Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Sources: DOJ Investigating Trump Accuser E. Jean Carroll; Trump Admin Launches Plans To Put Trump On $250 Bill; Bessent: "We Perhaps Have The Makings Of A Deal" On Iran; Jill Biden: Joe "Was Slowing Down" But Not In Cognitive Decline. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired May 28, 2026 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:00]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: They are so fun. They're so smart. They work so hard.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Resilient. They prep all year for this. Like some of the smartest kids you'll ever meet.
KEILAR: Unbelievable.
THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT starts right now.
(MUSIC)
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. Welcome to THE ARENA. I'm Kasie Hunt. It's great to have you with us on this Thursday.
Vengeance and vanity. Welcome to day 494 of Donald Trump's second term. Consider this, the Justice Department has launched yet another investigation into one of the president's perceived enemies. And the president is now planning to put his name and his face on a new $250 bill.
First, on CNN was the news of the federal criminal probe into E. Jean Carroll. The former magazine columnist who accused President Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her in the '90s. Carroll's claims resulted in a 2023 civil trial in which a jury agreed and found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
Our sources say the DOJ investigation is focused on whether Carroll committed perjury during a deposition in which she was asked about the funding for her lawsuit. President Trump has consistently denied Carroll's claims and is still fighting to have the verdicts overturned.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's a made up, fabricated story by somebody, I think initially, just looking to promote a book. And when they called me, I denied the story. I got sued essentially for defamation because I'm denying a story where I'm right. I should be suing her for defamation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: As that vengeance tour marches on, the latest in presidential vanity could look like this. The Trump 250, shared by Republican Congressman Andy Barr. Today, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed that plans are in the works should congress change the law barring living persons from appearing on our currency.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: At present, no living person can be on U.S. currency and the currency must say, in God we trust. So right now, there is proposed legislation in front of the house, in front of the Senate to change the first requirement so that a living person, Donald J. Trump, could be on the $250 bill
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: I mean, let's be real, it's not surprising. President Trump would want to put himself on our nation's money. His whole brand throughout his whole life, built by putting his name on everything -- skyscrapers, wine bottles, red hats. It is also not surprising that the Justice Department, even though sources say acting A.G. Blanche has recused himself, would investigate a woman who brought a successful and embarrassing civil case against him.
The push for revenge has, after all, been a hallmark of Trump's second term, because, after all, this is a man who openly ran on elevating himself and taking vengeance on others.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: I am your retribution. Let's get off the sidelines. Head into THE ARENA. My panel is here.
CNN legal analyst, former federal prosecutor Elliot Williams; CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein; former Biden White House communications director Kate Bedingfield; and Republican strategist Brad Todd. They're both CNN political commentators. We're also joined by CNN senior political and global affairs commentator, Rahm Emanuel.
Thank you all for being here. Really appreciate it.
Rahm, I want to start with you actually on this. You had posted something today that caught our eye, that lined up some of these things that we're seeing from President Trump. And, you know, it occurs to me that this is really the way that we have been marching through the presidents second term with a combination of him settling old scores from when he was president, the first time in the intervening years, and then cementing his legacy, quite literally, honestly, on buildings, potentially initially on money, et cetera.
What taken together, does this say about where we are and the president's standing with the American people?
RAHM EMANUEL, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL & GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Kasie, look, I mean, I added to that you wrote about. I said three Gs, there's greed, grievance and grandeur. And don't lose sight of the fact -- I mean, there's a story out today about his intervening White House in the Pentagon to throw a contract to a company that his own kids are investors in. He's going to walk out $4 billion richer. You're going to walk out $4 trillion poorer as a country because of his presidency.
The grandeur and also an example of the cost on this -- you hear every day, whether it's the ballroom, the arch or the reflecting pool, he's on the phone every day with the head -- of the secretary of interior about some monument to himself.
[16:05:12]
Do you ever think he called the secretary of education about the fact that 50 percent of our kids can't read at grade level? No, but we know that he's on the phone every day about a ballroom to himself, an arch to himself, and also on the reflecting pool.
And there's not a day that goes by that he's not using the Justice Department to, for what? You know, the grievance tour. So those are the defining things that animate his presidency. And it has nothing to do with the well-being of the American people. But it has to do with both either his political or financial well-being for himself. And he's going to pay and he -- and the Republican Party are going to pay a price for it this November.
HUNT: So, Brad Todd, I want to bring you in on this because you are charged with trying to get a number of these Senate Republicans reelected, right, coming up here in the fall. The Senate is in play more than anyone really expected it to be, in no small part because the president's approval rating is so. How much do these things, the sort of focus on himself that some of this represents impact what you're trying to do?
BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, you know, the candidates who are running on the Democrat side hope to have an election about Donald Trump and the candidates who are running on the Republican side, if they're smart, will want a candidate that's focused on where the voters are and where their lives are and how they can get better, focused campaigns that win. And the windshield and you focus campaigns that lose in the rear view mirror.
And, you know, the president is entitled to his defense on the civil judgment. He's entitled to find out if, in fact, what he claims is true. But I don't know that it helps candidates who are trying to look through the windshield, not through the rear view mirror.
HUNT: Yeah. I mean -- yeah, go ahead.
KATE BEDINGFIELD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I just quickly, I just -- it's -- it's fascinating to me. You know, you hear Scott Bessent saying that Congress would have to pass a law in order to put Trump on a piece of currency. And it just my thought when I heard that was, there's just truly no limit to what Donald Trump will do to try to drag congressional Republicans kicking and screaming into -- into his agenda. I mean, it's like he wakes up every day just thinking about like, how can I screw these guys as much as possible. I mean, it's like --
TODD: Majority in the House --
BEDINGFIELD: And you're going to ask Republicans in marginal districts to vote on whether Donald Trump should be on a piece of currency rather than voting on.
TODD: We struggle to pass on approving the chaplain of the day. You know, with a two-seat majority. So I don't know how we're going to change that.
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: But I actually think -- I think it's even broader and bigger than that. I actually think rather than members of Congress ask people who voted for Donald Trump with the money question, forget all the legal stuff. The money question, is this what you voted for? Do you want did you vote for a president who wants to put himself on money? And I -- you know, frankly, Brad, I'll ask you, you know, I just have a hard time believing that even the most loyal supporters of the president actually feel that this is what they wanted for.
TODD: On Donald Trump's best day, he's defending people who are forgotten. He's defending blue collar voters, people who that have been missed over by the elites on the on the on both coasts. On his worst days, he's focused on Donald Trump.
WILLIAMS: Yeah.
TODD: And so the idea of putting his face on a dollar bill or a $250 bill or $1 million bill or whatever, next, you know, that all seems to me to be thinking about himself and not the public.
HUNT: Ron Brownstein, Hillary Clinton posted this, "By the end of Trump's term, it will be just enough the $250 bill to buy one gallon of gas and a carton of eggs."
RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. The core Democratic -- what's the core Democratic argument for 2026? You elected Donald Trump to solve your cost of living problem. All he's done is make it worse with his tariffs, the gas prices and the war, the cuts in federal health care assistance, while he's focused on enriching himself and his family and rewarding his allies.
And every day, from tearing down the east wing to the -- to the slush fund, to putting his name on money, to putting his name on building, he gives Democrats bullet points on that. I -- just two other quick points. You know, I think what's happening in the Justice Department isn't really just a smirk.
I mean, what we're talking about is a fundamental perversion of the Justice Department. And one thing that astonishes me is that we haven't heard more from business leaders about the precedent that's being set here, because if you're Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk, don't you have to think that a Democratic president who was inclined in the same way could find some reason to begin a criminal investigation of you or various Wall Street leaders who are big contributors to the Republican Party?
I mean, it's just astonishing that kind of independent voices are now saying, wait a minute, is this a society all of us want to live in?
And, Brad, one last point. Whether you're looking at the windshield or the rearview window, the fact remains, rearview window, the fact remains that in Trump's first term in 2018 and 2020, every Republican Senate incumbent or challenger in a state where his approval was net negative in the exit poll lost, except for Susan Collins in 2020. She was the only one who was able to swim past that undertow.
So his standing mattered, no matter how hard you swim away, it matters if he continues to do things that diminish his standing with the public, because it's hard for Republicans to escape that kind of whirlpool.
[16:10:05]
HUNT: So you mentioned the, quote/unquote, "weaponization fund". And, Elliot, I want to put this to you because the treasury secretary was at the White House podium today defending that.
Let's watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BESSENT: President Trump is a great American who has endured more than 10 years, 10 years of nonstop harassment and weaponization from the federal and state government actors. The bad actor at the IRS leaked more than 400,000 tax returns, including the Trump family, all the employees. And that's how we got here now. No American should be targeted for political reasons, and every citizen deserves fair treatment, full protection of the law.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAMS: Yeah, well, okay. The person you spoke about at the IRS who did leak President Trump's tax information went to jail has paid the price for it. His employer had their contracts canceled with the IRS. So, they're not working with the IRS anymore.
There was already a penalty paid for this action here. Now having Donald Trump, you know, sue the IRS for I guess the initial sum was $10 billion, was just gilding the lily in a way that did not need to happen. And quite frankly, the secretary knows that. And this is silly.
It is it is shameful to see the secretary of the treasury debasing himself by making arguments like that, that he knows are baseless.
The other thing is that there is and has always been a process for challenging an indictment or a conviction. Even if someone feels that they've been politically targeted, they can one appeal it and get it thrown away, or two, get a judge to toss it out. So the idea that then now we have to create a fund for this nebulous concept of weaponization that does not exist in the law, it's not written into the law anywhere in the United States is silly.
There are ways to throw these things out. And this is a waste of American money and foolish.
HUNT: A little bit more from Secretary Bessent, who also argued that while the economy is challenging, everyone is still doing well. Let's watch that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BESSENT: The economy that it is challenging now but unemployment is still low. Tax refunds were high and consumer spending is still quite high. So in my private business over the years, I always looked at what were consumers doing, not what they were saying. And I'm in constant contact with the banks and every income quintile is still doing well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Rahm Emanuel, I mean, that reminds me of many of the times and, Kate, you can jump in here too, if you want, that Biden officials would try to say, hey, everything's great. But if people don't believe it, how does this make it better?
EMANUEL: Well, it does -- well, first of all, breaking news. It doesn't. And second of all, I'm going to advertise what Scott Bessent just said. And the same way that the president's voice where he says, I don't care about American people's finances.
And guess what? They know he doesn't care. He cares about his finances, not their finances.
I think the argument -- you know, in politics, you try to move people from what they believe so that it's what they think. He is trying to tell people what they believe and what they think is wrong. And it tells you how out of touch, not only his secretary of treasury, but the president of the United States is enunciated the same type of things that the economy is as well. And it is well, if you're Donald Trump and Scott Bessent.
For working families that are trying to afford a down payment on a home, their health care bill, or taking money out of their 401(k) to make the paycheck get to the end of the month. It isn't well. And so, it is only going to reinforce this is an administration that is animated by greed, grievance and grandeur for themselves and the American people are going to be the thin blue line that protects us from two more years of Donald Trump's type of presidency.
BROWNSTEIN: You know, it may be --
EMANUEL: I hope Scott Bessent continues to act, talk like that. BROWNSTEIN: It may be that there is no messaging that can overcome
economic discontent because people feel it in their daily life. But I will say that it seems like every president of both parties runs into the same problem. Their instinct is to say, no, look at all the good things I've done for you. Why aren't you paying attention to, like all of the great things that are out there that I've done and that --
HUNT: It's like getting married, you know?
BROWNSTEIN: Right. Exactly. I mean --
HUNT: I washed those dishes.
BROWNSTEIN: Right. Right.
EMANUEL: That wasn't -- but that wasn't what he was saying.
BROWNSTEIN: Right. He was saying --
EMANUEL: He was saying --
BROWNSTEIN: You're doing better. Yeah.
EMANUEL: You don't believe how good it is for you.
BROWNSTEIN: Right. You don't know how good you have it. You don't know how good you have it.
TODD: I've advised candidates for a long time, and one of the hardest things to get them to say is we have a lot more work to do. They want to say things are terrible, so hire me or things are off or things are great. So keep me. That middle ground is the thing they struggle with.
BEDINGFIELD: Well, and it's interesting too, because you don't see the administration focused on. So you have Bessent delivering this message, which falls on deaf ears when people feel like their lives are more expensive because they are. And then you don't have the administration day in and day out taking steps to demonstrate, here's what were doing to supposedly, you know, undergird this economy that you should feel so good about.
[16:15:08]
You see Trump talking about himself. You see, you know, focus on Iran, which we know 60, 65 percent of voters say, you know, what does this have to do with me? And why are we -- why are we entangled over here?
So, you know, you can -- you can -- you have a losing message? And what you hear Bessent saying, and then you also have a lack of focus from the administration on trying to do anything to prove to people that, you know, they should feel better about the economy than they do.
HUNT: The president, of course, clearly focused on, you know, all the things we hear him talk about.
Rahm Emanuel, thank you very much for joining us today. I really appreciate it. Hope to see you soon.
EMANUEL: Thanks.
HUNT: The rest of our panel is going to standby.
Coming up next here in THE ARENA, Democratic Congressman Adam Smith will join me as the U.S. and Iran near a deal that could end the war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Plus, stunning new details about how President Joe Biden reacted in private to his own disastrous performance in the CNN debate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: Folks, I don't walk as easy as I used to. I don't speak as smoothly as I used to. I don't debate as well as I used to, but I know what I do know. I know how to tell the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:20:40]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BESSENT: We perhaps have the makings of a deal here. It is a multifaceted agreement, and nothing is going to be on the table until we see the Strait of Hormuz open. Everything depends on what the president wants to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: The United States and Iran have reached a tentative agreement today to open the Strait of Hormuz and start nuclear talks. The deal, though, is awaiting one critical signoff, President Trump's.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declining to confirm details of the emerging agreement but telling reporters that Iran must turn over its highly enriched uranium and commit to not pursuing a nuclear weapon.
Joining me now is the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Adam Smith of Washington.
Congressman, thank you very much for being here.
I first want to get your reaction to the reports of this emerging deal. How comfortable are you with something that reopens the strait while, of course, leaving this nuclear question for the time being essentially unresolved?
REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): Well, I guess three things. One, who knows? I mean, we've been hearing this for over two months now. The president has not been reliable in terms of giving accurate information on where this is at. So I'll believe it when I see it. It's number one. Number two, the deal itself underscores how stupid this war was. I
mean, we got into the war wanting to stop Iran's nuclear program in their ballistic missile program and also stop their support for terrorist organizations and hoping for regime change. You know, none of those things have come to pass. And now we've got the Strait of Hormuz on the table.
Now we're just desperate to try to get a strait open that was open before the war started. And as you documented in your previous segment, the cost of the war has been just off the charts.
But number three, we have to take the best deal we can get right now. I hear a lot of people say, no, we have to win. You know, we have to force Iran, you know, to do what we -- how exactly? I mean, this is the recipe for starting wars that shouldn't be started and keeping wars going, that shouldn't be kept going. This myth that somehow if you just apply enough force, you get what you want, it is way past time for us to learn the lesson. It doesn't work that way.
So, yeah, if we can get something that stops the war and opens the strait based on a vague promise on the nuclear weapons program, a lot of people would say, no, no, no, no, we can't take that. It's a bad option. It's better than anything else that's going to be on the table.
HUNT: How do you feel about this possibility that Iran ends up getting paid for people to use the Strait of Hormuz? The -- there has been some assurances, according to Scott Bessent from the Omanis, that that's not going to happen. But that seems like it's part of this overall calculation. No?
SMITH: Well, yeah. Well, again, I don't believe a single thing Scott Bessent says. I mean, literally. I mean, anyone coming out of the White House, it's very clear that Trump and his team have been lying about this war from the day it started, and they've never stopped lying.
Second -- yeah, Iran's not going to agree to this unless they get some kind of payment. You know, whether that's direct payment for, you know, controlling access to the strait or some kind of sanctions relief, that's what they want. Okay, which again points up how much this war has weakened us and how dumb it was to start it in the first place.
HUNT: You said just a moment ago, you pointed out -- you raised the question, how are we going to get what we want here? How are we going to get Iran to do what he want -- what we want? And I saw that at a "Politico" event earlier this month, you said the following, "The United States of America under Donald Trump is no longer the leader of the free world, and the rest of the world knows that even if we continue to pretend otherwise."
Can you explain why you believe that? I mean, that's a pretty stark statement.
SMITH: Yeah. Well, I mean, the president has been threatening the sovereignty of -- I've lost track at this point, like a dozen different nations. I mean, threatening to invade Greenland.
You know, actually did sort of invade, overthrow the regime in Venezuela. Claims he's running it. Now, he's trying to starve Cuba.
You know, he has pushed Zelenskyy away while all the while embracing Putin.
[16:25:03]
I mean, there's no better metaphor for this, no better statement than the fact that he literally -- Trump literally rolled out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin and then gave Zelenskyy the dressing down he gave him in the White House at the start of his term. If you're the leader of the free world, that's inverted. Okay?
So, look, I mean, Trump has made it -- and the other part of this, of course, is Trump is an autocrat. He's a dictator. He doesn't want to follow the law of the rules. And we're seeing this over and over again, and things trivial like the ballroom and the ridiculous painting of the reflecting pool, his arch. Now he's on a $250 bill. His mug is all over the place.
You know, it's stuff that would make Mussolini blush in terms of how he's promoting himself and he's ignoring the law, blatantly, not just international law, but domestic law who can credibly say that any part of what President Trump is trying to do is to promote economic or political freedom anywhere in the world. And I'm open to the argument. If someone tell me, where in the world is he trying to promote economic or political freedom, it damn sure isn't in the United States of America. We can tell that.
HUNT: An interesting set of points all. I -- my -- I guess my follow up question to that is, you know, you're -- if Democrats take back the House, you're set to become the chair of the House Armed Services Committee. Is there a list of things on your mind that you would do to try to restore America to a position in the free world?
SMITH: We're going to try. We're going to try to push accountability. We're going to try to push -- follow the rule of law, that you can't just spend money wherever you want, whether Congress has appropriated it or not. I mean, anything as ridiculous as the fact that they strut around calling themselves the Department of War when the law says their Department of Defense, they're ignoring that law, too.
We're going to come up with a bunch of creative ways to say an absolute minimum. You should follow the law. Now, part of the problem there is were passing laws to say, you should follow the law. Will Trump adhere to it? Will any Republicans in Congress, House or Senate join us in trying to enforce the law?
But we're going to try. We're going to push it. And Trump's still going to be in the White House, sadly. But we want to at least offer a reasonable alternative in a vision that says, no, we should stand up for the rule of law, both here and we should try abroad where possible. HUNT: You mentioned both rule of law and briefly, you also previously
mentioned this $250 bill. The treasury secretary said, of course, the law says that nobody living can be on the money. You have to be dead.
He said that they're going to try to get Congress to change the law. Have you heard anything about that? And what is your reaction to that possibility?
SMITH: The big eye roll that you just saw is my reaction to that -- that possibility. I mean, the ridiculousness of him wanting to put his face on a on a bill anyway, again, it's -- but frankly, that's pure fascism. I mean, that's just, you know, my face has to be everywhere.
And second, yeah, no, it's illegal. Do I expect them to follow the law? No, I don't. I mean, they're supposedly asking us this session to change the Department of Defense to the Department of War. But again, they've already done that.
So, no, I don't -- I'm sure Trump will print up his $250 bill just like he put his name on the money. Gosh, what else has he been doing? I lose track of it all. You know. Oh, sorry, the Kennedy Center.
You know, all this stuff that is like, you know, not legal, he just does it. So no, I don't expect -- well, sorry, I fully expect that they'll just go ahead and do it regardless of what Congress does.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Adam Smith, thank you very much for being with us today. I appreciate, you know, the lack of tie, the looser --
SMITH: (INAUDIBLE) at some point. But yeah, I mean, there are options here. There are alternatives. We don't have to accept this. Okay? But I think we do have to -- we have to call it what it is and stop acting like this degree of normal here. It's not, okay? And I need to identify that. Sorry, I know we're out of time.
HUNT: No. You're good. I really appreciate the candor, and I hope you'll come back soon. We can talk more about all of it. Thank you.
SMITH: Absolutely. Thanks, Kasie.
HUNT: All right. Still to come, fight night at the White House. A massive arena being built on the south lawn as the UFC prepares to come here to D.C.
Plus, the pushback that former First Lady Jill Biden now says she got from White House staff after her husband's disastrous debate performance
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
INTERVIEWER: Did you ever see signs that he was falling into cognitive decline?
JILL BIDEN, FORMER FIRST LADY: No.
INTERVIEWER: No?
BIDEN: No.
INTERVIEWER: Truly?
BIDEN: No.
INTERVIEWER: I mean, people were saying he wasn't the same Joe Biden.
BIDEN: Well --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:34:19]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
INTERVIEWER: Did you ever see signs that he was falling into cognitive decline?
JILL BIDEN, FORMER FIRST LADY: No.
INTERVIEWER: No?
BIDEN: No.
INTERVIEWER: Truly?
BIDEN: No.
INTERVIEWER: I mean, people were saying he wasn't the same Joe Biden.
BIDEN: Well, I don't think that's true. He was the same -- the essence of the same Joe Biden. But yeah, he was slowing down. He was getting older. I mean, we all observe that when, you know, it's a very intense job. I think it ages you quickly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: More comments today from former First Lady Jill Biden's interview with CBS about her husband's purported mental decline.
[16:35:03]
Not only did Jill Biden believe that Joe Biden was having a stroke during that disastrous 2024 debate performance, we're now learning, she thought the president may have even been drugged.
In her forthcoming memoir, a copy of which was obtained by "The Atlantic", the first lady writes the following of her reaction, quote, "Is this a stroke? I felt like we were watching an A.I. hologram of the man we knew, and the hologram was glitching. Has he been drugged? Oh, God. Will people watching assume this is how he is all the time?" Jill Biden then goes on to say that she wished she'd thought to ask for a blood test after the debate, and that she suggested the president take a cognitive test to calm doubts, but was ultimately overruled by his advisors.
My panel is back, and Democratic Congressman Adam Smith has agreed to continue to join our conversation.
Congressman, I do want to start with you, actually, because, of course, the president decided he was going to run for reelection after the wins in the 2022 midterm elections. Now, we're hearing this from Jill Biden.
Is it productive for her to be out there saying these things at this point, in your view?
SMITH: I don't think it's terribly productive, and it's sad and it's dishonest. I mean, just think of the two sentences she said. I saw him on the debate stage. I thought he was having a stroke. And then in the next breath, she says, no, I didn't see any evidence of cognitive decline.
Come on. I mean, and this is something that was a huge problem for my party. I mean, it was very clear, you know, probably a couple years out that Joe Biden was not going to be a credible candidate for president because of his age and declining health.
That -- to my mind, that's not even debatable. And yet, Jill and the family and a whole lot of his advisors around him, for whatever reason, dug in and said, we're going to jam him forward. And we've paid a terrible, terrible price for that.
And the final point on this is every one of us Democrats out there who saw that Biden was going to run and there was no stopping him. You know, we had to try and defend him, you know, which undermined our credibility as individuals and our credibility as a party.
So, it really weakened us in 2024. They should have seen it. They just should have seen it.
And the only thing I want to hear from Joe Biden is, I'm sorry, we should have said something sooner.
HUNT: Congressman, do you think that President Biden is responsible for the second term of President Trump? Is Joe Biden responsible for the second term of President Trump?
SMITH: Well, there's no one thing that is responsible for that, okay? There's a lot of different things. Chiefly responsible for that are the Republicans in Congress who didn't do the right thing after January 6th and impeach and remove Donald Trump from office. That is the number one biggest area to go for blame after that.
And it's hard to say. I mean, who would have, you know, who would have the candidate been? Would they have been better? You know, all I can tell you is without question, we were in a weaker position because of the two-plus years that we had Joe Biden out there as our nominee and an obviously weakened state.
No, I wouldn't say, Jill, there was so much else that was going on, but they certainly put us in a much weaker position to be successful. And I don't -- again, I don't see that as being debatable.
HUNT: Kate Bedingfield, you were there for a lot of this. What say you?
BEDINGFIELD: Well, I wasn't actually there for this, so let's -- you know, but --
(CROSSTALK)
HUNT: Let me -- you were -- you were with -- you knew the president very well and you worked for him, but you were not working for him by the time this happened on the debate stage.
BEDINGFIELD: Correct. I left in March of 2023.
No. Of course, look, of course, it is unhelpful. It is not something that Democrats want to relive right now. They don't want to have a discussion about everything that happened around the debate.
It was a terrible night for Joe Biden. It was a terrible night for the Democratic Party. And relitigating it now, two years later, when, by the way, we have a president who we are watching fall asleep actively in cabinet meetings and be unable to get through a coherent set of remarks.
No, of course, Democrats don't want to be focused on this. Now, obviously, Joe Biden has the right to tell her story. I think that going back now and suggesting that she was much more concerned at the time than she was suggesting publicly is, you know, that's difficult to process, especially as, you know, as people were hearing from the campaign and from Biden allies at the time --
HUNT: They all said he was fine.
BEDINGFIELD: -- we're going to -- we're going to power through and we're going to, you know? So to hear her now say that she was much more concerned at the time -- yeah, of course, that's upsetting.
TODD: I want to flag that the reason Joe Biden was unpopular and what Donald Trump won is because Joe Biden promised to govern as a moderate and he governed as a liberal. That's it. That's not -- it's not January 6th. It's not impeachment. It's because Joe Biden broke his promise to govern as a moderate.
But second --
BEDINGFIELD: Well, it's because inflation was high and people were frustrated --
TODD: Because of the policies.
BEDINGFIELD: Well, no, because of COVID and when supply chain -- TODD: When you forcibly drive up energy prices and labor prices,
you'll get inflation.
I -- my question is, why is Jill Biden doing this?
WILLIAMS: Oh --
BROWNSTEIN: Yeah.
TODD: She -- does she have to write a book? Does she have to go on TV?
[16:40:00]
Why doesn't she just go away?
HUNT: The congressman is nodding.
TODD: Why doesn't she go to the beach?
HUNT: Draw your attention to that.
TODD: Who's waiting on this? Does anyone --
BROWNSTEIN: No, right, no.
WILLIAMS: You know, I think I wanted to add to the point Kate made about the president falling asleep and the president dealing with his own aging. The president also has a 38 percent approval rating. The Democrats ought to be pouncing on now.
Now, look, you've written a book. I just had one out. You don't pick the day it comes out. But this is remarkably bad time -- timing for Democrats to have messaging like, and to your point, earlier in the show, Brad, about looking backward versus looking forward, this is the point at which all the folks who want to defeat Donald Trump ought to be looking forward and not at the mess that --
TODD: I'm glad to talk about the Bidens all you want another election.
BROWNSTEIN: I mean, there's -- I think the congressman reflected, there's literally no one in the Democratic Party who wants to hear explanations from the Biden people about why they did what they did. But, you know, there is a forward looking impact. I mean, I think the Biden situation has created an irreversible, impregnable demand for generational change in the Democratic Party. We're already seeing in '26, it's going to be really powerful in '28, and I predict, based on what Kate is talking about, the visible signs of Trump's decline, including falling asleep in public repeatedly, it's going to be equally strong in the Republican Party in '28.
Get the country moving again as John F. Kennedy said after Dwight Eisenhower was kind of puttering his way toward the end of his term after a heart attack, I think is going to be a powerful bipartisan message in '28, after the experience of Biden and now Trump. HUNT: Congressman, as you've been listening to this conversation,
feel free to add your thoughts. I mean, Elliot mentioned why does --
SMITH: Yeah.
HUNT: -- the first lady writing a book now? Go ahead.
SMITH: I mentioned two things. One, I think there's going to be an incredible push for a strong, coherent messages. The generational part of it is -- part of it, too. But look, I mean, there are people who are 60, 65 years old who are capable of being strong, coherent messengers. It's not necessarily a -- once you're pushing past 70 and 80, then it's time to move on.
But I think also, yes, there is a push for generational change even beyond the -- are you a strong messenger or not? And I think that is going to drive the elections going forward. And then to the point about, you know, Joe Biden governing, you know, more left and center, I think he definitely did. And I think the inflation problem is, yeah, we went big on all of the bailouts, you know, couldn't spend enough money.
And I would say this to my fellow Democrats and I consider myself to be, you know, to the left, all right? Not -- not, you know, center left, but actually a little bit left and progressive on economic messaging. The message that the debt doesn't matter because of modern monetary theory, let's go ahead and bury that, because that's absurd. And people know it's absurd. And it undermines our credibility.
I think we do need to change the economic reality in this country. Too few have too many -- sorry, too few have too much, and too many are struggling to pay the bills. And yeah, tax policy is part of that, you know you know, social welfare programs are part of that, but it's also got to make fiscal sense.
And if you walk in there saying that fiscal sense is irrelevant to you, then you're going to have a harder time delivering those policies in an effective way. So I think, yes, the Joe Biden thing is, you can tell, gets me a little bit fired up because of what it did to us and how -- I mean, I have not seen such an unforced error in my entire political career. But we got to get the message and the policy right, too.
Jill Biden -- Jill Biden book tour, no book tour, whatever, they're done, they're gone. They can talk all they want. No one's really paying attention. We need policies and messages that are going to build us going forward in the midterms, then in '28.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Adam Smith, thank you for sticking around. It's great to have you as part of this conversation. Appreciate your candor and hope you'll come back soon.
All right.
SMITH: Thank you. Thanks, Kasie.
HUNT: Of course.
Right now, a live look at the White House and behind it, the arena that is now being built on the south lawn. Ahead, new details on the UFC fight that is coming to D.C. The surprising criticism from one of the MMA's biggest promoters.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE ROGAN, PODCAST HOST: I know, it's going to be very high security and high stress and weird to have a fight at the White House in the middle of a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) war. I would hope the war will be sorted out by June, but quite honestly, I'm not confident that that's going to be the case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:48:36]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROGAN: The White House thing is odd. I don't like it. I don't like the idea of fighting outside at all.
I just don't think that you should compete in a world championship fight in a non-controlled environment.
JOHN MCCARTHY, RETIRED MMA REFEREE: I understand the whole thing and --
ROGAN: I get it, too, but --
MCCARTHY: -- it's special.
ROGAN: Listen --
MCCARTHY: But it's going to be a pain in the butt.
ROGAN: Build a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) roof.
MCCARTHY: Yeah.
ROGAN: Build a roof like you've got all the money in the world, right? You're doing this, you want to do this for (EXPLETIVE DELETED) America.
MCCARTHY: It's not my money.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Two UFC legends, Joe Rogan, and referee John McCarthy weighing in on the upcoming UFC fight planned at the White House. It's currently being built. You'll see that big dome structure towering over the White House. That's what they call the Claw. And it will soon house the famous octagon arena. The big fight set to take place on June 14th, which is Flag Day. It
also happens to be President Trump's 80th birthday.
The sport, of course, has dramatically increased in popularity in recent years. In January, just under 5 million people watched the first fight that was streamed on Paramount+. They paid a whopping $7.7 billion over seven years for the media rights to the sport.
It is a long way from the UFC of the '90s to see just how far the sports come -- has come.
Here is Joe Rogan talking about it on Conan back in 1998.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[16:50:00]
CONAN O'BRIEN, HOST: The Ultimate Fighting Championship this Friday on pay per view.
ROGAN: If you can get it, it's -- they have a huge problem with censorship. You know, a lot of the cable companies are keeping it from being aired because, you know, the image, you know, fighting in a cage.
Everybody goes, what are you crazy? What is that? It's human cockfighting. But it's not, you know?
O'BRIEN: Right.
ROGAN: They're really skilled fighters.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Wow. That was a nice find to my producers back there behind the camera.
Who would like to -- Elliot, are you into UFC? You're the person at the table who's into things that I'm --
WILLIAMS: Random things.
HUNT: You know, like --
WILLIAMS: A little bit. But here's the thing, you know, I so many people were up in arms about the president having a UFC fight in the White House lawn. This is not the fight to pick. We've been talking about the Justice Department and bulldozing government property without process and firing data scientists. There are bigger fights to fight about Donald Trump.
Now, something that's not in that video that you showed there is Joe Rogan was actually making a serious point, which is you're having an outdoor UFC fight in Washington, D.C., where it's going to be 100 degrees out, potentially humid, potentially thunderstorming, is it safe for the folks who are fighting? Is this practical? Those are the questions to ask, but I just think in the pantheon of
chaos and madness coming out of this White House, this is not the thing for people to lose their minds.
HUNT: Well -- and not to mention the security issues too. There was a shooter at the White House recently.
TODD: Regular Americans who are swing voters are going to like this.
WILLIAMS: Yes.
TODD: I can tell you that you get asked, as all of us are in Washington and have some relationships you get asked for. Can you get me a tour on spring break at the White House, which you never can? And then the other thing, this is like that. I've been asked by a lot of regular American friends and relatives, can you get me a ticket to the octagon? This is a thing that regular Americans who maybe are turned off by politics, they're going to be very interested in.
WILLIAMS: You know, just to add to that, this idea of we're at war and all things are going on, this didn't happen. I think there are millions of people who actually think America needs a distraction like this at this time, that its actually helpful.
BROWNSTEIN: You know, among the many ominous things in polls for Republicans, maybe the single most ominous thing is that after winning two thirds of non-college whites in each of his three campaigns, Trump is now down to around 50/50 in approval. In many polls, under 50/50.
That really matters because the core of the Democratic target list in the House are districts with a lot of blue collar whites. In the -- in the Senate, most of the key states have more than average. And they are feeling -- they are the voters were talking about before who feel like they elected Trump to solve their cost of living problem. He has not.
What he does have is a strong cultural connection to them, and partially that's on issues kind of with a cultural and racial overtones like immigration and crime. But also it's like this. It's something like this.
So, he is playing to a strength, but that -- you know, whether that is enough to keep people coming back when they feel like they can't afford, you know, formula and their rent, you know, you may see, in a lot of races, Texas is a really good example. Republicans are betting heavily on the traditional cultural arguments that worked so well for them. And this is a reflection of that. But when people are this unhappy about the economy, are those as salient as they have been in the past?
BEDINGFIELD: Yeah. I don't think this fight is going to be enough to swing the midterms to Donald Trump. But I do agree kind of broadly with Elliot that like in the pantheon of Trump things that Trump does that are that seem shocking, this doesn't seem all that problematic. Now there are security questions there, taxpayer funding questions. I mean, there are questions about how this is being funded. And but -- I, you know, I think it's a -- it's a political effort to reach voters that Trump believes he needs to win and --
HUNT: Is it in some way bait for Democrats to go after it?
BEDINGFIELD: I think so. I would not -- I would not advise Democrats to spend a bunch of time swinging at this. I think to the extent that people like it, they're -- they like it. And hearing a Democrat criticize it is not going to change their opinion on it one way or the other. And if you're somebody who doesn't like it -- well, you already don't like it.
TODD: Ten bucks on Kalshi says Elizabeth Warren can't resist.
HUNT: Ron Brownstein, I mean, there have been also people who have critics who have suggested that this underscores the idea of an empire.
BROWNSTEIN: Yeah.
HUNT: Right. Is there anything that --
BROWNSTEIN: Yeah, I mean, look, I mean, I think, you know, as we're talking about, you know, the core problem Trump and Republicans face in the midterm is that people elected him to solve their cost of living problem they don't think he has, and they don't think he's particularly focused on it. They think he's focused on all of these things that aggrandize himself.
And in that light, this is not, I think, an unmitigated good. But as you know, compared to putting his name on the Kennedy Center, tearing down the East Wing, funneling $1.8 billion of your money to people who rioted on January 6th, you know, I would not again put this at the height of, a of those vulnerabilities.
And also, does he really want to call this much attention to the fact that he's turning 80? I was kind of wondering that the whole -- the whole time, I mean, putting this on his birthday, I mean, does he like want to remind everybody, "Hey, I'm 80."
BEDINGFIELD: Yeah.
BROWNSTEIN: Yeah.
BEDINGFIELD: Yeah.
HUNT: All right. Well, I guess we'll see.
On that note, we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:59:31]
HUNT: All right. Thanks to my panel. Really appreciate you guys being here.
Thanks to you at home for watching as well. Don't forget, you can now stream THE ARENA live or catch up whenever you want in the CNN app. Just scan that QR code below.
You can also catch up by listening to THE ARENA's podcast. You can also follow along with the show on X and Instagram @TheArenaCNN.
But don't go anywhere. Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".
Hi, Jake.
