump didn't bother? If he was going to -- this is -- if this was such an easy ask. You go to Congress. You ask them to just, you know, create, create a line. They don't have to appropriate any money. No problem.
Why didn't he just do that in the first place?
JENNINGS: Well, they have a different legal interpretation that they don't need it, A. B, and again, you get you get government involved in building stuff and things simply just don't --
SIMMONS: But they are the governments, Scott. By them doing it, the government is therefore involved. So, I'm not sure what that argument --
PHILLIP: I think it's also worth noting, when you look at the history of major renovations, the west wing, the third floor addition, the east wing, the full gut renovation, the added balconies, those were all approved by Congress. The only things that were not were smaller cosmetic changes on the interior, but creating new structures on the White House property, that has gone to Congress historically.
So, whatever their interpretation of it, there's not a whole lot of precedent for what the president is doing.
JENNINGS: Well, precedent or no, all I know is that as we sit here today, there's a big hole in the ground. There's a bunch of cranes over there. We do need to rebuild this, and we do need a ballroom that is befitting of the White House and all the things they have to do.
Every president, you know, you work there, wanted a bigger facility to have stuff. So, I hope they ended up building it. And if Congress has to approve it, I don't have a problem.
SIMMONS: With this is, Abby, there are White House social secretaries who would -- who would have signed on to this, but they were not asked.
PHILLIP: Nobody was asked. NAVARRO: And I'm not sure -- I'm not sure if people --
PHILLIP: Elie Honig, thank you very much.
NAVARRO: -- would agree that it needs to be a 90,000-square-foot ballroom.
PHILLIP: All right, everybody, thanks to the rest of my panel. Don't go anywhere though. Coming up next, the shaky ground the Iraq war is putting the president on with some core members of his base, how officials are trying to smooth things over right now.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:47:55]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: As far as President Trump and boots on the ground, I don't understand why the base, which they have already, they understand, wouldn't have faith in his ability to execute on this. Look at his track record of pursuing peace through strength, America first outcomes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth today responding there to criticism from Americans who support President Trump but don't want to see boots on the ground.
This war has caused some cracks in the MAGA base, as prominent voices such as Megyn Kelly, Tucker Carlson and others are questioning the decision to go to war, and some younger voters don't support the war at all. Conversations are swirling among some on the right as to who exactly is to blame for President Trump's decision making.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: We still have a lot of questions. For instance, was the president fully briefed about the risks of all of this from the beginning? And was he then able to take it all in and understand the complexity of this, how complex it could actually get? And further possibilities of casualties or other damage, the difficulty of dealing with these people? Or was he told this would be relatively quick in and out?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: My panel is back.
Laura Ingraham there sounding as if the president has no ability to make decisions for himself about the cost benefit of a war?
SIMMONS: Listen, I'm not reflexively against us doing damage in Iran, right? Nobody has sympathy for the mullahs and the ayatollahs and all of that. The question for me, though, is at what point did they do the
planning? At what point did they figure out they were going to build a coalition? Were they going to talk to the American people about it, or are we going to do this in a way, at least when George Bush went into Iraq, he sold it, right? He went out and made a presentation to the United Nations. He made a presentation to the country, Oval Office addresses, East Room.
Where is that part of this process? And I think the fact that we don't do it just infers to me that they are sort of making it up and that Donald Trump, whether he read the briefing documents or not, I don't know. I'm not in the Oval.
[16:50:01]
But Donald Trump doesn't seem to have a plan that takes us out to the second, third and fourth steps of this particular operation.
NAVARRO: It also sounds to me like, like, like her question, I think could be -- and I'm speculating here -- responding to the reporting that there's been that the Israelis had told Trump and the White House that this would be quick and that Iranians would come out to the street and that that would entail regime change and that, you know, things would be hunky dory. They haven't.
And I think a lot of people are questioning whether Donald Trump has been played like a fiddle by Bibi Netanyahu.
PHILLIP: Well, let me just -- one interesting thing about that, coming from Laura Ingraham. So, Ann Coulter, another conservative, over the weekend, she said, watching Fox News assure viewers that the Iran war is going super well and that Trump is a total stud, is like watching the same network assure viewers that Dominion voting systems rigged the 2020 election and Trump was the winner.
And what she's calling out there is this sense that in conservative media, there's been very little criticism. But I think that is changing. I mean, that was Laura Ingraham last night.
Lindsey Graham yesterday saying, "Oh, I support the president winding down this war."
I mean, are they responding to a weakening of support for this idea of ground troops, this idea of a war lasting longer than a month?
HERNDON: Yeah, I think that we're seeing a recognition of reality in some ways, and they have not been able to impose the shift in public opinion that they may have expected. You know, the assumption is that after kind of military action happens, you'll see a kind of rallying around the flag. American people supporting a mission from the president, even if there's unpopularity that emerges later. We haven't seen that with this. And so, I think that is a part of the reason were seeing maybe some shifts from Republicans who.
But I think it's important to also say they would not have put up with Joe Biden, for example, being seen as someone who was only who was not the where the buck stopped and a commander in chief that was only taking information for from advisors or, or lack the sort of presidential agency that they're currently describing. Donald Trump, even if Donald Trump was played by -- or by an adverse adversary or did not get fully briefed on the impacts of what could come, that is on Donald Trump. And I think that's what we're seeing the public react to is a kind of feeling that this, at minimum, is a commander in chief that was either willfully ignorant or not asleep at the wheel.
PHILLIP: Yeah. I mean, to your point, I mean, here's -- here are three congresspeople blaming somebody else other -- who is not named Donald Trump for what's going on with the war. Listen
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY MACE (R-SC): I want President Trump to take Lindsey Graham out of the Situation Room.
REP. ANNA PAULINA LUNA (R-FL): Lindsey Graham does not speak for this Congress. He does not speak for the administration.
REP. KAT CAMMACK (R-FL): I absolutely think he should have his Oval Office credentials revoked.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Last I checked, Lindsey Graham is not the president.
He might be --
NAVARRO: -- Disney world --
PHILLIP: He might be influential. He might -- he might have a lot to say. But he is not the president. Where does the buck stop?
JENNINGS: With the president. The commander in chief makes the decisions. And if you look at any video of Donald Trump for the last 40 years, he has had the same view of the Iranian regime since like 1980, repeated public comments.
They will never have a nuclear weapon. That is my red line. I will never permit it.
So, the idea that he sort of came to this conclusion willy-nilly, or that he was played by someone or what have you, that's just not moored in the reality of his long held belief that the Iranian regime is bad and that we cannot permit them to have nuclear weapons.
HERNDON: But when we -- at the Trump rallies, when we were hearing no endless wars coming from Trump and those around him, wasn't that assumption to be about the same type of endless entanglement around we're seeing right now?
JENNINGS: How many weeks have we been there?
HERNDON: I'm saying, when does that --
JENNINGS: Is that endless to you? I mean, what --
HERNDON: When does that start a calculation change? We're seeing the type of escalation that could lead to boots on the ground. I feel like there is a blatant hypocrisy from the Donald Trump that was pitched, to the Donald Trump that folks have received even if you think what he's doing is good.
JENNINGS: I think you're having willful memory loss about the Donald Trump that was commander in chief the first time around. He has never been shy about using the U.S. military to enact our national security priorities. He is not an isolationist. He has never been. People have tried to ascribe this to him.
PHILLIP: Okay. He's also repeatedly warned --
JENNINGS: He's been for smart engagement. Not willing engagement, but smart.
PHILLIP: He has also repeatedly warned against Democratic presidents launching wars against Iran. He warned it about Obama. He claimed that Kamala Harris would do it.
He has -- he has used a war in Iran as something to argue against his political opponents.
HERNDON: And resisted doing it.
PHILLIP: And so, I think that is important to note because when you when you're running for president, you say the other guy is going to send you to war with Iran, and then you become president and you go to war with Iran, that might seem like a bait and switch to his viewers.
JENNINGS: Well, I think he would say -- you'll have a commander in chief who's smart and knows what they're doing, versus people who would not be as smart as me. I mean, that's essentially the argument in political campaigns.
PHILLIP: So, a bait and switch?
[16:55:00]
JENNINGS: I have better judgment than them. Who do you trust?
(CROSSTALK)
NAVARRO: Listen, the Donald Trump after Venezuela --
JENNINGS: And the American people made the decision.
NAVARRO: I think Venezuela had a deep impact and effect on Donald Trump's psyche, despite the fact that we had to park a third of the U.S. Navy off the coast of Venezuela for five months.
But taking Maduro out and doing what he thought was regime change, I think has affected him.
PHILLIP: All right.
SIMMONS: You know, who has the best judgment? The American public is watching gas prices like the way rich people watch stock prices, and they're not happy.
PHILLIP: We'll be right back, everyone.
NAVARRO: Even rich people are watching gas prices.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Big thanks to my panel here in New York.
Jake Tapper, meanwhile, is standing by for "THE LEAD".
Hey, Jake.
