Return to Transcripts main page

CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt

U.S. Sending Carrier To Mideast To Replace USS Abraham Lincoln; DNC Holds Summer Meeting Amid Debate On Party's Future; Trump's Handpicked Kennedy Center Board Attempts Workaround To Put Trump's Name On Building Facade; GOP Rep. Mike Lawler: Democrats Have Tried To Turn Abuse Claims Against GOP Rep. Max Miller Into A "Spectacle". Aired 4-5p ET

Aired August 13, 2026 - 16:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[16:00:01]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. Welcome to THE ARENA. Kasie Hunt is off. I'm Pamela Brown.

And as we come on the air today, there are concerns that are mounting over the conditions aboard an American aircraft carrier as the war with Iran continues with no end in sight. A U.S. official tells me that the USS George Washington is headed to the Middle East to hopefully replace the USS Abraham Lincoln in about a week or so, but I'm also told plans can change. This official claims that swap was previously planned but it comes amid reports of low morale and poor conditions aboard the Abraham Lincoln.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: I would say morale is pretty low, and not just in the division, like in the ship entirely.

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: Kind of like Groundhog Day, relive the same day over and over, so that thing gets hard.

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: We were running pretty low on rations. I mean, at some point -- some points in the day, it would just be about noodles and tuna mixed in together. And that was it.

Sometimes --

BROWN: That's all you were eating?

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: Sometimes you get a corn dog, sometimes you get a hot dog, but -- you know, those are some -- those are some rough days. I'm glad you made it pass out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: That was from what I heard from service members aboard the Abraham Lincoln, and I reported from that carrier in the Arabian Sea last month. And now, some lawmakers are pressing the Pentagon for answers. Democratic congressman from California, Mike Levin, describing the

reported conditions on board as, quote, "moldy showers, broken toilets, no hot water for weeks, meals that came down to 1/2 a cup of rice and two tortillas. A ship's store out of soap, deodorant, and toothpaste. Sailors so worn down that according to one family member, the ship's own doctor warned that they need to reach port soon or people are going to start losing their minds," end quote.

"Stars and Stripes" and "The Navy Times", both reporting that there have been multiple attempts by crew members to jump overboard. A U.S. official confirming to me one instance in which a sailor did go overboard earlier this month. I'm told he was wearing a life jacket and was recovered in around an hour by a helicopter and choppy water. treated by the medical team and then transferred off ship for follow- up care.

In a statement to CNN, the U.S. Navy said, quote, "We have not observed an increase in suicidal ideations or attempts aboard the ship. We take every service member's well-being seriously and have religious, medical and mental health professionals available to assess and address concerns as they arise," end quote.

The USS Abraham Lincoln is now in its ninth month of its deployment. It has not made regular port calls in more than 200 days, and I'm told by Navy officials that's a modern-day record.

Here's what I heard from some of the crew members when I visited last month.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: What do you want Americans to know?

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: I miss my family, but being out here has been great. I'm here surrounded by friends and ship with my family.

BROWN: What about you?

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: That I miss my family and I'm ready to go home.

BROWN: You're ready to go home? Is it tough not knowing when you're going to go home?

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: Yes, it is.

BROWN: What does that feel like day-to-day when you don't know when you're going to be home and you've been at sea for so long? Honestly, you can tell me.

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: It's just like -- I don't know, honestly. It's like -- I don't know. It's like, you know when you wake up and you're like -- it's like another day. It's like, oh my God, they're good, you know?

BROWN: Does it feel like Groundhog Day?

U.S. NAVY SAILOR: Yes, Groundhog literally every single day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel is here.

CNN senior political commentator, former Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger; White House correspondent for "Semafor", Shelby Talcott; and Democratic Congressman from Virginia and member of the House Oversight Committee, Suhas Subramanyam; and former Trump administration official Matt Mowers.

Great to have you all with us.

I want to start with you, Adam, because you served in the Air Force. You have deployed a number of times. And I think the context you can provide in this moment is really important because when I was aboard the ship, and as you just heard there, the sailors had varied viewpoints and mental health issues that they were dealing with this long deployment.

And I think it's really the uncertainty of it all. They were supposed to be home in May or now in August. And there's just that element of uncertainty that's hard.

ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, first off, God bless them. And this is why I actually joined the Air Force, not the Navy, because it's like that is a very difficult thing. I mean, an average -- when they go out to sea is like six months. This thing is getting close to a year now. And that's the biggest issue.

I mean, I remember in one of my deployments and as pilots when we deployed like three months, they're short because we run out of time that we can fly. But I got extended like a week and I remember it was just a massive gut punch. I was supposed to leave on a Sunday and they're like, well, the rotator broke so you can't go home till the following Sunday.

And that was morally -- you know, very difficult for your morale. I can't imagine what these young men and women are going through and I'm glad they're relieving the ship, but clearly, this has been a problem that's been brewing.

[16:05:01]

BROWN: Yeah, and normally they have port calls, even though it's longer than expected where they can at least set foot on dry land.

KINZINGER: I mean, just imagine being on basically a football field for about 200 days. That's rough.

BROWN: And it's small quarters and so forth, but at the same time, no one expected it to be a luxury hotel, right? I mean, I think that there's that balance there where they don't sign up for that, but that doesn't make it easier. It doesn't mean that this is an easy deployment and there aren't some challenges and a lot of pressure on these young sailors.

And when Secretary Hegseth, for his part, has been asked about some of the conditions back in April, he called it fake news. There was reporting about the food being spoiled, not having enough food. As you heard there, there was a time where they had to ration food because of supply issues during combat.

And then today, he basically just downplayed the reports and seemed to suggest that it was misrepresented. I wonder if you think that's the right approach here?

MATT MOWERS, PRESIDENT, VALCOUR GLOBAL PUBLIC STRATEGY: Well, and look, I think the most important thing is the fact that it does seem like they're now sending out the USS Washington out there that's going to provide some relief.

Look, I think the secretary, along with the entire administration, I imagine, takes all of this very seriously. Nothing's more important than the morale of your troops in the middle of essentially a combat zone right now. So, it's important that they have the resources they need. It's also right for Congress to ask the questions it has to do, and it's important for the administration to continue to focus on their morale so they continue to carry out this really important mission.

Those are all patriotic Americans who dedicate their lives to ensuring the well-being and safety. They're in a very challenging scenario right now. But I think they're all going to come back home safely soon, and we'll welcome them back, and I'm happy to treat a few to a nice steak dinner.

BROWN: I think they deserve. They all told me that they had their dinner in mind when they come back, whether it's Chinese food, Chipotle, or beer. They do have beer days actually on this ship where they're allowed like two beers. That obviously is few and far between these beer days.

But, you know, the bottom line is these sailors, a lot of them, nearly 50 percent, I believe, are around 25 years old and younger. And it's a very different experience for the enlisted sailors than it is for the officers on board.

So, Congressman, I wonder for you, what are the questions do you have right now as you listen to these reports and given your role on oversight?

REP. SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM (D-VA), OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: Well, first, I'm incredibly frustrated by Hegseth's response. I mean, he's downplaying this. This is an administration that continues to cover up failures. This entire issue is a microcosm of a lot of their failures, a failure to end this war, a failure to provide for our troops.

This is not an isolated incident. In Virginia, we have active duty military who are actually visiting food shelters regularly because they are not getting enough food on their bases. They're not getting the resources they need on their bases. And so, if you think this is just one incident, one deployment, you're wrong. This is happening across the military, and we need to fix this immediately, and this war needs to end immediately.

BROWN: And just to go back to you in terms of the man overboard. I know you didn't serve on ships. I'm told that this does happen on deployments with aircraft carrier. This is not unique to the USS Abraham Lincoln. But what more can you tell us about just the morale and the psychological toll of being on deployment?

KINZINGER: Yeah, I mean, look, so think couple things. So, first off, if you take any 2,000 people whether them in the military or not, you always have challenge.

BROWN: And there's around 5,000 on this ship.

KINZINGER: Yeah and so you take that number of challenges with mental health. That's number one.

Number two, you think of the family impact. Thankfully, I was single when I deployed, but I knew many people that were married. You're missing kid's birthdays. You're missing kid's graduations. You're missing time with your spouse. That has a real impact.

And I've seen some, you know, guys in their 40s, frankly, that were lieutenant colonels there that were in a really bad mental health place because maybe they missed their daughter's graduation or something like that. All of that comes into play.

The things that you like to be home for being and not just absent. You're not like in Germany doing something. You are in a ship with no way to get off of that. It has a magnifying effect.

Again, it doesn't mean they don't expect it, but I think where we get to where they don't expect is to be extended this often, this long, and then have an administration that downplays it because somehow they think that that is a discussion about whether we should have gone to war or not. That's not. It's just a discussion of how we should treat our sailors.

BROWN: How closely is the White House watching this play out?

SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Well, the administration's certainly keeping an eye on this. I've talked to administration officials about it, but I think the sentiment is what Pete Hegseth said. But they're keeping an eye on it also because this is, as you said, it maybe shouldn't be, but it is an overarching discussion about the Iran war, right?

And so, you're seeing how we talk a lot about low munitions as a result of this prolonged conflict. You're seeing the wheels come off in other ways, like this prolonged deployment. And so, you're seeing the administration is, I think, very aware all of these issues that are starting to pop up because there is no clear end to this conflict which is something that the president really wants to finish.

He has been -- you know, I've talked to administration officials who have said repeatedly he wants this to end.

[16:10:07]

The struggle is how does that happen. They don't have an answer.

BROWN: Yeah, I think that that's the overarching issue at play here. I just want to also note what the Navy told me. It says we have not observed an increase in suicidal ideations or attempts aboard the ship. We take every service members while being seriously and have religious, medical and mental health professionals available to assess and address concerns as they arise.

I want to now bring in the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Jack Reed from Rhode Island.

Senator, thanks for coming on.

So, when was the last time --

SEN. JACK REED (D-RI), SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Thank you.

BROWN: -- the Pentagon briefed you on the status of this specific carrier? And what questions do you have right now?

REED: The Pentagon has deliberately avoided briefing Democrats, particularly. Only last week did they speak to Republicans about the budget. But they have been essentially silent on the operational activities in the Persian Gulf.

This is an outrage to the men and women who are serving aboard that ship. Broken toilets, poor water supply, poor meals. The morale is, as you observe, very, very low. They deserve much more than that. They're defending this nation.

And I think this is all a result of the very poor planning of this White House and Department of Defense, their lack of a real goal. And the feeling right now among those sailors that they don't know how this is going to end, whether they'll have to come back, whether they'll stay longer.

So, this is a situation that is a result of very poor planning. And also to your question about information, I think these points are so not only embarrassing but so revealing of the insensitivity of the administration to the troops in the field that they want to cover them up, that this is all about just ignore it, and that's bad.

BROWN: And just -- you know, to be clear, I spoke to so many sailors, and of course, it's not a monolith, right? Not everyone we spoke to said the morale was low. But certainly, the time at sea weighs on you because they're human, right?

And I will say, having Wi-Fi aboard the ship seemed to be a game changer for a lot of the sailors I spoke to. But at the same token, those sailors are able to reach out to their family members who are now speaking out, out of concern for their loved ones. And I'm wondering if you've been able to speak with any of these sailors or their families about these conditions?

REED: We have had calls from family members in my office here in Rhode Island, not specific to the Abraham Lincoln, but to other ships, and they've echoed the same comments and complaints, poor living conditions, stress, unaware of what they're going to do, when they're going to do it.

And it is helpful to be able to make contact through computers and other devices. But still, in some respects, that makes it more difficult because you're seeing, you're talking to your family. You can't tell them when you're going home, what you're going to do, et cetera.

So, I, again, think that this is another example of a poorly planned, very well-executed, but poorly planned operation with no goal in sight. The president does not have an objective. He's moving from day- to-day. One day, there's a settlement on the table. The next day he's going to bomb them, et cetera.

And that's reflected also in the truth, because the point you made about being able to contact your relatives, parents, friends, you also can listen to the media and the news and you know what's going on, whereas years ago, you were in the field and maybe you got a letter once or twice a month.

BROWN: That's true. Although I will say I was asking them when I was on board if they knew what was going on because when I was there, there was escalating tensions and strikes and a lot of them weren't really paying that much attention to it because they just had their jobs at hand and they weren't that involved on the air wing of the ship.

Others were, you know, again, it's on a monolith, but that was that actually was interesting to me. Just -- also, they're just so used to the constant go, go, go, pause, shift.

REED: Right.

BROWN: You know, there was a lot of that on board as well.

I'm wondering how you think Iran is viewing all of this?

REED: Well, I think the Iranians are sensing that they have leverage because of the control of the Strat of Hormuz. They can effectively stop significant shipping going through. I think they also understand how there's no good plan emerging from the White House, and they are using this leverage, and also the leverage they have with the other countries in the Persian Gulf, these countries like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, are terribly concerned that another outbreak of violence will cause the Iranians to attack their vital infrastructure and really cause them even more significant pain.

[16:15:05]

So, the Iranians right now believe that they have the leverage to get a deal that they agree with and they think is worthwhile. And at this point of emerging at the White House, there doesn't seem to be any kind of direction, frankly. It's just sort of sitting in place.

The other thing about people say -- I was in the Army, so I'm not an expert, but I always heard about scuttlebutt. Which means not so much what you're listening to on the radio, but what the guy who's always talking is talking about.

And I wouldn't be surprised if there's the complaints about food, about living conditions, and also about, hey, we don't have anywhere to go. We're just sitting out here doing nothing.

BROWN: Well, I mean, yeah, and I certainly heard some of those complaints when I was on board. There was a time when they had to ration food. There was many months they went without fresh fruits and vegetables because of the supply logistics and just -- they're in the middle of combat and it was hard to get the ships there to replenish.

I'm wondering though, clearly you don't like where we are in this war. It's gone on too long in your view. How do you think the U.S. should handle it from here on out?

I mean, we are where we are. And it seems as though the strategy right now is to try to put a stranglehold on Iran with this Iranian blockade and try to squeeze them as much as possible. But what do you think the strategy should be?

REED: Well, I think the strategy should be a much more consistent, detailed, and intensive diplomacy, not only involving the United States and a few other Arab countries, but other countries that can help us to get a solution. I think what's upsetting the president is given the leverage the Iranians have, the solution will be much worse than the one he threw out, the Obama JCPOA.

I mean, right now, they have nuclear materials. They're not about to give them up. They have leverage. They're talking to the Omanis about charging tolls on the Strait of Hormuz.

All these things are much worse than before the attacks by the United States and Israel. So, you know, the president is in this dilemma. If he wants to settle this and get peace, he's going to have to accept demands from the Iranians, which are worse than what prevailed before the operation.

BROWN: All right, Senator Jack Reed, thank you so much for joining us.

REED: Thank you.

BROWN: Coming up in THE ARENA, the new legal test coming to the Kennedy Center after the board picked by President Trump makes a controversial move today.

But first, Democratic leaders meeting now in Texas as the party confronts what some call an identity crisis about its future.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KAMALA HARRIS, FORMER U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: There is almost a rebellion against status quo because it has not been working for a lot of people for a long time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[16:22:26]

MODERATOR: With these midterm elections in November, you've got the Democratic Socialists of America, DSA, with several candidates who are on the ballot headed into these midterm elections. Your thoughts on what that energy, how that represents some of the change that you are talking about that's happening in the progressive wing of your party?

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: Yeah, so I think we'll see, you know, what happens in terms of what the caucus looks like on the other side of the midterm elections. Certainly, our focus right now is making sure that we win as many seats as we can in November, flip as many red seats blue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries not directly answering the question this morning when asked if recent wins by Democratic Socialists represent a change in his party.

Today, DNC leaders are gathering in Texas for their summer meeting, and it comes at a time when Democrats all over the country are grappling with not only their future but their present.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, widely viewed as a 2028 contender, saying this about the party. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS: You know, what is the future of the Democratic Party? Where is it headed? Because I think it's too early to tell based on just a collection of recent elections. But I will say that I think that what we are seeing is, again, there is almost a rebellion against status quo because it has not been working for a lot of people for a long time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Joining our panel in THE ARENA is progressive Democratic strategist Corbyn Trent, along with the rest of the panel here.

And, Congressman, I want to kick it off with you what we just heard there from the former V.P., saying it's too early to tell what the future of the party is. But you have midterms right on the corner. Isn't it time to figure it out? SUBRAMANYAM: Yeah, I mean, the voters want change, right? That's what they're saying. They want an end to the status quo. This is a rebellion against the status quo.

And it's not necessarily change in terms of ideology. I mean, the DSA is winning some primaries because they're showing more change and representing more change. But you know, sometimes it's been a change in terms of, you know, how long have you been there, you've been there too long, change in terms of are you fighting against the Trump administration enough, right?

And so, I think it is a change but it's a change not necessarily in the ideological spectrum as much as his style and wanting to be more of a -- you know, against the President Trump and his administration.

BROWN: Corbin, to bring you in, Harris said that there is a rebellion within the party. Is that how you would describe it?

CORBIN TRENT, FORMER BERNIE SANDERS STRATEGIST: I mean, I think there is what I would call a political rebellion across the country that we've been seeing since, I don't know, 2007 at least when Barack Obama won the presidency in the nomination.

[16:25:09]

I think that that same political rebellion has waxed and waned in the form of love for, say, Bernie Sanders, excitement around Donald Trump the first time, excitement around DSA candidates now. You know, I think that there is a rebellion against the you know the economic system that we have the foreign policy system that we have.

I think that people have looked for hope and change over and over and over. in likely and unlikely places, and what they get are results that are basically nil. They continue the downward slalom in their ability to afford their lives, to afford their homes, to afford their housing, to afford their healthcare, childcare, transportation. They see infrastructure going unbuilt. You know, they see a country that doesn't look like the one we hear about in the history books. It doesn't look like the one our parents and grandparents told us about, and it sure doesn't look like the one the Democratic Party wants to tell us about.

BROWN: So, if there's this rebellion, how do you resolve it, Corbin?

TRENT: I mean, I think you start electing people like we're doing right now. Like, you know, the work that I've been doing since I entered this arena in 2015 is to try to wrestle back the Democratic Party to one that I recognized, one that from a Tennessee perspective that my papa talked about, my mama talked about, that I recognized as a as a party that was going to do the hard work to lift people up, you know, like building the things that we need, whether it's hospitals or daycare centers, whether it's the infrastructure that we need, like the TVA or the Interstate Highway system, and not just give money away to consultants, not give money away, you know, in tax breaks, but actually do the work. And that Democratic Party, I've just not seen it, you know, and

hopefully right now, we're going through the process of electing people with those kind of visions. The people with the vision that says, hey, we don't want to participate in genocides. Turns out we don't want to go into foreign wars in the Middle East. Actually, Iran, like the funny thing about this Democratic Party right now is that we can't even get these people to say that the war in Iran has failed, it's illegal, and we shouldn't have started it in the first place. That's a bizarre thing.

BROWN: I want to go to you, Matt, because I'm curious if you see parallels when it comes to rebellion, when Trump first came on the scene, and there were a lot of people within the Republican Party, part of the establishment, who really resisted it and thought he was this guy, didn't take him seriously, and now the Republican Party is the party of Trump.

Do you see Democrats coalescing?

MOWERS: You know, I think it's actually earlier than that. It's really more like 2010, 2012, right? The Democratic Party hasn't found its Donald Trump yet.

Let's not forget, the Republican Party didn't find Donald Trump until a year before the primary in 2015, right? So, you know, I think this is maybe a lot more equitable to you know you got the Todd Akins of the world, you had the Murdocks of the world who lost winnable Senate seats in 2010, 2012. I think that's probably what you're seeing the Democratic Party do in states like Michigan with Abdul El-Sayed right now.

I'll tell you the challenge is if Corbin was running for office, I'd be a little more worried as a Republican because he's remarkably on message. He's able to drive it home.

Those aren't the issues that those candidates are talking about though. You're talking about candidates who are now out there having to rewrite whether they want to defund the police or not, whether they want to abolish the Pentagon or not, whether they want to actually go out there have an open border or not.

And it's -- they're losing credibility there, especially when you then have the former vice president, who is, by the way, the vice president, talking about the need to actually change the status quo. It's incumbent upon her and others to say, what part of the status quo would you have changed?

BROWN: Congressman, you were shaking your head.

SUBRAMANYAM: Yeah, I think people care about affordability, for instance, and that's what a lot of these candidates are talking about. And this administration laughs at the term affordability. That's an example of the kind of change people want. They don't want sort of tepid change. They want big changes.

They want to see a big leap forward when it comes to policymaking, not incremental change. And I agree that this has been happening since 2007. That's why you got Trump in the first place. People are angry about the way politics works right now.

I see 2007 was also the year that we had Citizens United, and the way campaigns ran changed, as well. You could get tens of millions of dollars since these congressional races. I think that is what's been changing, as well. And I think people want different ideas now and different ways of doing things.

MOWERS: Let's not forget, 2004, you had MoveOn.org, you had foot boats, you had 527 groups. I don't necessarily agree with you on the money and politics part. It's always been there.

But the challenge for the Democratic Party right now is they're either stuck with a brand which is unpopular because it's stale, which is the establishment. They're stuck with a brand that's seen as out of touch with the middle -- central part of the electorate that's going to turn these elections. And that's the problem they have right now.

They've got two types of dog food that voters aren't necessarily interested in right now. And so, the Republican Party right now has hundreds of millions of dollars more than Democrats, has never happened in an election cycle before. If they put that to use in the very small number of competitive battleground seats, and both the Senate and in the House, this will not just be a referendum election, it will be a competition.

KINZINGER: I think there's a lot of -- there's a lot of energy --

[16:30:00]

BROWN: Hold on one second. Let's let Adam into this.

KINZINGER: Well, I just think there's a lot of energy in the Democratic Party to have somebody to fight, right? Like at the beginning of their time of Donald Trump's second presidency, keep in mind, there was DOGE, that whole DOGE thing happened. Congress was home for three weeks, while that went unabated. The Democrats did not come back to D.C. to fight, to make a point, to try to demand access.

And I think that's where you saw a lot of anger from the Democrats is just like, we need somebody to go out there and fight. There can be differences in the party in terms of what people believe.

Let me also say, do not go find your Donald Trump Democrats. You don't want to get your Donald Trump, so don't use that as your blueprint.

BROWN: All right. Corbin?

TRENT: I mean, you know, I think that the ironic thing here is that we talk about fighting Trump. So, you hear that a lot from Democratic politicians. You hear a lot from Democratic candidates. But what that means in my mind, like, for example, you've got national security presidential memorandum number seven. It says we're going to go after people for being anti-American, anti-capitalist, not Christian enough, to pro-immigration, you know, it lays out seven things for like pre crime of domestic terrorism, signs of domestic terrorism.

We also had a national security chief that's out there saying that we need to go after the most dangerous people in our country, which is the Communist and the and they were talking about like Claire Valdez and Brad Lander.

But what we don't see the Democratic Party, its leadership, Hakeem Jeffries and others saying, hey, this is unprecedented. We're not, you know, this a free country where political thought and political ideology is something you can express. Socialism is not against the law, it turns out. In fact, it built our rails, it built our interstate highway systems. Socialism built a lot of things in this country.

But that's one of the things I feel like we're not doing when it comes to fighting Donald Trump is that we're not standing up against his pushing against the Constitution and what normal protections we should have as citizens.

BROWN: You mentioned socialism. I mean, Donald Trump has been using that against the Democrats in his line of messaging, calling them communists and then taking it even further, calling some of the people elected jihadists. Is this going to be a new line of messaging we're hearing from the White House?

TALCOTT: A hundred percent. You've heard it from Karoline Leavitt. You've heard it from other top officials in the administration. You've heard it from the president himself. This is their messaging.

And the reason that this is their messaging when I talk to White House officials is they believe that they can successfully paint the Democratic Party writ large as very progressive, as too far left for the moderate voter in America. Whether it works or not, it remains to be seen. We'll see in November.

I think the open question for the White House that they're still grappling with on their side is, they're going to message against Democrats, but they also are going to have to find a message for voters to vote for them, right? What are they going to do with the economy? What are they going to do to help lower gas prices?

And you're seeing them try to talk about it a lot, but the president continuously is going back to those foreign policy things that are turning voters off.

BROWN: All right. Thank you all. Corbin Trent, thank you for joining us.

The rest of my panel is going to stand by because we have more coming up in THE ARENA. The new lawsuit against embattled Republican Congressman Max Miller.

But first, the new drama at the Kennedy Center. The board that President Trump handpicked to oversee the institution is now likely triggering another court battle after two key votes today.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:37:56]

BROWN: Welcome back.

President Trump's handpicked board at the Kennedy Center just found a way, potentially, around a court order blocking the president's name from being added to the historic arts center. Sources telling CNN that the board is now opting to add an inscription below the Kennedy Center sign saying the arts complex was, quote, "restored and renovated by President Donald J. Trump".

This after a federal judge ruled that the president's name should be taken down from the facade of the building arguing that only Congress has the authority to change the institution's name.

My panel is back.

And I'm very curious what you all have to say about this.

First to you, Congressman, what do you think about this pretty aggressive test of the court order?

SUBRAMANYAM: Well, I think this is illegal, too. But aside from that, this is just another one of the president's vanity projects. It's completely unnecessary, uncalled for. The reality is people don't want it. They'd rather see him spend that money on affordability, on making sure that Americans have health care.

But instead, we're talking about trying to name things after him. It's one of many examples of that. So, I think people are tired of it.

BROWN: How big of a win is this for Trump?

TALCOTT: I think it depends on if it ends up. holding up and if he's able to go forward with it. We've seen a number of projects get held up in the courts. I'm sure that this is going to be tested as well. But I'm not surprised that they did this, actually, because I've been hearing for months from Trump allies and people around the White House about different ways, theoretically, that the president could end up getting his name on something like this.

And so, I think that was clearly the end goal here, regardless of this initial court order. This is what the president wants. But it also, I think, speaks to the larger just sort of legacy aspect that this president is focused on this term. You know, I've done a lot of reporting about the president's D.C. renovations writ large, and it is something he is extremely focused on.

He will be talking to lawmakers and in meetings about unrelated topics and bring up, for example, the ballroom or bring up the Kennedy Center. He'll bring in props to show people what he's working on. It is something that he is really obsessed with in the second term.

[16:40:00]

KINZINGER: Can I just say for a second, I agree with everything everybody said. But let's just look at the fact that the president of the United States of America, the most powerful person in the world with a failing war right now in Iran, obviously all the other issues we're talking about is obsessed with having his name on the Kennedy Center so much that when they took his name down, they had to put a curtain in front of it that as far as I know, still is in front of there because his ego is going to get hurt by not seeing his name on that.

This is a movement, a party that claims to be movements of alpha males who don't follow people who have strength who go camps and shoot guns and do everything and they're following a president who is obsessed with having his little name on the Kennedy Center and everywhere else. I just -- this is a party that I do not recognize that 10 years ago I would have said was 180 degrees different from this.

And now, it's all about him getting his little name on something because that's what's most important. I do not understand it.

BROWN: Is this still message when voters are dealing with affordability issues ahead of the midterms?

MOWERS: I mean, I think it's a few different things, right? One, I'm not sure voters truly care about whether his name Kennedy Center or not. I will say from having been to the Kennedy Center, I definitely need some upgrades. I think from that standpoint, most folks who've been there would agree to it. And they have utilized the Kennedy Center in a way that had not been done previously.

I mean, if you look at the FIFA World Cup draw and really instead of just have it saying it's a nice Opera House for people in the D.C. area, it's a place that could showcase a lot of American culture. I think they've actually really utilized it in a smart way, and the renovations make sense and we're going to continue to do that.

As far as putting his name on, look, doesn't bother me, doesn't help me. I don't care too much about. I don't think most Americans do.

And honestly, I know Adam's going to have a condition and probably disagree with me. I don't think the president really cares that much either.

BROWN: Hold on. Hold on.

KINZINGER: Let me tell you why.

BROWN: I know he does. He's cared about this since his 20s. He told my mom in his 20s that his dream was to have his name on every building in the world.

KINZINGER: Well, there you go.

BROWN: There you go. They were friends. They knew each other back then. And my mom would always tell that story that was his big dream. He wanted his name.

KINZINGER: By the way, I agree with Matt. I don't think any voters do care about this. The fact that he cares so obsessively about this, about painting a statue here gold, about like all these little things, the reflective pool that everybody knows was bad construction but he can't admit it so he said somebody walked along it with a razor and we sit around and we were just so used to the lies that it just --

BROWN: Doesn't give a layup to the Democrats of like you know Trump's not fighting for you he's fighting to get his name on --

SUBRAMANYAM: I have people reaching out to me asking about this and demanding something -- I do something about it which I will. But the reality is that this president is putting his ego, his vanity projects over affordability and a thing is about that's what they care about more so than even just the name change.

MOWERS: I think the congressman's district is also like 10 minutes from the Kennedy Center so it's not exactly the representative of the rest of the country I think it.

TALCOTT: Really depends on the voter though. Like I do think that a lot of this is along party lines. If you are a big supporter of the president, you're going to be very supportive of the ballroom, of the renovations to the Kennedy Center.

I think some of the other things are actually bipartisan in terms of trying to clean up areas of D.C. There's not been much drama around some of those aspects. I think if you're a Democrat, you're going to be opposed to it.

I think the problem comes not with the Kennedy Center, but with things like the ballroom and who's paying for it. That's where some of those more moderate voters get a little squishy and start saying, well, why is this the focus instead of lowering gas prices or lowering my cost of living?

BROWN: Fair point.

All right, ahead in THE ARENA, what a swing district Republican is saying about whether he'll return a campaign donation linked to embattled Congressman Max Miller.

We'll be back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Why not just give up back? It's only $10,000.

REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): Because this is the typical Washington-- this is the typical Washington media game where it's always an allegation comes up, you must return the money. It's the typical game everybody plays.

(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:48:22]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LAWLER: I know Max very well. I've talked to him personally over the last two years about this very difficult family situation. It's tragic. I don't think anybody disagrees about that. But this is something that should play out in family court.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: As embattled Republican Max Miller forges ahead with his re- election bid, the abuse allegations against him, which Miller denies, are now raising new questions about the thousands of dollars that Miller's political action committee has funneled to over a dozen of his Republican colleagues.

So far, just one of the GOP campaigns that received money from Miller's PAC said they had returned it, "Politico" reports.

And earlier this afternoon, CNN's Dana Bash pressed Swing District Republican Mike Lawler about his own plans for those contributions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: I'm asking you specifically about Max Miller. So, it sounds like you said you've talked to him a lot privately?

LAWLER: Right, but --

BASH: It sounds like you're saying that you're not returning the donations because you --

LAWLER: I'm not going to get into that.

BASH: Because you believe him.

LAWLER: Look, this is a private family matter that unfortunately has spilled out into the public. It should be adjudicated in family court. Max has been accused. Max has also made accusations against his ex- wife.

It is tragic. And obviously, I don't condone any level of abuse. But ultimately, there's been nothing that has been corroborated here.

BASH: Why not just give up back, it's only $10,000, and move on?

LAWLER: Because this is the typical Washington -- this is the typical Washington media game where it's always an allegation comes up, you must return money.

[16:50:01]

It's the typical game. Everybody plays. (END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: CNN senior reporter Annie Greyer joins us now from Capitol Hill.

So, Annie, what are you hearing about what these Republicans are planning to do with this money?

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, Pamela, this is something that all Republicans who've received donations from Miller are going to have to contend with. And by our count, it's as many as 25 incumbents, Republicans running for reelection, many of whom are in tough reelection battles, and they are going to have to decide if they keep this money.

In fact, one of the Republicans, Republican Congressman Tom Barrett from Michigan, who has received donations from Max Miller, was asked about whether he's going to keep donations earlier today. So, take a listen to that clip.

(BEGIN VIEEO CLIP)

REP. TOM BARRETT (R-MI): Obviously, the challenges that, you know, Max Miller is going through are really devastating for their family and something that is really sad to witness. I'm something that believes in due process. I respect the ethics committee in that process and, you know, I'm going to see what their findings reveal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRAYER: This is the exact reality that Republican leaders wanted to avoid and why so many were working behind the scenes to try and convince Miller to drop out and not run for re-election because now this is something that incumbents who are running in tough reelection battles are going to have to contend with and answer for. And if Miller wasn't running for reelection, this wouldn't be something that they would have to address.

But now that Miller is firm that he is running in this race, that he wants to clear his name, the party we know is standing behind him. In fact, the RNC chair a few days ago said that they would financially back Miller now that he is staying in this race.

BROWN: All right, so with that in mind, Matt, I want to go to you first. What would you encourage these Republicans to do? Is the $10,000 here worth the risk of association?

MOWERS: Well, look, every candidate's going to make the determination of their own race what makes sense. I think, generally speaking, these, you know, take out the allegations, everything else, but the returning of money is often a process story we talk about a lot here. It's not something people in districts usually care about.

And I think Democrats have to be careful because there's a lot of glass houses around. I mean, after Stephen Horsford was accused by his ex of abuse, he gave a lot of money to a lot of Democrats. He gave a lot -- he became the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Does every single Democrat, including many in swing districts, want to say whether they have to return his money? Or what about Mike Lawler's opponent, Cait Conley, who took money from Elliot Spitzer, who was accused of trafficking women across state borders?

I mean, there's a lot of hypocrisy here. I think in politics, you want to be careful, the punch you're swinging because sometimes the counterpunch is stronger. And so, I think this is more of a process story, but the counterpunch could actually be pretty devastating for a lot of Democrats in these districts.

BROWN: What do you think?

KINZINGER: I think if you break your daughter's collarbone or credibly accused of it, that's different as well. Sure. And then have been charged and basically go out there and give interviews where it just continue to dig a deeper hole.

I mean, part of Max Miller's problem is there's no humility about any of this. Whether there should be or not, I don't know.

There are problems on both sides, and I think Democrats seem to hold themselves to a different standard, whether that's internal pressure or not. Graham Platner obviously was forced to resign. Republicans were quick to call that out. The party turned against him.

You saw that with, you know, Eric Swalwell of California, et cetera. Look, I ultimately think Republicans would have been far smarter to throw Max Miller under the bus this one, but they're going to have to live with it.

It's a very winnable seat, by the way. It's a lean Republican seat that is they're very likely to lose.

BROWN: You think so?

KINZINGER: Yeah, it looks like.

BROWN: It's been reliably read historically. But and in terms of just what Democrats have done, we've seen that after Swalwell resigned, Democratic Congressman Swalwell resigned after our reporting here at CNN, the Democrats gave his campaign contributions to charity.

I'm wondering what you make of that when you see Republicans. not really take the same route as Democrats in these situations.

SUBRAMANYAM: Yeah, well, our party holds our own accountable in those situations. It's because our voters also hold us accountable. And I think all of Congress should be held accountable, Democrat or Republican.

So, I serve on the Ethics Committee. We have announced an investigation against Max Miller, so I can't talk about him specifically. But I'll say generally that this Congress has been a little rough when it comes to all the resignations we've had, all the issues with ethics that we've had.

And so, you know, we're looking at ways on the ethics committee that we can move faster given all of the incoming.

BROWN: Do you expect any resolution to this investigation before the midterms with Max Miller?

We have to give people due process, right? And we have to go out and investigate people and make sure people will cooperate with our investigation, too. So, it's difficult. We don't move as fast as the news cycle, but we're moving faster than any other ethics committee before us.

And I do think there'll be a resolution. But if there's not a resolution before November, the committee will continue its investigation into next Congress if he is re-elected.

MOWERS: Can I say one fact? Max Miller is the one who actually requested the investigation, though, if I'm not mistaken, because he believes that will clear his name.

BROWN: He welcomed it, yeah.

[16:55:01]

KINZINGER: Well, it also bought him a lot of time because in the pressure to drop out of the election because it happened before he could have dropped out of the election, then he could say, well, there's an investigation, let's wait for that because the pressure was building for him to drop out.

I also think, too, look, when you are a public figure, this thing being a family matter is not something you can say like you work at IBM. When you're a public figure, you're under different standards.

BROWN: All right. Thank you all so much.

Annie Grayer, we appreciate you bringing your reporting to us.

I'll see you all tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. Eastern in "THE SITUATION ROOM".

Don't go anywhere. "THE LEAD WITH JAKE TAPPER" starts after a quick break.