← Meet the Press
Meet the Press
Meet the Press NOW — March 16
01:00:01
President Trump calls on the international community to secure the Strait of Hormuz on Day 17 of the Iran war as gas prices continue to soar. NBC News reports that the president is presented with "off-ramps" to the war on a daily basis. President Trump takes questions in the Oval Office from reporters.
Loading summary
Transcript133 lines
- [00:00]
Peter Alexander
Underwear drawers are like the Wild west of wardrobes. You never know what pair you're going to pull out or what shape it's in. It's time to upgrade your underwear drawer with the buttery, soft comfort of Meundies. Meundies signature fabric is as soft as a warm hug from your favorite sweater.
- [00:14]
Monica Alba
Plus it's breathable and so comfy, making
- [00:17]
Peter Alexander
it ideal for all day wear. Get 20% off your first order, plus free shipping at Meundies.com SXM Enter promo
- [00:25]
Donald Trump
code SXM that's Meundies.com SXM Code SXM
- [00:31]
Kelly O'Donnell
Shipping Billing Admin Payroll Marketing.
- [00:34]
Courtney Kube
You're managing all the things, so why waste time sending important documents the old fashioned way?
- [00:39]
Kelly O'Donnell
Mail and ship when you want, how
- [00:41]
Courtney Kube
you want with stamps.com print postage on demand 247 and schedule pickups from your office or home. Save up to 90% with automated rate shopping. That's why over 1 million small businesses
- [00:53]
Kelly O'Donnell
trust stamps.com go to stamps.com and use
- [00:56]
Courtney Kube
code podcast to try stamps.com risk free for 60 days.
- [01:11]
Kelly O'Donnell
Welcome to MEET THE Press. Now. I'm Kelly o' Donnell in Washington, where President Trump is making a direct appeal to the international community to help the US Secure the Strait of Hormuz to avoid a global oil supply crisis. Even as he claims the US could secure the Strait by itself and says that we don't need the oil. It comes as the White House continues to try to reassure consumers that the spike in energy prices due to the conflict will be temporary. Yesterday, President Trump said he was demanding countries that rely on oil from the Middle east join the US in forming a coalition to secure the Strait, which supplies roughly 20% of the global oil market. Today, the president doubling down on his calls for a global coalition.
- [02:00]
Donald Trump
We strongly encourage the other nations to get involved with us and get involved quickly and with great enthusiasm. I have that from a number of them and I'd like to say their names, but frankly, I don't know if they would want me to or not because maybe they don't want to be targeted. But I say wouldn't matter if you targeted or not because this is a paper tiger that we're dealing with now. It wasn't a paper tiger two weeks ago, it's a paper tiger now.
- [02:31]
Kelly O'Donnell
That assessment comes as the president is also claiming that Iran has been, quote, literally obliterated in the war and that its leadership has effectively been dismantled, prompting this question from reporters.
- [02:46]
Peter Alexander
Now that you've announced that the US has destroyed all of Iran's mine Laying ships. Why can't the US Just immediately reopen the Strait of Hormonal?
- [02:57]
Donald Trump
Well, we could, but it takes two to tango. We have to get people to take their billion dollar ship and, you know, drive it up. You know, these ships are very expensive. They could cost up to $2 billion. So they don't want to take a chance at, gee, I think, I think you'll be okay. They got to know it. We don't know if they even set any mines, but the thought that they may have is enough to keep people from saying we don't need it.
- [03:29]
Kelly O'Donnell
Among the countries the President is calling out for help, the United Kingdom, France, South Korea, Japan, and China, all responding to his request with mixed reactions and none doing so publicly, none committing to deploying assets to the Strait of Hormuz so far. Meanwhile, Iran's foreign minister telling state TV the Strait of Hormuz is open and only closed to enemies. Yesterday, crude oil hit $100 a barrel. Today, those prices are coming down to around $93 a barrel, but still 40% higher than when the war began. Fuel prices also continue to climb, with the average regular gas price per gallon inching closer to that $4 mark. Yesterday on Meet the Press, Energy Secretary Chris Wright saying it could be a few weeks before those prices come down.
- [04:23]
Peter Alexander
After the conflict is over, you'll start to see prices come back down. It is a short term disruption in the flow of energy. Americans are feeling it right now. Americans will feel it for a few more weeks, but at the end, we will have removed the greatest risk to global energy supplies.
- [04:42]
Kelly O'Donnell
As for now, how much longer this could go on is a question mark. And Iran's foreign minister says there is no reason to negotiate with the US President Trump was also asked about the possibility of negotiations, and here's what he had to say.
- [04:58]
Donald Trump
I don't know if they're ready yet. They're taking a pounding. I don't know if they're ready yet. And we don't even know their leaders. Look, all of their leaders are dead as far as we know, but they're all dead. We don't know who we're dealing with. We met with the next group and we don't know who their leader is. We have people wanting to negotiate. We have no idea who they are.
- [05:26]
Kelly O'Donnell
Joining me now are NBC News White House correspondent Monica Alba, NBC News senior national security correspondent Courtney Kubie, NBC News business and data correspondent Brian Chung, and NBC News international correspondent Matt Bradley. Welcome, one and all. Glad to have you here. Monica, let me start with you. Traffic through the strait has really ground to a halt, in part because the companies that have the vessels don't want to expose themselves to the risk. Do you get a sense that the president's attempt to form a coalition is actually materializing?
- [05:58]
Monica Alba
It doesn't seem like it, Kelly, because he's trying to do this retroactively.
- [06:02]
Kelly O'Donnell
Right.
- [06:02]
Monica Alba
He's trying to kind of bring this coalition together to countries, asking them for help when they weren't really consulted in the first place on launching this attack against Iran with Israel. So countries are saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a second, not so fast. And also they're saying this, this isn't our war. This isn't necessarily our conflict, even if we do have a vested interest in getting the Strait of Hormuz to be safe enough for vessels to pass through it. So they want to have a more diplomatic conversation. That is certainly not what President Trump likes to necessarily want to engage in. He said about the UK Prime Minister, for instance, who said, well, let me talk to my team first and maybe we'll have a discussion and I'll make a determination and get back to you. And the president said in this event today, why does he need to talk to his team? Why can't he just tell me he wants to help and go ahead with it? So a difference in leadership style and a difference in the approach to this very complicated diplomatic challenge, and so revealing,
- [06:53]
Kelly O'Donnell
because the president doesn't feel he needs to consult, therefore, another head of government might not need to. Is there a conflict in these discussions with the president saying he needs this international coalition, but at the same time is describing the threat from Iran as far reduced?
- [07:09]
Monica Alba
Yeah, I think there are kind of a myriad of contradictions that the president has been making here because he is trying to make the argument, argument that militarily so many of these targets have been hit, so many of the objectives have been met. But clearly this economic consideration and dealing with the Strait of Hormuz, which he says he knew and was aware this was going to be such a problem, makes it very, very difficult to be able to declare victory in any sense, because until you have solved that, we don't really know how the president can make that claim. And then you also are seeing these reports of additional resources of Marines and a unit that are going to be sent to the region, unclear exactly what their go and what their role will be. But it is very hard for the President to say, on one hand we are ready to wind down, while on the other, you're seeing a ramp up in that sense.
- [07:56]
Kelly O'Donnell
We're still waiting this afternoon for an event that has yet to take place, as I understand it, with the President and Vice President Vance in the same room together, which might not sound unusual, except we have not seen that since the war began. What should we be looking for?
- [08:10]
Monica Alba
Just a few days ago, it was the President who admitted that the Vice President did have some, quote, philosophical differences in, in his approach to what they should do leading up to the decision making on the war against Iran. The fact that we are seeing them and there they are at this event now is notable because likely there will be some questions presented to one or both of them about that gulf, about that difference in opinion. Now, the Vice president, when he was asked about this a couple of days ago, said, I'm not going to reveal personal considerations and recommendations that I make to the commander in chief, to the media. I'm not going to reveal that to all of us. But, but I think it is very instructive that the President doesn't really hesitate when he's asked about it. He will say, yes, maybe we, you know, differed on a couple of different things, but we're aligned on these others, which just sets up this whole other major conversation, as you know, Kelly, about 2028 and what this could mean for the President backing his own vice president or potentially his Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who's somebody that he has heaped praise on as we have seen this conflict over the last three weeks.
- [09:10]
Kelly O'Donnell
And Rubio has been so prominent in this whole discussion by virtue of the role that he plays. Courtney, let me bring you into this discussion as and we talk about the feasibility issues from the military side of things, of trying to form a coalition, of trying to bring these leaders together. Do you get a sense that there's any progress on this and that there's any definition as to what the roles would be if other nations joined in?
- [09:35]
Courtney Kube
Yeah, it's not impossible that the militaries could come together and provide some present some sort of a coalition that would be helping ships get through. But at this point, we don't see any real momentum towards that goal. There's options like things like some nations can provide aircraft that can do surveillance, maybe even provide air defenses in the way that they could defend against drones by shooting at them, air to air missiles or whatever it is. So there's multiple options, there's unmanned systems that they could use as well. But again, at this point, we don't see any indication that that is really moving in any direction. And it's in large part because of what just Monica just said, that is, these countries weren't brought in in advance. And even though they have an economic interest in this being the Strait of Hormuz, allowing for free FL of commercial traffic, they may not want to get involved militarily. And the reality is the same exact threat that exists to the US Navy would exist for all of those other militaries as well. So there is a real threat to the military if they were to try and take on this challenge, even as a multination coalition.
- [10:42]
Kelly O'Donnell
So it's an extraordinary ask from the president to these allies. We also need your expertise when it comes to that critical oil depot known as Kharg island in Iran. There have been questions about whether the U.S. now that there have been strikes, there would there be some plan to have any boots on the ground just to secure that critical area? Is that something that's being discussed?
- [11:06]
Courtney Kube
It's not outside the realm of possible. And this is something that the US has war gamed for years, the possibility of doing this. But the reality is, Kelly, it would take thousands of U.S. troops to accomplish that. And as difficult as it could be to take the island or holding it would be even more difficult and dangerous. And I think that's one of the big concerns here. It's not outside the realm of possible, but it would be a very dangerous endeavor. And again, it would take thousands of troops. Now, the question, though, is, is this one of the potential ways that the Trump administration wants to take this conflict? Does the. Does President Trump want to own Iranian oil or use Iranian oil as a leverage point? Because if so, Carg island would be a critical piece to that, that potential equation.
- [11:52]
Kelly O'Donnell
We also heard today the president talking about disinformation in this war and the role of AI and talking about what Iran has done with that. What do we know about the potential of what that can do and how it might affect U.S. forces or other facilities in the region?
- [12:11]
Courtney Kube
Yeah, I mean, we have seen so much AI content come out just since this war started, but the reality is we were seeing it. I mean, one thing that AI has done, it's not just in the war in Iran. We saw it in Syria as well, but there has been a real use of AI for intelligence purposes. So in the US Will gather all of this information, visual and satellite imagery and videos and things, and they can feed it into a computer, and the computer can help them pick targets. Now, the key here, Kelly, that we keep hearing about, though, is that a human being is still supposed to be involved in the targeting process, but this is a real point of discussion, especially after the school that was bombed early on. It's looking more and more likely that the United States was responsible for that in southern Iran. But AI is definitely playing a huge role in it. The president has been, according to his posting on Truth Social, he's frustrated that he says that some media are repeating some of these AI memes or fallacies that are out there. The reality is the White House is also putting out AI content as well, though.
- [13:17]
Kelly O'Donnell
Kelly we've seen that quite a lot and the dog bark was not AI for those who are interested, treats for that little one? No, never. It's real life. Brian Oil markets are back down after hitting $100 a barrel yesterday. I mean that that was a big key marquee moment. What do you attribute that to?
- [13:37]
Peter Alexander
Yeah, we were watching markets really closely when they opened up and had futures trading last night and it seemed like oil prices were going to go to the moon. It was like 100, $304 at one point. And now here we are with oil markets sett $93.50 on crude oil. Again, we've seen prices higher than that during the course of this conflict, but it hasn't necessarily, you know, led to unease in terms of the concerns about prices at the pump where consumer facing prices are around $3.71. According to AAA. That is up over 70 cents compared to prior to all of this conflict emerging in the in the Middle East. Now, of course, the question is when will there be more ships going through the Strait of Hormuz if there's more ships that go through? It's as simple as that is when prices would come down. We heard from Secretary of the Treasury Scott Besson earlier today on CNBC talking about optimism on all of this. Take a listen. We are seeing more and more the fuel ships start to go through. The Iranian ships have been getting out already and we've let that happen to supply the rest of the world. We've seen Indian ships go out now. So the Indians who rely very heavily on guns, Gulf oil we believe some Chinese ships have gone out so that and that should start ramping up before there are any the flotillas or protective armadas in the Gulf. So we think that there will be a natural opening that the Iranians are letting out. And for now we're we're fine with that. We want the world to be well supplied. So it seems like that commentary, in addition to what we heard from President Trump earlier today, points to US optimism that they can get more ships going through There. But Kelly, we just showed that chart that shows the amount of ships that have passed through the Strait of Hormuz over the last few days. And you can see it is still dramatically lower.3 compared to well over 100 prior to this conflict beginning. So even though we hear that optimism, we're not seeing it in the numbers yet. It's still, for all intents and purposes, closed off the shade of Hormuz.
- [15:40]
Kelly O'Donnell
And when you consider that positive tone, Brian, Energy Secretary Wright was speaking with our colleague Kristen Welker underneath the press, and he said it'll be a few more weeks before the American people feel relief at the pump. Is it that simple? I tend to see prices go up very quickly and then down at a much different pace. What is your sense of that?
- [16:00]
Peter Alexander
Yeah. And again, the context behind the conversation between Kristen Walker and also Chris Wright, the Secretary of Energy, is important because he was also saying that yes, there could be relief, but it might not be until this summer. Now, it's all about when ships can start going through the Strait of Hormuz. It's as simple as once those ships begin going out, it doesn't even have to be at the same rate as what we saw prior. Even if it's 10, 20, 30, maybe even 50 ships, that could lead to overall repricing in these global oil markets. I was talking to an analyst in the last few days that said the moment the trade of hormones looks like it's open again, you could see barrels of oil go down $20 in one go. Again, if we're going by the math that every $10 for a barrel of oil translates to 25 cents at the pump per gallon. For you and me, that can mean an instant savings of about 50 cents per gallon. But again, it's if, if the Strait of Hormuz reopens.
- [16:49]
Kelly O'Donnell
Thank you, Brian. Appreciate that. And in just the time that we have been having our conversation here, Courtney has gotten some new information, some additional reporting on how the President is being advised about some next steps. What can you tell us?
- [17:03]
Courtney Kube
Yeah, so one thing that we've learned this is according to a number of our colleagues worked on this story together, is that according to six sources who are familiar with the President's daily information that he's prevent presented on the war in Iran, that every day he is presented with what's known as an off ramp or an option for how he can end the war if he wants to. Now, notably, we know that he has not done yet, that at this point, every single day, he has continued to go forward with the military options and military objectives. But in fact, there are advisors who are providing him with that option. Maybe one of the reasons that we hear this language that's so uncertain from the administration about exactly how long this
- [17:43]
Kelly O'Donnell
war could go on, Kelly, that is important context. And to get a sense that this is a part of the president's regular cadence of trying to make that decision, that is critical. Do you get a sense that there is any coalescing around a particular option, or is it just presenting him with an array of choices?
- [18:03]
Courtney Kube
It seems to be that there is a decision or at this point there is a goal to complete these military objectives. So that is the most basic ones that they've laid out from the beginning. It's to go out, take out the Iranian navy, to destroy their ballistic missile program, and to destroy their drone program. But, Kelly, those are not easy to accomplish. The US Military has made a huge amount of progress in the first two plus weeks of this, but they still have a stretch to go. So the fact that the president every single day is getting the option for an off ramp when they have really completed a lot of the task and really taken out a lot of Iran's military capabilities, it just opens up the possibility that the president may decide one day that he is tired of the headlines about the Strait of Hormuz, that he's tired about this on this billions of dollars that are being spent in this war. But again, as of now, he's not taking that off ramp.
- [18:56]
Kelly O'Donnell
Great new reporting. Thank you for bringing it to us, Courtney. We always appreciate that you can juggle a lot of things. Thank you so much. Let me turn now to Matt, and as we've mentioned, we're now into week three, and let's get a sense of what it's like on the ground in the region. The situation has obviously changed a lot. And have you gotten a sense that in Tel Aviv there have been more strikes? What's your picture there?
- [19:21]
Peter Alexander
Well, as a matter of fact, Kelly, we just got an alert right now.
- [19:24]
Donald Trump
You might be hearing this all around,
- [19:26]
Peter Alexander
saying that in the next couple of minutes they're expecting another incoming, probably from Iran. But we've been hearing these with some regularity. In fact, it doesn't really seem like it's been letting up. But what we have heard from the IDF is that now these salvos that are being fired by the Iranians contain fewer and fewer, fewer projectiles in them. So while we're still hearing the sirens all day long and often all night long, and though they have been dispersing quite a little bit. Most of these missile salvos don't really
- [19:54]
Donald Trump
have that many missiles in them, and
- [19:55]
Peter Alexander
they're causing very few injuries. So things have shifted.
- [19:58]
Donald Trump
And that's why we're starting to see
- [20:00]
Peter Alexander
this week schools are going to partially begin to reopen.
- [20:03]
Donald Trump
It's already been several weeks since offices were reopening.
- [20:07]
Peter Alexander
And things really are getting back to normal in a real way. A lot of the restaurants and stuff in this neighborhood and around the country
- [20:14]
Donald Trump
are getting back to work.
- [20:15]
Peter Alexander
So things are kind of getting back to normal.
- [20:19]
Kelly O'Donnell
I want to share with you some of what the president had to say today about Iran's leadership and his description of the new supreme leader. Let's play a bit of that.
- [20:29]
Donald Trump
This one we haven't seen at all. So that could be for a lot of different reasons. We don't know, Peter, if he's dead or not.
- [20:37]
Peter Alexander
Now that you've been.
- [20:38]
Donald Trump
I will say this. Nobody's seen him, which is unusual.
- [20:42]
Kelly O'Donnell
The president, of course, referring there to the son of the supreme Leader who had been killed. And then we have not seen any sort of proof of life, even though there was a statement. What is the sense in the region about an assessment of who is in charge right now?
- [20:58]
Donald Trump
Well, obviously, this lack of information is
- [21:00]
Peter Alexander
causing a flurry of conspiracy theories and conjecture. One of the things that we're hearing and that the Israeli press is talking, talking about a lot is the talk
- [21:08]
Donald Trump
about how the senior Khamenei might have
- [21:11]
Peter Alexander
thought that his son. And there you're hearing those sirens. Now, that's an answer to your question about how things are going on was considered inadequate.
- [21:29]
Kelly O'Donnell
So we were having some difficulty with your, your mic going in and out. Matt, obviously for the reasons of the alarms that are going on around you. Please be safe. We don't want to hold you up. Thank you so much. Yes, quite an indication. You're bringing it, really, to us and our viewers. We're going to go into the White House now where the president in the Oval Office is taking some questions from reporters.
- [21:49]
Donald Trump
And because they're crooked, they make money, they gain power, they use it for power. Like with the Somalians. They vote in a block 100%. They make a deal with the Somalians. They all vote because they're on a gravy train.
- [22:04]
Peter Alexander
Trade.
- [22:06]
Donald Trump
It's, it's coming. It's money first, power second. A lot of people say power first. Now it's money first, power second. Do you ever see where, like Mercedes people come over from somebody, they have no money and now they're buying Mercedes Benz cars, okay? It's more cash goes out of the Minnesota airport than any other place in the world or something. We're going to find it. And Minnesota is really bad. The governor is corrupt. The attorney general is totally corrupt. Just like the New York State Attorney General, Letitia James. She's a highly corrupt person. Bragg, the DA is a corrupt person. They're all corrupt. These are corrupt people. And we got too many of them in our country and we have to expose them and we have to catch them. And if these two guys can't. These are high IQ people. I like high. I've always liked high iq. These are high IQ people. If they don't do it, we're going to go a long way, fellas, to find somebody else that's going to be. We have no choice if honestly. And they may not do a good job. If they don't do a good job.
- [23:18]
Peter Alexander
Thank you, sir.
- [23:20]
Donald Trump
It's possible. If they don't do a good job, the country's sort of in trouble. Yes, go ahead.
- [23:25]
Kelly O'Donnell
Thank you, sir.
- [23:26]
Donald Trump
Two questions. And I think they're going to do a great job. Go ahead.
- [23:28]
Peter Alexander
First, Mr. Vice President, Democrats are already
- [23:31]
Donald Trump
calling you the fraud czar.
- [23:33]
Peter Alexander
What's your reaction to that title?
- [23:34]
Donald Trump
And then second, Good title.
- [23:36]
Peter Alexander
Second, given the past skepticism of foreign adventurism, are you completely on board with the current war in Iran? So I like frauds are certain, certainly what we're going to do. And look, we have to do it. As the President said, this is a problem that has festered in this country for far too long and far too few people have actually wanted to do anything about it. That's what makes this administration different, is that we actually tackle the problems the American people have been confronting. So I'm very happy about it. And look, I think that I know what you're trying to do, Phil. You're trying to drive a wedge between members of the administration between me and the President. What the President said consistently going back to 2015, and I agreed with them, is that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. We have taken this military action under the President's leadership. I think all of us, whether you're a Democrat or Republican, should pray for success and pray for the safety of our troops. That's the approach that I've taken. Make it as successful as possible. So there's no hesitation, given your past statements, with the current operation. What do you mean there's no hesitation with my past statement? Given your skepticism of foreign. You were a critic of the global
- [24:43]
Donald Trump
war on Terror previously.
- [24:45]
Peter Alexander
Well, I think one big difference, Phil, is that we have a smart president, whereas in the past we've had dumb presidents. And I trust President Trump to get the job done, to do a good job for the American people, and to make sure that the mistakes of the past aren't repeated. Absolutely.
- [24:56]
Donald Trump
Thanks, sir. Look, JD has been great, but here's the simple thing. And I have, you know, some people, I don't want wars. I want wars less than almost anybody. Peace through strength. But you know what? I've watched Iran for a long time. I called them out 20 years ago when I was a civilian that liked watching the world. And they're violent, vicious people. The leadership. Violent, vicious people. They killed 32,000 protesters over the last three weeks. They put out a memo two days ago saying, if you protest, we will shoot you and kill you in the streets. And somebody said, oh, there's not that many protests. Well, first of all, there are bombs going off all over the place. But even if there weren't, who's going to do that? You know, who's going to do. They don't have any guns. And the other ones have latest in line, machine gun. Right. And every form of gun you can have, they shoot them right through the middle of the head. They're violent people. If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it. And sometimes they'll have. Some of the people that, you know, feel very strongly like I do about wars, and I say, do you think Iran is violent and do you think that people are violent? Yes. Leadership. Do you think they should have a nuclear weapon which is massive power? I don't even want to discuss how powerful, because it's depressing. And they said, no, they shouldn't have. Definitely they shouldn't have. They said, and you don't want to fight war? No, no, we don't want to fight war. So these are naive people that frankly, are stupid. If you believe that Iran should have a nuclear weapon, there's something wrong with you. Because they would use it within. The only question is within one hour if they get it or one day, they will use it and they will blow up the entire Middle east, not just Israel. They'll start with Israel, but they will blow up. And you got to see that, that when they unexpectedly started sending missiles to every country within 1,000 miles of them, I mean, they're blowing up countries that were neighbors, not necessarily some friends. They actually blowing up some friends. They were blowing up the people that handle their accounts. They're sending thousands of missiles into countries that didn't expect to be in the war because they wanted to take over the Middle East. And if I didn't terminate Barack Hussein Obama's horrible Iran nuclear deal, which I did in my first term, one of the dumbest deals, perhaps the dumbest deal because of the danger involved, you would have had them have a nuclear weapon three years ago, maybe four years ago, and they would have used it, blown up the Middle east and they would have then come after us. And if these gorgeous B2 bombers. Give me that bomber, Andrews. Let me just hug that little sucker. Give me that bomber over there. Thank you. Knew it immediately. Which one? This looks small, but in person it's very big because it's the only plane capable of carrying a 200,000 pound bomb. So I don't know how to do it because it's very sleek and nice, but it carries a lot of weapons and there's a lot of bombs. But had I not sent this incredible machine times, numerous others, to hit Iran at midnight with no moon dead dark, every single bomb was dropped right down the chute that it was supposed to hit. How they do it, who knows? Nobody else can figure. No other country can do it. No other country has our military or even close. And I think we've probably proven that with Venezuela and now with, with, because we have done a number in Iran. But have I, if I didn't do that, if I didn't decimate, I call it their nuclear dust. They would have had a nuclear weapon within one month after that bombing took place and they would have used it on first Israel and then the Middle East. And you know that because all of those missiles that were launched against their neighbors were set long ago, long before they knew they would be using them. This quickly, had we not done this, you would have had a nuclear war that would have evolved into World War Three. And more important, this is a war that there would have been nothing left. So we've done a great thing. The people that say it's okay for a very sick ideology, a very sick country in terms of its leadership, very good people, great people. But the people that say that, that I think they're actually, they're either evil or they're stupid. So if you believe that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon, they should not have it, then you have to absolutely love what I've done. Because in two weeks we have decimated them. They have no navy, they have no air force, they have no anti aircraft weapons, they have no leadership. The leadership is God. But then they set up a new Leadership to go and name a new leader. And that leadership is gone. And now they think maybe the sun is gone. They're all gone. My biggest problem is I have no idea who we're talking to, because nobody ever heard of any of these people. They're all dead. But we did a job for the world. Not a job for us, for the whole world. We took the worst country in 50 years and maybe longer, from the ideological standpoint. A country that wanted to blow up the world. A country that is sick. Sick. And it has a religious fervor. And when you add religion, you know, people don't realize. More people died in religious wars than every other war put together. And that's what you would have had here. And it was a terrible thing. I'm very proud of what we did, and I think JD Understands better than most. If you give Iran a nuclear weapon, at least a very substantial part of the world would be blown up. And it'll be used almost immediately. Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. You don't mind if I keep this here, do you? Isn't that a beautiful thing? You know, I used to look at it and I said, it's a piece of art, but how can it be effective? It's so stealth. Think of it, Peter. One in the morning, it flies in and they say, sir, they're in Iranian airspace. And I say, oh. And I'm watching it from the Situation Room with a couple of other very smart people, including some good generals, real generals, not television generals. And all of a sudden, you see that dive. They start diving, and you see him. 30,000, 20,000. Boy, I said, that was a lot. They went down fast to aim it, and they know they're coming, and they're smart and they never saw them. And they're firing a little bit, but they don't know what they're firing at because they can't see a thing. And then you hear the biggest explosions that anybody's ever heard. Those are the biggest bombs outside of nuclear. Those are the biggest bombs. And you say, what technology we have. What a great country. What? What? I built it largely. I built it during my first term. I built it. I didn't know I'd have to use it this much in my second term. But we had an incompetent president. We had an incompetent administration. And if that group of people, in any form, whether it's Kamala, him, it doesn't matter. Would have had another four years. We would have had no country left. Yeah. Please. Thank you, Mr. President.
- [32:43]
Peter Alexander
You say you're doing a job for
- [32:44]
Donald Trump
the rest of the world. And your conversations with your counterparts parts. Are they thanking you?
- [32:49]
Peter Alexander
What are their conversations like when you
- [32:51]
Donald Trump
talk about this military conflict that's taking place in Iran? Well, I should be thanking me because many of them get 90%. China as an example, should be thanking us, but I don't expect to thank you, but they should be thanking us. Japan gets 95%, China 91%. Many of the countries South Korea gets a tremendous percentage of of their oil and their therefore their energy from the straits and or as they call it, the Strait. And they should be not only thanking us, they should be helping us. What does surprise me is that they're not eager to help. There are a couple, we'll be announcing some names. There are some that really were right up front. I would announce their name now other than I, you know, maybe they prefer it not being announced for whatever reason. I will say this. It's a lot easier to get people today than it was two weeks ago. Two weeks ago before we destroyed there, before you obliterated the country, before we took out. Because they're down to about 8% of their missiles. They're down to a small portion of their drones and we've demolished many of their factories where they make the missiles and the drones and the rest are all following. Our military has been amazing. We hit Carg island, took out every single thing in Carc island except one thing. We left the pipes. Because if we take out the pipes, takes a long time to build them and at some point something is going to happen that's positive with respect to those pipes. But there are some countries that greatly disappointed me and you know, I'm the one that got them to pay from 2% to 5% percent of GDP. NATO and I get along great with those countries in NATO. But I always said, you know, the problem with NATO is we'll always be there for them, but they'll never be there for us. And, and when I hear the uk, which we sort of considered the Rolls Royce of allies, right, Wouldn't you say they were the oldest and they were going to be there. And I say it would be really helpful if you'd send over a couple of ships and if you have some minesweepers, which they do, be very helpful. And the prime minister is a nice man. I think he's a very nice guy. He says, well, I'd like to ask my team. I said, you don't have to worry about a team. You don't have a team. You're the prime minister. You can make a decision. Well, I have to speak to my people. I said, you don't have to speak to anybody. So it's very disappointing. And then after we obliterated them, destroyed their military, the whole thing, and it became a much safer zone, he said, we're going to send over two aircraft carriers. I said, I don't want them anymore. I don't want them after we win. I want them before we start. I don't need your aircraft carriers after we've already won. So, you know, those things are very disappointing. And you have to remember we have 45,000 troops in Japan. We have 45,000 troops, troops in South Korea. We have 45,000, 50,000 troops in Germany. We defend all these countries. And then, do you have any minesweepers? And they say, well, would it be possible for us not to get involved? I've been saying it for a long time. This is the greatest thing to come out of this. We spend trillions and trillions of dollars on NATO to defend other countries. And I always said, but if it ever comes time to defend us, they're not going to be. Be there. Many of them would not be there. And we're going to have to start thinking more wisely in this country. Some have been very good. One or two have been great. I'll tell you, the great ones are at the right time. But there have been some that were right up there, Peter. They were right up there. They wanted to do it so much. Go ahead, Peter.
- [36:46]
Peter Alexander
Thank you. You were talking about Iran a couple of times today and what they did after epic failure theory began. You said they hit Qatar, Saudi Arabia, uae, Bahrain, Kuwait. Nobody expected that. We were shocked. Are you surprised that nobody briefed you ahead of time, that that might be their retaliation?
- [37:02]
Donald Trump
Nobody? Nobody. No, no, no, no. The greatest extras. Nobody thought they were going to hit. They were, I wouldn't say friendly countries. They were like neutral. They were. They lived with them for years, Peter. They were going to take over the Middle East. They were going to knock out Israel with their nuclear weapon. But after we knocked out their nuclear potential, their nuclear weapons, potential weapon, they started building missiles. Thousands and thousands of missiles. And they were going to do it with missiles while they developed. These are sick people. While they developed nuclear. Somehow they were going to start at a different site because that site was. You saw the site, the mountain. They were going to go into a certain area which we know exactly where it is, and they were going to do that at the end. And it's incredible. What we've done, I tell you the job we've done. You know, if I didn't terminate Barack Hussein Obama's Iran nuclear deal, you would right now. Well, Israel would be gone, it would be incinerated and probably the Middle east likewise. And remember, they got all of those missiles. And I heard they were sending missiles to uae. I said, that's strange. You know, UAE is like the banker for Iran. They're like the banker. Qatar, their neighbors, they got along okay. Saudi Arabia, all of a sudden Kuwait, Kuwait is getting hit. Bahrain is getting. All these countries are getting hit. There was no expert that would say that was going to happen. It's not a question of like, gee, should you have known? And if we did known, big deal. I mean, we have to do what we have to do. But we hit them so hard, like nobody's ever been hit. We hit them very hard. And we've extinguished most of their missiles, we've extinguished most of their drones. We've extinguished most of the places where the missiles and the drones are built. We've fully extinguished two layers of leadership and probably a third, if you believe some story. So we only have one thing to have a little choke point. And they've used it very well for years, but it doesn't work. But I think this, if some of these countries that we've been good to for years, and maybe more important than that, some of these countries that get 90% and 95% of their energy from Hormuz, the strait. Hormuz, a famous, wonderful, beautiful place. But you wouldn't want to be necessarily sailing a boat there right now.
- [39:41]
Peter Alexander
I would not.
- [39:42]
Donald Trump
Okay, you know, why not? Because of them, because of us. Because we've taken out their entire navy. We've taken out every one of their drone. They call it a drone layer, a minelayer. There's specific boats that are meant to put mines on. How would you like to have a Nation that has 22 boats where their sole function. They're very different looking boats. You wouldn't want one for your family. They're not pretty. Their sole function is to lift a mine into the water and drop it a certain number of feet down. But they had 22 of them. We've taken out all of them. But you can probably, you can probably drop them off on the bus. So we don't even know, by the way, we don't know that any mines have even been dropped. But the thought that they would scares people that have billion dollar chips. Yeah, please. Thank you, President Trump.
- [40:33]
Peter Alexander
I'd like to Ask the vice president about his plans to go after possible fraud in California and New York. We know, of course, about Minnesota. And President Trump. First, could I ask you, you said earlier today that the new supreme leader, but Khamenei, you don't know if he's dead or alive. There are a couple interesting reports about him today. There's one report that he just narrowly escaped death in the first airstrikes by stepping out into his garden. There's another report that he may actually be gay, despite leading a theocracy that hangs gay people. How do you determine what's true, and do you have an assessment of those?
- [41:07]
Donald Trump
Well, so far, no doubt. If you look at his father, he used to give talks a lot, you know, talking about death to America. He'd say, death to. To America all the time. When they say death to America, you should believe them, because that's what they would have. If they had a nuclear weapon, they would have used it. But they never had the chance. I never gave them the chance to use it. And other presidents should have done. I spoke to one of the former presidents who I actually like, actually speak to some. I do like some people, be shocking. And he said, I wish I did what you did, could have done it. Other presidents, somebody should have done it. 47 years this went on. They call Iran the bully of the Middle East. And you could have never had the Abraham Accords. You could never have had peace in the Middle East. Now you're going to have peace. You could never do it with the dark cloud of a nuclear Iran. But Iran is a shell of itself. It's no longer a bully. It's the one that gets bullied. It's a bully that got beat up. We beat the crap out there out of them and. And they deserve that. You know, when you see a soldier walking down the street without his arms or being helped down the street because he's got no legs, or his face is blown to smithereens with no legs and no arms. Those two. No legs, no arms, and a face that got wrecked. That was done by roadside bombs. That's the favorite weapon of Soleimani, who I killed, killed in my first administration, General Soleimani. Had I not killed him, that was the beginning of their downfall. Because had he not gone, it's possible that we would not be this far advanced in destroying Iran. Because he was a really good general. He was a vicious, horrible man, but he was a brilliant general. And he was looking to knock out 5 of our military bases at one time. And the man that killed that died with him was the same his counterpart in Iraq and they were working together and they got hit real hard and if that didn't happen we would have had a problem. But maybe more importantly than that, they were, he was really the mastermind behind it and they never found somebody to replace him. In terms of the genius. I knocked him out and that was a big step knocking him out. But if we didn't get rid of the Obama deal, I terminated it against the wishes of my then secretary of state. He was no Marco. Against the wishes of a lot of people at the time. You remember that Peter? A lot of people had I not terminated remember that Stephen, you remember they were all in north. Dude, this is not. That deal was a disaster. That was a road to a nuclear weapon. They would have had it it three years ago and it would have been, it would have been used I would say two to three years ago and it would have been used in the Middle East. And by the way, after they were finished that they were coming over here, they never got a chance to do it.
- [44:10]
Peter Alexander
I just want to ask you about something very interesting that you've said twice today that you talked to another former president about the Iran strikes. Was it it George W. Bush?
- [44:19]
Donald Trump
No.
- [44:20]
Peter Alexander
Was it Bill Clinton?
- [44:21]
Donald Trump
I don't want to say. I don't want to say because Barack Obama, a member of a party, a member of a party, they have trumped arrangement syndrome. But it's somebody that happens to like me and I like that person who's a smart person, but that person said I wish I'd did it. Okay, but I don't want to get into who I don't want to get him into trouble. Maybe, hey, you know what? I think you probably know, you know, it's interesting and maybe he'd be proud and I could even ask him that. Would you like me to reveal your name to Peter at Fox? Hi. Well, at least you have high ratings. Your ratings are through the roof, Peter. Congratulations. Thank you for noticing. Congratulations.
- [45:09]
Peter Alexander
Can I ask you another question?
- [45:10]
Donald Trump
Yes.
- [45:12]
Peter Alexander
If Iran, as you say, totally obliterated, got the missiles, got the first two rounds of leadership, Air force gone, may be gone. Can we wrap this war up this week?
- [45:23]
Donald Trump
Yeah, sure.
- [45:24]
Peter Alexander
Will we?
- [45:26]
Donald Trump
I don't think so, but it'll be soon, won't be long and we're going to have a much safer world when it's wrapped up. It'll be wrapped up soon. We're going to have a much safer world world. I had an obligation to do this. I didn't Want to. I called an excursion. I didn't want to make this journey. We had the highest stock market in history. We had low gas prices. Everything was good. And I know exactly, I know what you're going to do it. People are going to raise the price of oil. That's good. But I know that. But that's a very small thing compared to allowing them to have. You want to see a stock market, Good day. Start letting them hit you with nukes. Okay. I think I said it this morning. I think it's a very small price to pay. And frankly, I thought it was going to go down much more. If you want to know the truth, I assume that it was going to go down much more only because people don't understand. To a large. It's a great. It's a big chess game at a very high level. It's very high level chess. The highest. And I'm dealing with, with very smart players. These are smart people. They don't get there. You know, when you deal with some of these people, you're dealing with high level intellect, high, very high IQ people. These are not Jasmine Crockett and her group. These are smart people. These are really smart people and violent people and vicious people and some very nice people and some are very nice, but violent. They turn violence. But you know what? If I didn't do, if I didn't do what I did, we would have been hit. Number one, very important was the termination of Obama's horrible deal. And number two, this beautiful plane hitting them eight months ago, whatever it was, and taking out their nuclear capacity, that totally threw them for a loop. If they had that bomb at either time five years ago or seven months ago, if they had that bomb, that bomb would have been used almost immediately. Mr. President, two questions on domestic policy. Bringing it close to home.
- [47:34]
Peter Alexander
First of all, the Save America Act. What are you expecting this week when
- [47:38]
Donald Trump
this vote takes place in the U.S. senate? Will the vice president's vote be necessary? It's imperative that it gets done. I'm not sure it is. You know, the Democrats have horrible policy. It's just incredible. But they stick together. It's the one thing they do. Their Supreme Court members stick together. Those appointed by a Democrat stick together. If Barack Hussein Obama appoints a member of the Supreme Court, that member never goes against him and they're proud about it. They say, I don't give a damn if it's good or bad. That man appointed me and I'm never going to let him down. I don't say that's Right. Wrong. I just say they stick together. Republicans go the opposite way. If Donald Trump appointed me, I'm going to show the world that I can be totally just and I can be independent of Donald Trump. He's not controlling me. And I don't want to control them. I just want to have smart decisions. They gave us a decision on tariffs the other day that won't change tariffs. I can do it a different way. I always knew I could do it a different way. This was a little quicker, a little easier, a little better. But they gave it a decision that could cost this country $500 billion to pay people back. Because now I have to start the tariffs all over again. Very simple. And what happens with the money I've already collected? Why didn't they say starting from now go the other way? $500 billion perhaps. It's so sad. But one thing about the Democrats, they stick together. Like Lou, they impeached me twice for absolutely no reason, unanimously. Fortunately, the Republicans stuck together. And it was something, it was pretty wild. But the Democrats have horrible policy, transgender for everybody, open borders, men playing in women's sports. But the one thing they do have is they stick together no matter how bad the policy. It's embarrassing to watch them try to defend it. And in a way I say, as a Republican, I would. In a way I say thank goodness they have bad policy because you'd never beat them. We have something in there now, the Save America act, voter ID with a picture. Right. That's a 99% issue, even among Democrats. You know, Democrats poll at 89% on that. And then they have proof of system citizenship and then they have no mail in ballots. No mail in ballots. We have no mail in.
- [50:28]
Kelly O'Donnell
We're going to continue to listen to the president and come back with any additional news, making comments he may make. But I want to check in with Monica Elba, who has remained with us here on set. One of the things that I didn't hear much discussion of in that with the president is how all of this affects China. And he has big plans to visit China soon and maybe those would be a justice. What is your take on how China is as playing a role here or might be effective?
- [50:56]
Monica Alba
That stood out to me too, Kelly, because that is certainly playing in the background and in the conversations around everything related to Iran. The president is supposed to be making his way to China about two weeks from today is when the White House says he was going to be heading there for that high profile meeting with President Xi Jinping. And now today for the first time, the press secretary opened up the door for potentially delaying that. The president sort of hinted at that this weekend, that that is a possibility, because if this doesn't get completely wrapped up by which those conversations seem to be happening in the background, it seems like that will move back. The president really wants this meeting to happen, but everything is connected also to this major big conversation about the economic repercussions of what happens with the Strait of Hormuz. So all of this is really just coming together at a critical point for the president, who wants this meeting to happen, but admits it may have to move back.
- [51:47]
Kelly O'Donnell
And certainly being out of the country at a time when there is hostile conflict, that is a risk in and of itself. Let me also check back in with Courtney. There were a couple of things that stood out, reference to the pipes and something might be coming with the pipes. I didn't know if you had any sense of what that means. And I was also struck by and he was asked a question about the fact that he a couple of times hinted at not having early guidance that Iran would strike neighbors perhaps as quickly as they did. What is your sense of how that squares with what you've been learning from the military sources that you routinely talk with day in, day out?
- [52:26]
Courtney Kube
So the pipes, he mentioned this on one of his social media postings that the US Intentionally did not destroy or go anywhere near any of the oil pipelines or pipes on Carg Island. And he said that was because they could take potentially years to fix or repair. And so that was his decision, but he left open the possibility that the US could go back and strike them again. So I suspect that's what he meant by the pipes. But again, this is the first time we've actually heard him speak about it. As far as this is. Also, he's now several times in the last day or so mentioned that the US didn't think that Iran was going to strike out against other countries in the region once the US And Israel began their strikes inside Iran, and that we know that the military was planning for that possibility, including by sending in additional forces and air defense systems into the region. So, so there definitely was planning and expectation that Iran would lash out, at least at the US Military and potentially allied facilities in the region. Now, it's possible that they underestimated Iran's will to go after some of the civilian facilities and civilian targets that we've seen them go after in countries all around the region. Kelly. But as far as the military, the military was preparing for and expecting that Iran would lash out just the way that they did.
- [53:49]
Kelly O'Donnell
Such great context. Courtney, thank you so much. We're joined now by the panel. We've got an abbreviated back of the show. So thanks for riding along with us as we do that. Toluse Olu Ripa from the Atlantic joining us, Arshi Siddiqui is a former aide to Speaker Pelosi and also a Democratic strategist. And Mark Bednar, the Republican strategist and and former adviser to Speaker McCarthy. So thank you one and all. Monica is still with us, so you already know her. Let's talk about some of the things the president has just said. Mark, let me start with you. When you hear the president speaking critically of allies at a time when he needs them, does that sit well with other Republicans?
- [54:31]
Peter Alexander
Well, when he finishes the thought and is comprehensive about it, it's a very important conversation. For instance, when he's been critical about the EU's involvement in their ask for help against Russia. They're buying record amounts of Russian natural gas. So they're personally funding Putin's war machine. So when he criticizes them in totality, that argument then makes sense. And here the EU is going to also benefit from a defanged Iran, a nuclear free Iran. So the fact that they have actual major incentives as well to participate and to get on board and to help
- [55:03]
Kelly O'Donnell
secure this area, we certainly had more than a hint that Bill Clinton might be a phone friend of President Trump today. Are you surprised by that? Do you think it has benefit for the president to hear from others who've sat in that chair? Absolutely.
- [55:19]
Monica Alba
I think that's a positive aspect. And we know that the president likes picking up the phone. So I'm glad that circle is widening and I hope it continues to widen. In terms of getting different types of
- [55:30]
Kelly O'Donnell
thoughts and perspectives, do you get a sense that when the president talks about I thought the prices would go or the stock market would go down more dramatically, do you think that's a message Democrats can seize on in the weeks ahead?
- [55:43]
Monica Alba
I think the stock market is one piece of the puzzle, but it all
- [55:47]
Kelly O'Donnell
goes back to affordability.
- [55:48]
Monica Alba
And certainly the stock market has a lot to do with retirement and balances there.
- [55:52]
Kelly O'Donnell
But this uncertainty and volatility and these self inflicted wounds on the economy, I think that's where Democrats are going to double down because these are concerted decisions that the administration is making, whether on
- [56:04]
Monica Alba
tariffs, whether or not extending the ACA subsidies, the enhanced subsidies on health care,
- [56:10]
Courtney Kube
health care, cutting Medicaid, cutting food assistance,
- [56:12]
Monica Alba
all of these things are raising prices for Americans.
- [56:14]
Kelly O'Donnell
And then, not to mention the big
- [56:16]
Monica Alba
elephant in the room, gas prices.
- [56:18]
Kelly O'Donnell
Oh yes, everyone's talking about gas prices. Toluse, what stands out from you? We've heard from the President a couple of times today, in this most recent example, the vice President right over his shoulder. We know that he has often been a critic of this kind of activity. They were asked about that, seemed to put up a united front. What do you think the takeaway is from what the President's trying to say in this moment?
- [56:42]
Peter Alexander
I think the President is trying to say that this is a short term, in his word excursion, something that's going to be over soon. And he even said that this is going to be finished soon. I think the President is trying to find an off ramp here. War is very complex. It often does not go according to a script. But I think the President is realizing that this is something that does not have the level of popularity that he thought it would have, especially among his base. And he's trying to find an off ramp and he's saying that this will end soon and not talking about wanting to blow up Iran's oil or do anything that would escalate this further. So I do think the President is trying to find some kind of off ramp. He's already talking about this as a victory and trying to frame it in that way. And that's probably what we're going to see in the coming days.
- [57:18]
Kelly O'Donnell
Do you see any ongoing strains with other leaders? I mean, when the President talks about NATO or allies wouldn't be there for the United States. We know the only time that Article 5 was invoked was after 9, 11. He doesn't reference that. And obviously it's a tense time for those other nations. Do you see that as having long term impact?
- [57:38]
Peter Alexander
Well, for sure. The President has been sort of badgering our allies for quite a long time and now he's trying to get the allies to help him in the Strait of Hormuz. And he's not getting the response that he thought. And he's saying that a lot of these allies are the ones that actually need the support or need the oil that's coming through the Strait of Hormuz. And I think the President is realizing that not having that strong relationship with allies, not being able to rely on them, not having them feel like they can rely on the US Is now becoming a hindrance as he moves forward with this war. And not having, you know, the EU and NATO and other folks that he wants to be sending warships, not having them all on board and I think that's part of what the President's doing.
- [58:14]
Kelly O'Donnell
And, of course, a great cost is always the service members. And we've seen that with the loss of life for Americans and really untold numbers on the other side or in other countries. Monica, in the last day or so, the President's been asked about his response to the deaths of American service members. He's been asked about the use of an image of him at the dignified transfer when six Americans were returned home in an advertising or fundraising appeal. Rather, he seems quite prickly about that. What is the impact there?
- [58:44]
Monica Alba
Yeah, he did not like that line of questioning from a reporter on Air Force One and sort of was dismissive of it overall. When the President has been asked about this, he has said things like, you're always going to have death when you start a war. That is part of the risk. That is sort of part of the calculation. And not perhaps responding with a level of empathy from a commander in chief that certainly his critics are calling for. He did attend that dignified transfer. He had indicated, and the White House had indicated that he could be present for future of similar events, those extremely solemn nature and moments. But he certainly doesn't always, always approach it in that manner of talking about just the incredible loss of life that we are seeing from American service members over there. But he was the one that warned about this at the very beginning when that first announcement of these strikes came. He said this was likely going to result in American service members losing their life. And he seems to have just factored that into this. And the longer it goes, acknowledging, the more we could see.
- [59:44]
Kelly O'Donnell
Mark, would you counsel the pac, the political action committee, to not continue to use those images?
- [59:50]
Peter Alexander
Well, from a tactical standpoint, he raises so much money anyway. He doesn't need to use images like that. He's a very good fundraiser. But in a more serious sense, he's actually very empathetic. Behind closed doors, he is very concerned. He talks to Gold Star families all the time. He talks to veterans, their spouses, their families.
- [60:08]
Kelly O'Donnell
Was that a miss?
- [60:11]
Peter Alexander
It was unneeded. Because he raises so much money anyway, he's going to be able to deploy in 26 and 28. We can raise money without images like that.
- [60:19]
Donald Trump
Okay.
- [60:19]
Kelly O'Donnell
And Tolhu, do you get a sense we only have a few seconds left, that this resonates with members of Congress and military families and people who have maybe a closer reach to service members than in the big picture?
- [60:31]
Peter Alexander
Well, for sure. This is unprecedented to see a president using this kind of imagery and even people within the President's base are not happy about this war overall, so seeing this become even more politicized and used for funding raising is not something that is going to help the President over the long term.
- [60:45]
Kelly O'Donnell
We have an abbreviated panel today. I thank you for your time and your insights and we thank you for watching with us as well. We will be back with more news tomorrow and of course, more Meet the Press now. And stay with us for more on NBC News Now. Thanks for your time.
- [61:01]
Peter Alexander
Snoring, Gasping during sleep Feeling fatigued? Wake up to Zeb Bound Tirzepatide, the first and only FDA approved prescription medicine for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apne apnea and adults with obesity. Zeb Bound is an injectable prescription medicine that may help adults with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea and obesity to improve their osa. Zebbound should be used with a reduced calorie diet and increased physical activity. Zeb Bound is Approved as a 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5 or 15mg injection. Zetbound contains tirzepatide and should not be used with other Tirzepatide containing products or any GLP1 receptor agonist medicines. It is not known if Zepbound is safe and effective for use in children. Do not share needles or pins or reuse needles. Don't take zepbound if allergic to it or if you or someone in your family had medullary thyroid cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia Syndrome Type 2. Tell your doctor if you get a lump or swelling in your neck. Stop Zepbound and call your doctor if you have severe stomach pain or a serious allergic reaction. Severe side effects may include inflamed pancreas or gallbladder problems. Tell your doctor if you experience vision changes, depression, depression or suicidal thoughts before scheduled procedures with anesthesia. If you're nursing pregnant, plan to be or taking birth control pills. Taking Zepbound with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. Side effects include nausea, diarrhea and vomiting, which can cause dehydration and worsen kidney problems. Talk to your doctor, call 1-800-545-5979 or visit zepbound.lilly.com Zepbound and its delivery device base and QuickPen are registered trademarks owned or licensed by Eli Lilly and Company. Its subsidiaries or affiliates.