Loading summary
Transcript80 lines
- [00:01]
Golddealer.com Representative
Golddealer.com provides one of the nation's largest inventories of gold, silver, platinum, palladium and rhodium bullion, and our website offers live buy and sell prices. We specialize in precious metal, IRA accounts, charge no setup or shipping fees, and provide one of the best storage programs in the business. Golddealer.com also provides a free audio quote line that is updated twice each day and a gold newsletter that is published every week.
- [00:28]
American Home Shield Advertiser
Warren QI Home Ever heard of Warren qi? It's an energy someone gives off when they have an American Home Shield warranty. It's the feeling of protected appliances and home systems covered repairs or replacements, H Vacs, ovens, fridges.
- [00:44]
Audience Member
Wow.
- [00:45]
American Home Shield Advertiser
My warranty is incredible. American Home Shield don't worry, be warranty
- [00:49]
Nicole Wallace
for 20% off our plans. Visit ahs.com listen see ahs.com contracts for coverage details including limit amounts, fees, limitations and exclusions. Hi everyone, it's 4 o' clock in New York, day 19 of the war with Iran, and here's where things stand. Oil prices are soaring after an Israeli strike on the world's largest natural gas field, raising fears that Iran will retaliate with more attacks on oil and gas facilities Here at home, gas prices are up 5 cents since yesterday. As for the Trump administration, the country's top national security officials today found themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. On one side, reality and the facts. On the other side, Donald Trump and his shape shifting and sometimes contradictory explanations for why we went to war with Iran, when we went to war with Iran, what our goals are in the war with Iran and when we expect to achieve those aims. In her opening remarks, the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard spoke strayed from her prepared remarks in this hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Worldwide Threats. First, we'll show you what she ended up saying.
- [02:03]
Tulsi Gabbard
Prior to Operation epic fury, the ICSS's Iran was trying to recover from the severe damage to its nuclear infrastructure sustained during the 12 Day War and continued to refuse to comply with its nuclear obligations with the iaea, refusing them access to key facilities.
- [02:20]
Nicole Wallace
So what matters here is that she says there that Iran was, quote, trying to recover from the damage inflicted on its nuclear program by US and Israeli airstrikes in 2025. However, in her prepared remarks, she wrote this quote, as a result of Operation Midnight Hammer, Iran's nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. There has been no effort since then to try to rebuild their enrichment capability. End quote. Now she ended up not saying that, and maybe it's because it would have contradicted what Donald Trump has been saying. Here's Donald Trump's current position as uttered last week. They would have had a nuclear weapon
- [03:00]
John Brennan
within two weeks to four weeks, and they would have used it long before this press conference.
- [03:07]
Nicole Wallace
What Iran was two to four weeks away from a nuclear weapon. That yawning gap between what Tulsi Gabbard wrote and submitted in her prepared remarks and what she ended up saying today did not go unnoticed by the Democrats on the committee. Here's Senator Mark Warner.
- [03:28]
John Hudson
You omitted that paragraph from your oral opening. Was that because the President said there was an imminent threat?
- [03:38]
Michelle Norris
Two weeks?
- [03:39]
Tulsi Gabbard
No, sir. I recognize that the time was running long and I skipped through some of
- [03:43]
Nicole Wallace
the portion of my. You chose to take my oral delivered remarks. You chose to omit the parts that
- [03:49]
John Hudson
can contradict the President.
- [03:53]
Nicole Wallace
She was running long and decided to edit out for length the part about where Iran was in its nuclear capabilities. That's historic in its own right. Bad news for Gabbard is that it went downhill from there. Gabbard admitted that even after weeks of airstrikes, Iran's regime remains intact if degraded. At other points, Team Trump's top intellig officials struggled to explain what Donald Trump knew and had been told would happen if they struck Iran. Here is Senator Michael Bennett questioning CIA Director John Radcliffe.
- [04:28]
Senator Michael Bennett
I know, Director Radcliffe, that I am that you warned President Trump that if, that if Israel assassinated the Supreme Leader, the IRGC would replace him with potentially a harder line puppet. In fact, I think what was clear is that the likelihood was that it would be a hard line puppet. Do you disagree with that characterization of the intelligence
- [04:54]
John Radcliffe
to that specific question? What we knew was. First of all, I guess I have to address up front so much of what you related in there, the difference between political rhetoric versus not political rhetoric.
- [05:08]
Senator Michael Bennett
I'm quoting the President of the United States. Political rhetoric versus military director.
- [05:16]
John Radcliffe
Between that and military and intelligence execution. But here's the most important thing. You mischaracterize this as saying there aren't clearly defined goals. The defined goals are very clear. Degrade and destroy the missile inventory and drone inventory. Delay and degrade the military industrial base and factories that produce that. Degrade and destroy the IRGC Navy that could control the strait.
- [05:40]
Senator Michael Bennett
Thank you.
- [05:40]
John Radcliffe
These are all defined goals that were set out specifically. The premise of my question is my
- [05:47]
Senator Michael Bennett
time back, Mr. Chairman. I can't get a word in edgewise. He won't answer the question and then he's taken a minute of my time.
- [05:56]
Nicole Wallace
Trump's national security team having to sidestep Donald Trump's contradictory public explanations for why we are at war with Iran is where we start today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. New York Times investigative reporter focusing on national security, intelligence and foreign affairs. Mark Mazzetti is back with us. Washington Post reporter John Hudson is here. He covers the State Department and national security. Also joining us, former director of the CIA. Now our senior national security and intelligence analyst, John Brennan's here. John Brennan, I start with you. I am slightly ashamed of still having the capacity for sympathy and empathy for these officials, but I do and just explain to people that nobody made Tulsi Gabbard say the things in her prepared remarks other than Tulsi Gabbard. So what Tulsi Gabbard intended to say, Tulsi Gabbard couldn't say because of what Donald Trump has said. And Mark Warner was simply calling her out on her own discrepancy between her own prepared remarks and her own statement, which she tried to chalk up to quote, I edited that part for length. Seems like it got to the heart of the matter. No?
- [07:07]
John Brennan
Yes. It was a very sad and troubling demonstration of the politicization of the intelligence community. What I really welcomed was the fact that in her prepared remarks, which were prepared by intelligence professionals, they stayed true to the facts and they provided the best analysis. But Tulsi Gabbard and others, the civilians, were doing their best to try to avoid saying anything that was going to antagonize the White House and Donald Trump. But it is clear that there is a contradiction, an inconsistency between the intelligence basis that the intelligence community had provided to policymakers and the stated rationale and explanations, rather twisted that have been coming out on this Iran war. And, you know, Tulsi Gabbard and John Radcliffe, I think, were caught there by the senators trying to make sure that the American people were able to hear from the leadership of the intelligence community. Unfortunately, I think they again avoided doing anything that was going to upset Donald Trump.
- [08:10]
Nicole Wallace
Mark Meshetti, let me come to you. And if I've got, I've been keeping a list of what they publicly stated for rationales. I've got Trump as the only one who has said that we are at war with Iran because they were, quote, two to four weeks away from having and using a nuclear weapon on my ledger. Rubio hasn't said that. Rubio has said Israel was going to strike, and in response, Iran was going to do things. And so we got in the middle of that ratcliffe has articulated a rationale that's around degrading naval and ballistic missiles. Has anyone else in the national security apparatus said what Donald Trump said about being at war in Iran because they were, quote, two to four weeks away from having and using a nuclear weapon?
- [09:01]
Mark Mazzetti
I think it was the day before the war, Nicole, we spoke and talked about this 11th hour case that was being made for war based on the idea that Iran was a kind of imminent threat. And even then, the week before the war, you heard national security officials asserting all sorts of different things, one of them being Steve Witkoff, who had said, I think, that Iran was one week away from a bomb. And he then never repeated that. And then until we heard the president talk about two to four weeks, there has been not only the justifications for the goals of the war, but also the reasons about the threat that Iran poses have been all over the map. I think what you saw today is sort of how American officials are trying to square what's fundamentally in tension. This idea that back in June, the President said Iran's capacities to enrich uranium were totally and completely obliterated. Right. And the more you accept that, the less you can justify the imminence of the threat today. And I think that's what we're seeing, that's what we saw play out in today's hearing.
- [10:10]
Nicole Wallace
Mark Mazzetti, didn't they fire somebody who refused to toe that line about, quote, total obliteration from the Defense Intelligence Agency?
- [10:23]
Mark Mazzetti
Yes. So the, the, the, he did. He did so. And it's, you can see that there is daylight. Right. Because the, the official, the, the professionals are, as John Brennan said, relying on the underlying intelligence. Right. And so they are going to be careful about going beyond that. It's, and the question is also like the imminence of the threat that Iran poses in other capacities. For instance, the ballistic missiles, which we can talk about, which was also brought up today as a question of just how much the imminence the threat existed.
- [11:02]
Nicole Wallace
John Hudson, you've had a bunch of scoops in this area. What did you learn today from the testimony in terms of both what they testified to and the things that Mark Mazzetti is pointing out, the realities and the rhetoric that are in tension.
- [11:19]
John Hudson
Yeah, I mean, one of the things that I learned today, and what was my takeaway is that it is my understanding that Tulsi Gabbard wanted this hearing to be postponed. She was very uncomfortable having to be in the position that she was in for a couple of reasons. One, clearly somebody who has built her political identity on opposing foreign milit military interventions seen as peripheral to core US Interests. But two, we just saw a very high profile resignation of one of her underlings, Joe Kent, who reports to her, who came out defiantly against the war. And this was something. So in both cases, she did not want to reveal any misgivings about the conflict, even though it directly contradicts much of what she has built her career on. And also questions about Kent and his resignation letter, which was a stirring and searing indictment of the war in Iran, saying that it wasn't in America's interest, there was no imminent threat from Iran. And these are all things that came up in the hearing. But she played it very close to the vest. So what I learned from her is she was not in a place that Joe Kent was in where he wanted to quit and he wanted to call out what he saw. And she also wasn't in a position that J.D. vance was in where J.D. vance has actually stood in support of the president's war in Iran, despite Vance's historic opposition. What she did is reveal as little as possible about her personal views and just tried to stay out of the limelight in a way that would anger President Trump,
- [13:14]
Nicole Wallace
which is no way to run a rodeo. Director Brennan, she was pressed on the story that broke while you were on our air yesterday. We covered the reporting in the Wall Street Journal about the extent to which Russia is aiding Iran in the targeting. Let me show you Angus King asking Tulsi Gabbard about that.
- [13:37]
Angus King
Could you update us on the intelligence on Russia intelligence sharing with Iran in the current conflict? What do we know, Senator?
- [13:48]
Tulsi Gabbard
If there is that sharing going on, that would be an answer that would be appropriate for a closed session.
- [13:56]
Angus King
Well, it's been in the public press, this is open source, that it's occurring. Is it occurring again?
- [14:05]
Tulsi Gabbard
If it is occurring, that would be an answer appropriate for a closed session. What I can tell you is that according to the Department of War, any support that Iran may be receiving is not inhibiting their operational effects.
- [14:24]
Angus King
Okay. That's sort of the first cousin of a yes.
- [14:28]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, Wall street journal wrote over 3,000 words about it. I'm not sure why she's turning to the we have to talk about that behind closed doors. But as someone who's been so complimentary of Putin and Russia, I can't imagine a more awkward line of questioning for her. What did you think of that exchange?
- [14:52]
John Brennan
Well, I can sympathize quite frankly with Tulsi Gabbard on that, because even though something might appear in the press in open source. It is not necessarily something that they are willing to confirm based on source methods and their intelligence. So that is an issue that it would be appropriate to speak behind closed doors. Now, she was asked another question about whether or not the Russians are benefiting from the war in terms of higher oil prices and relaxed sanctions, and she refused to speak to that. She said basically it wasn't her job to do. She was redefining the role of the intelligence community leadership throughout. When she said that it wasn't her place to assess imminent threat, that that's the responsibility of the president. No, it's the responsibility of the leadership of the intelligence community, the director of CIA, the dni, to be able to share with the president when there is an imminent threat based on the intelligence and analysis that is within the community. So, again, Tulsa Gober was just trying to avoid any type of statement that was going to irritate Donald Trump. And again, she's dumbing down sort of the role of the intelligence community leadership.
- [16:01]
Nicole Wallace
Is it your sense that the role has been dumbed down and this just revealed it, or was it your sense that that was performative, or is it unclear what the nature of that relationship is behind closed doors?
- [16:12]
John Brennan
I think it's all of the above. I think it's been stated from the very outset that we didn't believe that Tulsi Gabbard had the credentials, the capability, the experience to fulfill such an important role. And I do think it is clear that there is a politicization that is going on right now in the intelligence community when the intelligence clearly is different than what the policymakers are doing and what the policymakers are saying in terms of the rationale for this war, There was no imminent threat, and this was a needless and senseless war. And that's why Radcliffe and Gabbard are in a difficult position trying to answer questions of the senators while at the same time not annoying Donald Trump.
- [16:52]
Nicole Wallace
Let me ask you about something that you reported, John Hudson. This headline, I think, jolted all around the world. Israel urges Iranians to revolt, but privately assesses they'll be slaughtered. Quote, senior Israeli officials have told U.S. diplomats that Iranian protesters will, quote, get slaughtered if they take to the streets against their government, even as Israel publicly calls for a popular uprising. According to a State Department cable reviewed by the Washington Post, some of the questioning today, especially from Angus King, tried to get at what Donald Trump knows, how much of the intel he's taking in. What is your sense of whether or not that intelligence got to Donald Trump, in terms of his public rationales for
- [17:35]
John Hudson
the war, It's a great point. You know, what was very clear from our understanding of the U.S. intelligence community. And now after this most recent report where the Israelis have stood on this, US Intelligence said that the likelihood of cracking the regime and having it crumble with simply an assassination of the supreme Leader, it was unlikely. This is an entrenched dictatorship. It's got an entrenched military establishment and an entrenched clerical establishment, and they have succession planning. So that was always going to be difficult. And it's unclear if that was made clear to the president because there was an eagerness to launch this war and he ultimately did approve it. With the latest reporting that I've uncovered by obtaining this State Department cable is that this was just from last week. So we're several days into the war at this point, and the Israelis are seeing that the regime has not cracked despite the assassination of the supreme Leader, the security forces are still able to assert themselves on the street, and that indeed, if the opposition takes the streets, they would be slaughtered. And so all of that sort of paints a picture that both the Americans and the Israelis seem to be tolerant of the opposition, there being significant bloodshed in the streets, all but for the goal of creating regime instability in Iran and having a longtime adversary weakened.
- [19:17]
Nicole Wallace
It's just fascinating. It's back to the reporting from the first weekend of the war about Lindsey Graham's role in talking to Netanyahu about how to talk to Donald Trump. No one's going anywhere ahead for us. There was also questioning about what Donald Trump knew about the Strait of Hormuz, something he's described in the plural, something he's spelled like a straight line. We'll delve into what he knew about that and when he knew it. We'll also show you some voters who have stood by Donald Trump through everything that has transpired to date, who are now feeling for the first time how bad he really is because of this war with Iran. We'll show you some of them in their own words, let you reach whatever conclusion you'd like. Later in the show, an incredible moment at another Senate hearing today. Republican Rand Paul confronting and accusing Donald Trump's pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security, Republican Mark Wayne Mullen, and accusing him of basically applauding his violent assault and questioning whether someone like Mullen can lead an agency that has struggled with figuring out the proper use of use of force. We'll show you all of that and much more when Deadly White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.
- [20:35]
Podcast Narrator
If you like sharp political analysis but want historical perspective too, check out the Signal Award winning podcast the Future of Our Former Democracy. Produced by More Equitable Democracy, the new season examines parallels between the rise of Nazi Germany and today's current political moment, and the lessons the US can learn about how Germany rebuilt its democracy to prevent extremism from taking power again. Episodes unpack how far right movements operate in modern day Germany and in the United States. They reveal why America's system has enabled minority rule while Germany's proportional representation model has limited extremist power. Through sound, rich storytelling, personal narratives and expert interviews, the show challenges what democracy can be and explores bold ideas for a more equitable future. So don't miss out. Follow the future of our former democracy wherever you listen to podcasts today.
- [21:32]
Volkswagen Advertiser
Right now it's Volkswagen Driver Days. So it's easy for us to urge you to say yes to the most affordable German engineered car brand in America. And it's just as easy for you to not. But imagine that you did say yes to a new vw and then you said yes to a spontaneous trip you went after that ice cream truck, jumped in the puddle, threw the ball for the dog. A life in the yes lane doesn't have to start with a new vw, but it could VW Drivers Wanted Claim Based on MSRP information available at time of publication for 2025 and 2026 German
- [22:01]
CIDP Treatment Advertiser
engineered vehicles, CIDP can make your daily routine feel not so routine. The good news? With a self injection for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, you have the option to treat at home. Discover more@cidpselfinjection.com and talk to your doctor. That's cidpselfinjection.com brought to you by Argenyx.
- [22:30]
Angus King
Any predictions to the President about the Strait of Hormuz? All you got to do is look at a map and you'll see that the vulnerability of the Strait of Hormuz. Was that Was that part of the briefing? Director Gabbard?
- [22:42]
Tulsi Gabbard
I think Director Ratcliffe made The point here is that this has long been an assessment of the IC that Iran would likely hold the Strait of Hormuz as leverage.
- [22:54]
Angus King
My question is, was that communicated to the President in the lead up to
- [22:57]
Tulsi Gabbard
this act because of that long standing assessment that the IC has continued to report that the Department of War took the preemptive planning measures that it did?
- [23:08]
Angus King
Well, they've stated that they did not plan for the Strait of Hormuz. The President said, who knew that was going to happen.
- [23:18]
Nicole Wallace
That's what all the president said. He called them the straights. He spelled them straight, like straight line. And he is getting this response from Sam Stein today on Twitter. Quote, on the Strait of Hormuz, we've gone from, one, we don't need any help. Two, we need help. Three, why aren't folks helping? Four, helps on the way. Five, I'm not going to tell you who's helping. Six, help's not actually on the way, but we don't need it anyway. Seven, we may just abandon it and leave it to everyone else. In terms of Donald Trump's experience of war, what is public facing, at least, is that the economic impacts and the peril to his sort of perception of his economic prowess is something that registers. This feels like a big, big significant part of this today, that it is not clear that anyone, I mean, if ground. The entire conversation around ground troops usually hinges around whether or not Trump thinks ground troops are going to be needed to secure or regain access and control to the Strait of Hormuz. He's also told ships to just go for it, to basically man up and just go through it. What is your sense of what was known ahead of time?
- [24:30]
John Brennan
Well, as it was.
- [24:32]
Mark Mazzetti
Go ahead.
- [24:33]
Nicole Wallace
Sorry. Let me get Mark Mazzetti, see if there's any reporting that he's unearthed on this first.
- [24:40]
Mark Mazzetti
Oh, sorry, yeah. Certainly there was discussion about the Strait of Hormuz before the war began. There were intelligence assessments that there was a possibility that Iran might close the strait. But there was, as we reported last week, there was this general belief among at least many in the White House that Iran was not going to do it, in part because it didn't do it last year after the or during the 12 Day War in June. Iran, of course, did not close the strait. Oil flowed freely. And so I think there was not this recognition that Iran might act differently this time than it did last summer. And of course, that didn't turn out to be true. And so it was a general miscalculation about Iran's actions this time around, when, of course, Iran is under much greater threat. They believe this could be an existential war compared to where they were last last June.
- [25:38]
Nicole Wallace
Director Brennan, just jump in on that in terms of, I mean, again, I don't know how the Iranians assess the difference, but this is clearly a more, a more aggressive, calculated strike than the summer, even as it's been communicated by Donald Trump and the Israelis.
- [25:59]
John Brennan
Yeah, well, the US And Israeli military strikes have been much more extensive than they were last year, I think the current count is there were about 15,000 Iranian targets that have been hit so far by this aerial bombing campaign. And so the sense was that the Iranians always knew that they could, in fact, take steps to blockade and block the Strait from international shipping. They've done it in years past. They did it in the 80s, 90s before in terms of mines and other things. One of the questions I have is I don't know whether the intelligence community knew just how extensive in the scale of the US And Israeli military operations were going to be, because as Mark pointed out, the Iranians, I think, are seeing this as really a question of their survival. They're battling for their survival. So why should they hold back the capabilities and leverage that they have? And the Strait is one of the capabilities that they have to basically be able to interdict shipping there by the use of mines and missiles and whatever else. That's why I also wonder, at what point are the Iranians going to pull out the terrorism card? Because they continue to see that their leadership is being killed. And I think the new Supreme Leader has come out saying that he's going to retaliate and there's going to be Israeli blood shed in retaliation for this. So, again, just how extensive this is war has been and the destruction that's taking place in Iran, it should be no surprise to anybody that this was going to occur.
- [27:26]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, John Hudson, if you reverse engineer what is publicly known. And the conversation Mark Mazzetti mentioned at the beginning was the Friday the war starts that night. And I think the last thing I asked him was, are we about to go to war with Iran? And his answer was, we don't know. I mean, 12 hours later, the war had begun. I mean, Tuesday night, before the war began, Donald Trump gives a State of the Union address. And the one economic indicator that he voiced above all others was the price of gas. I mean, it just seems that all the public evidence, if we are to believe our eyes and believe our ears, is that Donald Trump had no idea that Iran. That even if the intelligence community knew it, whether or not they briefed it to Donald Trump seems like the wrong question. Donald Trump clearly hadn't processed either what the Strait of Horror moves was or what closing it would do to the US Economy. Is there any, any acknowledgement that that is an unintended consequence of this war that they've begun?
- [28:22]
John Hudson
I mean, he surprisingly did acknowledge in some of his stray comments to the media, including, like, nobody ever thought that the Iranians would strike out against all of their neighbors. He said varying things about what he did and didn't know about the Strait of Hormuz being the target. But obviously, you know, Pentagon planning, military planning, a war scenario of this type, have always predicted that if the Iranians felt like this was an existential crisis, they would of course, lash out against the Strait of Hormuz. That is a key part of leverage that the Iranians have over the United States, which wants to see global commerce continue to flow and so much of the world's oil and gas, 20% flowing through that. And I think what's important to remember is that's not sort of an opening bid that the Iranians do to hold the Strait hostage, but it's going to be something that they continue to do because they have to establish their own deterrence at this point. Their supreme leader has been killed, their military and nuclear infrastructure has been decimated. In order to send a message that they can't just be attacked like this, they're going to want to inflict pain. And holding the straight hostage is one of the ways to inflict that pain.
- [29:48]
Nicole Wallace
It's truly unbelievable. We live and die by your reporting. Mark and John, thank you for being here. Director Brennan, thank you for making sense of all of it for us and thank you for starting us off today. After the break, US drivers and American voters are already feeling the cost of what we're talking about. Trump's war with Iran. We'll talk about that next.
- [30:13]
Volkswagen Advertiser
Right now it's Volkswagen driver days. So it's easy for us to urge you to say yes to the most affordable German engineered car brand in America. And it's just as easy for you to not. But imagine that you did say yes to a new VW and then you said yes to a spontaneous trip. You went after that ice cream truck, jumped in the puddle, threw the ball for the dog. A life in the yes lane doesn't have to start with a new VW, but it could. VW drivers wanted claim based on MSRP information available at time of publication for 2025 and 2026 German engineered vehicles with American Home shield.
- [30:45]
American Home Shield Advertiser
You can now video chat with live repair experts for help with home fixes over the phone. American Home Shield don't worry. Be warranty. Visit ahs.com listen for 20% off any
- [30:56]
Nicole Wallace
plan available as a benefit.
- [30:57]
CIDP Treatment Advertiser
With select plans, CIDP can make your daily routine feel not so routine. The good news? With a self injection for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, you have the option to treat at home. Discover more@cidpselfinjection.com and talk to your doctor. That's cidpselfinjection.com brought to you by Argenics.
- [31:27]
Nicole Wallace
If you could say something to President Trump and he was going to hear you right now, what would it be? You are a worthless pile of. And you voted for him how many times? Three times. That was my bad.
- [31:41]
Audience Member
Apparently I'm an idiot.
- [31:46]
Nicole Wallace
I checked four times to make sure that was real. But it's important, right? Because it's just one year in. We've got three more years of this. And if Trumpism is to be defeated, a coalition is going to have to include some people who now describe him as a worthless pile of whatever she said, I don't know. I'll use my imagination. And what's important politically and nationally is that is about how well it is going for Donald Trump with his own coalition. Even some of his most devoted supporters, people who voted for him three times, describe him as a worthless pile of we don't know what we can guess. They are fed up as Donald Trump abandons all of his campaign promises, especially the ones that centered around the price of things, affordability and ending foreign conflicts and never starting a new one in favor of the things he is doing starting a war with Iran. That anger from voters is likely to grow as gas prices and prices of all things continue to rise. Average gas prices reached an eye popping $3.84 a gallon, going as high as $5.56 a gallon in California. A new poll paints a dire picture for Donald Trump ahead of November's midterms. Just 36% of Americans approve of Donald Trump's handling of the war in Iran. A drop of seven points from one week ago, a drop that is driven mostly by independence. I want to bring into our coverage senior contributing editor Michelle Norris and political analyst the former Senator Claire McCaskill. Claire, your thoughts?
- [33:14]
Tulsi Gabbard
Yeah.
- [33:15]
Audience Member
This is something, you know, gas, Nicole, is at the apex of politically sensitive commodities. Unlike other things, you know, you can buy ramen and not fresh produce and try to scrimp by. You can substitute, you know, maybe don't fill your prescriptions, which is terrible, or maybe delay, but you've got to have gas to get to work. And the other thing about gas is that there's signs everywhere reminding you what the price is. So that's why everyone is sent that runs for office is hypersensitive about gas prices. No one more so than Donald Trump. He is focused on gas prices almost exclusively as his measure of how well it's going. And the problem he's got with this particular scenario is that typically he sloughs it off and blames someone else. He can't do it because everybody can see it's his war with Iran that is causing this. And he cannot blame someone else. He can't blame Joe Biden. He can't blame the Democrats in Congress or Mexicans or whoever he likes to blame. This is his. He owns it and it means big political trouble for him.
- [34:25]
Nicole Wallace
Michel I mean, to Claire's point, it isn't just gas prices. CNBC is reporting that the Strait of Hormuz standoff puts the supply of America's generic drug prescriptions at risk. Let me read that to you. Quote, Nearly half of US Generic prescriptions originate in India, which relies on the Strait of Hormuz for the arrival of key inputs in drug manufacturing, including petroleum based materials, and for shipping finished medicines to the US So I guess it's one less errand to go run if you can't pick up your generic prescription drugs. But it is one more pain point for American families.
- [35:02]
Michelle Norris
Well, I would add to that list fertilizer, I would add to that list many beauty products that you use that are in your wellness products, lotion, things like this all rely on petroleum products that move through the Hormuz strait. Claire made an interesting point how gas prices are sort of they're right in front of you as you move around. And as high as they are now, people are somewhat insulated from the impact right now because a lot more people are driving electric vehicles or more fuel efficient vehicles than they were in the 1970s when we saw the gas prices spike suddenly then several years ago. But that will start to really impact people as we get closer to the midterms because a lot of these impacts will be felt down the chain. So it'll be felt in terms of transportation, it'll be felt in terms of, as I was mentioning, fertilizer, which means everything that comes out of the ground will be more expensive. Really, anything that move on a ship or is moved by a truck or any kind of vehicle, even a plane, is going to be more expensive because of these fuel prices. And so people, you know, in that report that you mentioned earlier, John actually talked to other voters in that report who said that they were willing to go along with this right now. But I think as we get closer to the midterms and as these prices continue to creep and every economist is saying that they will continue to creep upward, that's going to be a real problem for Donald Trump and for any Republican who's running for office, because the independents are really where you see the biggest sway in terms of the support for the war.
- [36:31]
Nicole Wallace
And Claire, the calls about the weakness of the economy are coming from inside, not just the MAGA coalition but Donald Trump's own sort of circle of advisers. This is from the Financial Times. Trump ally warns US Economy not strong enough to cope with a war with Iran Quote, Donald Trump's one time pick to lead the Bureau of Labor statistics said the US economy is too weak to handle oil at $100 a barrel. And he warned of rising consumer prices triggered by the war in Iran. Quote, I don't think this is an economy that is going to be able to handle $100 a barrel for oil. It's just not. That's EJ Antoni speaking to the FT. He goes on to say, quote, the economy is weaker than we thought it was and inflation is worse than we thought it was. I think voters would dispute that based on his numbers. I think just, I think 70% of voters feel that the economy is bad or not great. It is a number that is lower than Donald Trump's overall approval rating who think the economy is good under his stewardship.
- [37:33]
Audience Member
Yeah, and the interesting thing here is, Nicole, is there's a few things he could do. One thing he could do is he could divorce himself from his very, very damaging tariffs. But tariffs may be the only thing he really believes in ever. I mean, he really believes in tariffs and, and that's why this gas price is a one, two punch. If you remember the speeches he was giving around the wobbly economy over tariffs and the prices going up because of tariffs. It was always. But the gas prices are so low, so now he's got nothing to fall back on. And you know, Michel is right about fertilizer, but it's more than just fertilizer. The farmers in America are gasping for breath. They've lost their markets, they have really high input costs and so the food isn't going to get any cheaper. And now you've got gas and food and all the other. I mean, this is a recipe for economic disaster for this presidency. And it started out that it was the economy stupid. And guess what? It still is the economy stupid. He can try to deflect off Epstein, he can try to pretend that he's some big strong warrior that can take the America wherever it wants to go and vanquish any enemy. But as it turns turns out, it's a lot harder than it looks.
- [38:52]
Nicole Wallace
It's just amazing. In his first term, his presidency is consumed by the tragedy that is Covid and all of that economic hardship. In a second, he's created the calamities that are consuming his presidency and the economic hardships. No one's going anywhere. After the break, there's another story we want to tell you about. It is a huge rebuke to Kerry Lake, remember her? But a win for president. Freedoms around the world. We'll explain next. A federal judge is blocking for now Donald Trump's attempt to shutter broadcaster Voice of America. Yesterday, a federal judge ruled that the near total shutdown of that organization, which oversees VOA and several other international broadcasters, violates federal law. The judge ordered the agency to bring more than a thousand employees back to work after Voice of America. In its ruling, the judge, a Reagan appointee, criticized the Trump administration's, quote, flagrant and nearly year long refusal to comply with requirements set by Congress. We're back with Michel and Claire. Michelle, this feels like a story about Voice of America, about truth, but also about how slowly the wheels of justice grind. This judge being definitive and clear in his order, but how much damage has been done to get to this moment?
- [40:15]
Michelle Norris
Well, they're gonna try to bring a thousand people back. It'll be interesting to see if they get back pay when they do come back. When I think of the Voice of America, I'm thinking about all those Americans that were stranded when the war in Iran began and how many of them might have turned to the Voice of America to try to figure out what was going on. At a moment of real confusion. I think it's a moment to say something about Michael Abramowitz, who was the of VOA before he was dismissed and put on leave, who filed the lawsuit that led to this. It is a reminder that the courts are yet another reminder that the courts are holding the line, that they are really reminding America about the rule of law and the role of the Constitution. And this is yet another example. We saw it in Minnesota, we saw it in West Virginia. We've seen it in Illinois, where again and again the courts are stepping up. And when you read these rulings, they are using language that you do not usually see in documents like this. I mean, they seem to judge after judge, you noted this is a Reagan appointee using very tough language that speaks to the moment that we're in. And this was all about cost savings. They're bringing these employees back. They'll have to reestablish the program. In the end, this is probably going to cost taxpayers more money as they try to reestablish this.
- [41:32]
Nicole Wallace
I mean, Claire, this was also about control. And from Trump and Carrie Lake's side controlling the information that got out.
- [41:40]
Audience Member
Yeah, they wanted to shut down voices that they couldn't control. They continue to do that. I mean, Brandon Carr is an embarrassment to the First Amendment and he's an embarrassment to our country. That is all about freedom of speech. And so. Yeah. And by the way, Kari Lake, the only good thing about her being there, she kind of disappeared and we didn't have to see much of her for the last year while this was in court. I assume they're going to appeal, Nicole. And so ultimately this will be in the lap of probably the Supreme Court, assuming they take it. I don't know if they will, but so far the Supreme Court has a mixed, it's a mixed bag when it comes to Donald Trump. They've given him a lot of leeway. I remember when I voted no on Kavanaugh, a lot of it was because of his view of campaign finance law and his view of executive power. He's always been a bully pulpit for more executive power. So you look at the Trump appointees and you look at the decisions now, they came down on the right side on tariffs, but who knows if they will on this. How far will they extend executive power in this administration? And I think it's important. It's one of the reasons John Boone has stood up against the talking filibuster. He knows what goes around comes around. So it will be interesting to see when a Democrat is president, if in fact the Republicans feel so great about executive power, then I have a feeling they won't. But it will take time. And the other thing politically about this, Nicole, is these cases are gonna keep rolling. They've been on file now for a while. They're gonna keep rolling between now and the midterms. And importantly for people like J.D. vance and Marco Rubio, they're gonna keep rolling all the way up to the next presidential election.
- [43:22]
Nicole Wallace
Exactly. With the public growing more and more, I think, cognizant of all of the unconstitutional and unlawful things they've set out to do. Claire McCaskill and Michelle Norris, thank you both so much for joining me today. As we go to break the winning hit for Team Venezuela against Team US in the World Baseball Classics Final, I'll show you how Donald Trump responded just moments after Team USA's defeat. Last night. Venezuela won big. They won the World Baseball Classics final game, notching a three to victory over the star studded US Team. But per his usual weird conduct, Donald Trump made it about himself in the strangest way possible by posting on true social moments after Venezuela's victory this, quote, statehood. And if that makes you wonder why, how, who, when or what planet he's on, he was actually referring to and doubling down on comments he'd made a day before posting. Quote good things are happening to Venezuela lately. I wonder what this magic is about. Statehood number 51, anyone? All of this less than three months after Trump ordered the invasion and subsequent abduction of then President Nicolas Maduro and had said the US Would run Venezuela and sell its oil. You have to wonder if he is actually considering statehood just so he could, I don't know, touch their trophy. After the break, Donald Trump's pick to lead dhs, a man named Mark Wayne Mullen, who's also a former MMA fighter. Confronted with his past today, quote, anger issues. We'll bring that to you, show you what that looked like when Deadline Whitehouse continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere.
- [45:10]
Chumba Casino Advertiser
Tyler Redick and Chumba Casino A winning combination Another checkered flag for Tyler Redick in 23xi, racing this time at COTA in the Chumba Casino Toyota Camry. That's three wins this season. Talk about a lucky streak. Chumba Casino, proud partner of Tyler Redick and 2311 Racing play for free at chumbacasino.com let's Chumba no purchase necessary. VGW Group Voidware prohibited by law. CTNC's 21+ sponsored by Chumba Casino.