'What the hell is going on?': Trump admin unable to explain attack on Iran

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: "What the hell is going on?": Trump Admin Unable to Explain Attack on Iran

The Briefing with Jen Psaki
Host: Jen Psaki · Date: March 5, 2026

---

Episode Overview

Jen Psaki dives into the chaotic aftermath of the Trump administration’s surprise attack on Iran, dissecting the administration’s shifting justifications and lack of clear strategy. The episode features in-depth analysis, notable soundbites from administration officials, and a substantive interview with Senator Mark Kelly on the beleaguered U.S. war effort. It also covers Texas’s potentially historic Senate race, with insights from James Talarico’s victory speech and an interview with Beto O’Rourke about Democratic momentum in the state.

---

Key Segments & Insights

1. The Texas Senate Race: A Turning Point?

• [00:59]–[02:34]: Jen Psaki introduces James Talarico, Texas’s Democratic Senate nominee, highlighting his distinct messaging and use of scripture to energize voters.
• Notable quote:

  “It's time to start flipping tables.” – James Talarico [01:14]

• Jen notes Texas and North Carolina Democratic primaries both outdrew Republican ones by ~200,000 voters, signaling momentum for Democrats.

2. The Trump Administration’s Justifications for War

• [02:34]–[14:29]: Jen walks through the tangled and inconsistent reasons offered by Trump officials for the strikes on Iran.

• Contradictory explanations from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Trump himself are dissected:

  • Rubio ([04:43]): “Absolutely was an imminent threat... If we didn’t attack, they would attack first.”
  • Reuters reports the Pentagon found no imminent threat, and Congress was not briefed on any such intelligence.
  • Rubio implies Israel forced the U.S. hand; Trump denies this ([07:14]):

    “No, I might have forced their hand.” – Trump, as quoted by Pete Hegseth

• Biblical and personal justification:

  • Hegseth references biblical sanction and Armageddon (sarcastically noted by Jen).
  • Trump ([08:06]):

    “It was my opinion... I felt strongly about that.”

  • Jen Psaki, caustic:

    “Trump started a war...because, well, he felt like it. He had a feeling.” ([08:22])

• Regime Change Or Not?

  • Trump calls on Iranians to “take over your government” ([09:45]), which Jen labels “regime change rhetoric.”
  • Hegseth contradicts: “This is not a so-called regime change war.” ([10:07])
  • No plan for what comes after, as admitted by Hegseth:

    “Most of the people we had in mind are dead... they may be dead also.” ([11:11])

• Timeline and escalation:

  • No clear idea how long the war will last; Hegseth says four to five weeks, then admits it could be far longer ([12:15]).
  • Trump’s post: “Wars can be fought forever and very successfully.” – which Jen highlights as deeply troubling ([12:22]).

3. Denials and Semantic Games: Is It ‘War’?

• [13:38]–[14:29]: While administration officials, including Lindsey Graham, flip-flop on “boots on the ground” and even whether a war exists, their language grows increasingly confused, highlighted in a comically circular exchange between Mark Kelly and Jen.
  • Psaki: “Is it all clear to you yet? Because I’m just as confused as you probably are.” ([14:02])

---

Featured Interview: Senator Mark Kelly

4. Veteran Perspective on the Chaos

• [15:49]–[17:42]: Senator Mark Kelly, retired Navy pilot and member of both the Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, shares a sobering comparison to his Gulf War experience, describing his commanding officer’s grave sense of responsibility.
  • Notable quote:

    “You could pick a random group of people off the street tonight... They could probably do a better job than our government is doing right now with this.” ([16:56])

  • Kelly argues there is clear absence of a strategic plan, timeline, or coherent rationale:

    “This is likely to lead to... a long war with a lot of dead Americans and no rationale for how this is helping the American people.” ([17:23])

5. Lack of Information & ‘Comical’ Justifications

• [18:19]–[19:33]: Kelly lists nine shifting justifications for war offered by the administration, calling it “almost comical”—besides the mounting American deaths.

  • Notable quote:

    “I'm keeping a running list because this is almost getting comical. But what isn't funny about this, we have six dead Americans who paid the ultimate price...” ([19:33])

• Questions the president’s understanding of his duty to protect Americans, criticizing lack of communication:

  “He didn't offer any explanation. I mean, a little video in the middle of the night.” ([20:48])

6. On the Value of Life and Flippant Leadership

• [21:28]–[23:28]: Psaki and Kelly respond to Hegseth’s dismissive remarks about American casualties:

  • Hegseth: “When a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it’s front page news...” ([21:31])
  • Kelly:

    “It's just dismissive... You have six dead Americans... their kids at home. There are kids… going to grow up without a mom or dad, and they're going to be thinking their entire lives, well, what was that for?” ([22:05])

• Kelly rebuts the idea of “imminent threat” and underscores the absence of any serious attempt to avoid war, especially when negotiations were ongoing.

7. National Security Purges and Cabinet Dysfunction

• [24:03]–[30:19]: Jen details FBI Director Kash Patel’s retaliatory firings of counterintelligence experts, particularly those with Iran expertise, and the scandals embroiling Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem:

  • The firings leave Americans more vulnerable, according to Kelly:

    “These folks are career professionals...Who replaces them? You’re going to hire somebody off the street?...Because the FBI director…fired some important people at the FBI.” ([27:27])

• On cybersecurity, Kelly expresses serious concern over understaffing and poor personnel choices at the relevant agencies:

  “Your family and your friends... they’re less safe because of this president and the people that he has hired.” ([29:30])

---

Texas Political Upheaval: Talarico, Beto, & the GOP Knife Fight

8. Republican Senate Primary Chaos

• [31:59]–[34:38]: Jen highlights the brutal, expensive, and unresolved Texas GOP primary between Cornyn and Paxton—neither is expected to drop out even after Trump's impending endorsement. Republican divisions may aid Democrats in November.

9. Democratic Unity and Talarico’s Rising Star

• [34:38]–[35:20]: Talarico’s acceptance speech focuses on turnout and multiracial coalition building:

  “There is something happening in Texas. The people of this state have given this country a little bit of hope, and a little bit of hope is a dangerous thing.” – James Talarico [34:52]

10. Beto O’Rourke: Why Texas Might Finally Flip

• [36:31]–[38:42]: Beto O’Rourke touts Talarico as one of the most talented politicians he’s seen, praises coordinated Democratic efforts ("every state House, Senate, and Congressional seat contested"), and notes turnout advantages:

  • Notable quote:

    “When James Talarico wins in November, he will be the 51st vote in the U.S. Senate. Texas will save the country.” ([38:33])

  • Links Democratic enthusiasm, grassroots work, and a fractured GOP to possible historic Democratic gains.

• [39:13]–[41:18]: On the brutal Republican runoff, Beto argues Trump’s panic reveals Democratic strength and the historic stakes if Texas flips.

• [41:18]–[42:58]: Beto warns of likely GOP election interference, but says new Democratic wins even in heavily gerrymandered districts suggest the potential for upset results:

  • Cautions about potential for voter intimidation and calls for massive turnout and registration to “overwhelm” any attempts at subversion:

    “This has to be an overwhelming wave that cannot be disputed... so that there's a check on Trump's power and there's an end to this tyranny.” ([42:58])

---

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• Jen Psaki, summarizing public confusion:

  “Is it all clear to you yet? Because I’m just as confused as you probably are.” ([14:02])

• Senator Mark Kelly, on White House chaos:

  “You could pick a random group of people off the street tonight here in Washington, D.C. ... and they could probably do a better job than our government is doing right now with this.” ([16:56])

• James Talarico, rallying Texas Democrats:

  “The people of this state have given this country a little bit of hope, and a little bit of hope is a dangerous thing.” ([34:52])

• Beto O’Rourke, on turning Texas blue:

  “Texas will save the country.” ([38:33])

---

Timestamps for Key Sections

• [01:14] — James Talarico’s Table Flipping Speech
• [04:43] — Rubio on “imminent threat”
• [07:14] — Trump denies Israel “forced his hand”
• [08:06] — Trump’s “I had a feeling” justification
• [09:45] — Trump on regime change and “freedom” for Iran
• [11:11] — Hegseth: “Most people we had in mind are dead”
• [12:15] — No clear timeline or strategy for war
• [13:38]–[14:29] — Debate: Is it war?
• [15:49]–[17:42] — Mark Kelly’s War Story and Critique
• [19:33] — Kelly calls Trump’s shifting rationale “comical”
• [22:05] — Kelly on the true cost of war for families
• [27:27] — Kelly on the firing of counterintelligence experts
• [34:38] — Talarico’s “dangerous hope” acceptance
• [36:31]–[38:42] — Beto O’Rourke on why 2026 is different
• [41:18] — Beto on Republican election interference and strategy

---

Tone and Style

• Psaki’s tone is urgent, analytical, frequently sardonic, and at times incredulous at administration incoherence.
• Interviewees (Kelly, O’Rourke, Talarico) provide gravitas, emotional resonance, and strategic insights while also fueling urgency and hope among Democrats.

---

Conclusion

This episode is an exhaustive, biting critique of the Trump administration's confused and dangerous Iran policy, combined with an optimistic view of rising Democratic momentum in Texas. Jen Psaki and her guests emphasize the chaos at the highest levels of government—“nobody seems to know what the hell is going on”—and lay out the generational stakes of both war and elections.

---

Transcript

[Jen Psaki]

You do it all. So why not get all the electrolytes Hydrate better than water with new Gatorade lower sugar now with no artificial flavors, sweeteners or colors and 75% less sugar than regular Gatorade. New to the fridge. All the Gatorade electrolytes. You love Gatorade lower sugar. Is it in you? Now available nationwide.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

LifeLock.

[James Talarico]

How can I help?

[Jen Psaki]

The IRS said I filed my return, but I haven't.

[Beto O'Rourke]

One in four tax paying Americans has paid the price of identity fraud.

[Jen Psaki]

What do I do? My refund though. I'm freaking out. Don't worry.

[James Talarico]

I can fix this.

[Beto O'Rourke]

LifeLock fixes identity theft guaranteed and gets your money back with up to $3 million in coverage.

[Jen Psaki]

I'm so relieved. No problem.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

I'll be with you every step of the way.

[Beto O'Rourke]

One in four was a fraud paying American.

[MSNow Announcer]

Not anymore. Save up to 40% your first year.

[Beto O'Rourke]

Visit lifelock.com Specialoffer terms apply.

[Jen Psaki]

A lot of people may have heard from James Talarico, the new Democratic nominee for the Senate in Texas for the very first time. Maybe you've been watching him a lot. Maybe you saw him on Joe Rogan or clips of it. Who knows? But a lot of people may have seen him for the first time. And what they heard wasn't just about Texas. And it wasn't typical Democratic boilerplate talking points either. I wanted to play part of it for you.

[James Talarico]

There is something broken in America. Our economy is broken. Our political system is broken. Even our relationships with each other feel broken. And that's because the most powerful people in the world want it that way. They'll call us a threat. The only truth is we are a threat. We're a threat to their corrupt system. Seven years ago, when the powerful few at the top hurt those at the bottom, that barefoot rabbi didn't stay in his room and pray. He walked into the seat of power and flipped over the tables of injustice. To those, to those who love this state, to those who love this country, to those who love our neighbors, it's time to start flipping tables. Thank y' all for being here. Thank you for being in this fight. God bless y'. All. Thank you.

[Jen Psaki]

So that guy you just saw, the guy who feels very comfortable talking about scripture because he went to seminary school, who is not afraid to call for flipping tables as you just heard him do. That guy is going to be out there on the trail for the next few months while the Republicans are are still going to be competing in a runoff. And boy, and I'm going to talk about this later in the show and lay it all out for you, is that setting up to be quite a scorched earth campaign on that side. And we're going to show you more of that Talarico rally and talk more about why this year might just be the best shot in decades for Democrats to win a Senate seat in Texas. We're going to talk with Beto o' Rourke about it a little bit later in the show. I just mentioned this to Chris, including the fact that the turnout last night is, is another reason to give Trump and his spineless minions some heartburn, because nearly 200,000 more Democratic primary voters turned out in Texas to support Democratic candidates than Republican candidates. And in North Carolina, it was also 200,000 more. So a whole lot of voters who felt motivated to come out in a primer because they were excited about the people they saw on the ballot. And this electoral momentum for Democrats, this rallying cry that we're hearing from James Talarico and Democrats turning out to vote across the country could not come at a worse time for Donald Trump. Because after a year of deeply unpopular, deeply unwise decisions, and some of them absolutely crazy, Donald Trump may have just made his worst decision yet, an incredibly costly and reckless decision that the American people seem to already hate. We're on day five of Trump's war with Iran. Over 1,000 Iranian civilians are estimated to have been killed. Six American service members have already been killed. Four of them were previously identified. And today we learned the identity of another one of Those service members, 45 year old Jeffrey O' Brien of Waukee O, Iowa. Army Major, excuse me. Our hearts are with his family, of course. You can see him on the screen right there, just 45 years old. A new NBC poll out tonight finds that voters disapprove, of course, of Trump's handling of Iran by 13 points. And voters disapprove of Trump's decision to strike Iran by 11 points. It's only five days old. I mean, for context here, even the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had popular support from the American people in their earliest days, which I have no doubt Trump is tracking. The thing is, wars do not tend to get more popular as they drag on. So Americans have already soured on Trump's war with Iran, and it's not at all hard to see why. I mean, let's start with the reason why this administration says the United States had to attack Iran in the first place. On Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told America that the reason war was necessary was because of the imminent threat that Iran would attack the United States. Here's what he said. There absolutely was an imminent threat. And the imminent threat was that we knew that if Iran was attacked and we believed they would be attacked, that they would immediately come after us. And we were not going to sit there and absorb a blow before we responded. There absolutely was an imminent threat. We were not going to sit there and absorb a blow. So says Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Now, the only problem with that, according to Reuters, is that the Pentagon told Congress that there was no imminent threat of an Iranian attack, as in the Pentagon in the same administration. And when the White House sent notification of those strikes to Congress, they made no mention of any imminent threat. So that explanation didn't hold up for long, or really at all. Then there was the other part of Rubio's explanation. We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces. And we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties. Okay, so Rubio, part of what he says there is that the US Knew Israel was going to attack Iran to. So we had to attack them first. Not a justification for war ever, just by the way, obviously. But, I mean, it is also quite clear to basically everyone who's paying attention that a huge factor here is Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel finally dragging a weak American president into preemptive military action against Iran, something he has been trying to do for decades. But Trump didn't like Rubio's explanation that Israel forced his hand. So when Trump was asked about what his own Secretary of State had to say, he. He said this. Did Israel forced your hand to launch these strikes against Iran? Did that y' all pull the United States into this war?

[Pete Hegseth]

No, I might have forced their hand.

[Jen Psaki]

Really? Israel didn't force our hand. We forced theirs. I mean, if you say so. And all of the contradictory explanations continued from there. It didn't stop there. There's more. I mean, for instance, Secretary Hegseth today suggested that this was in part a revenge mission because of Iran's failed attempt to assassinate President Trump two years ago. Then there's the absurd justification that a combat unit commander reportedly told his officers that this was biblically sanctioned and signals the rapid approach of Armageddon. Points for creativity there on that one, I suppose. But of all of the explanations we got, I think the one that is perhaps the least satisfying, and there's a lot of competition for that. And perhaps maybe the most accurate was this one from Trump himself.

[Pete Hegseth]

You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack. If we didn't do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that.

[Jen Psaki]

Okay, everyone, it was his opinion. He had a feeling. He felt strongly about it. Trump started a war with a country of 93 million people because, well, he felt like it. He had a feeling. And ridiculous as that sounds, that explanation now appears to be what the White House has settled on. I think the president, prior to that phone call, had a good feeling that the Iranian regime was going to strike the United States assets and our personnel in the region. The President had a feeling, again based on fact, that that Iran was going to strike the United States. The President's feeling based on fact that Iran does pose an imminent and direct threat. These decisions are not made in a vacuum. They are made by the President's feeling that Iran was going to strike the United States. Could you tell that feeling based on fact was like a phrase written somewhere. I mean, the thing about feeling based on fact, which rolls off the tongue, no doubt, it's not a thing. I mean, Trump's feelings are just feelings if they don't have facts, right? And we haven't had facts really laid out for us here. And it's also probably not the best justification for leading the country into a war, to state the obvious. And if you think the Trump administration's reasons for starting this war are confusing, just wait until you hear their explanations for how it's supposed to end. I mean, this was Donald Trump on the day he announced the strikes.

[Pete Hegseth]

To the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand. Take over over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.

[Jen Psaki]

Trump donned his special USA baseball cap there and told the people of Iran to rise up and take over their government. Which is kind of sounds to me like a clear and unambiguous call for regime change, doesn't it? But then here was Secretary Hegseth talking about that objective, same question, sorta, on Monday. This is not a so called regime change war. No nation building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. So which is it? I mean, is this administration trying to ensure regime change or not? In all seriousness, I mean, did you guys even meet about this before last weekend? Because these seem like pretty obvious top of the list things to really coordinate the reasoning on, most importantly, privately, and of course, your answers on publicly, so that people out there understand what's happening and why. And then there's the question of who will be in charge after the regime change. They aren't calling regime change. I mean, they killed Iran's supreme leader. Surely they had someone in mind to take over Iran after he was gone.

[Pete Hegseth]

Well, most of the people we had in mind are dead. So, you know, we had some in mind from that group that is is dead. And now we have another group. They may be dead also.

[Jen Psaki]

So the people of Iran should rise up and take over, but there isn't going to be regime change. Or maybe there is, but they did assassinate the leader of Iran, and they do want to replace him, but all their preferred leaders are dead. Got it. See, none of these goals make any sense. And typically, these are the sorts of questions that you really pour over for months among national security leaders, even among briefings with Congress. And now it appears that the most likely next leader of Iran will be the son of the guy they just killed, who is reportedly even more of a hardliner than his father. Nobody knows why they're doing this, why the country, why the United States is involved in this. Nobody knows what the goal is. And crucially, nobody seems to know how long it's going to take either.

[Pete Hegseth]

We projected four to five weeks, but we have capability to go far longer than that.

[Jen Psaki]

Four weeks, two weeks, six weeks. It could move up, it could move back. It could be six, it could be eight, it could be three. Okay, not much clarity there. No clear timeline for this. Clearly, on Monday, the president posted his social media account, quote, wars can be fought forever and very successfully. And is it just as unclear how far the administration is willing to go in carrying out that war? Over the weekend, Senator Lindsey Graham, a close ally of the president, perhaps the biggest Iran, one of the biggest Iran hawks in Congress, ruled out putting boots on the ground as part of this operation. There will be no American boots on the ground. This is not Iraq. This is not Germany, this is not Japan. We're not going to have any boots on the ground in Iran. No boots on the ground. So says the Senate's biggest Iran hawk. Understandably a big question. Lots of people out there have. But then the next day, in an interview with the New York Post, Trump refused to rule out putting boots on the ground sending American troops into Iran to fight another war. None of the messages out of this administration are consistent. None of them make sense. Even Donald Trump's own allies don't seem to know what to say or how to talk about it. I mean, some Republicans seem to be in denial that this even is a war, even though President Trump calls it a war every chance he gets.

[Pete Hegseth]

We're doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly.

[Jen Psaki]

We're not at war right now.

[Pete Hegseth]

Unlimited middle and upper ammunition, which is really what we're using in this war.

[Jen Psaki]

This isn't a war. We haven't declared war.

[Pete Hegseth]

We may have casualties. That often happens in war.

[Jen Psaki]

Strategic strikes are not war.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Really?

[Jen Psaki]

Is it all clear to you yet? Because I'm just as confused as you probably are. I mean, some Republicans have gotten so confused by this whole thing that they can't even keep their narrative straight from one sentence to the next sentence. This is war, and we're taking out the threat. People can see this is war.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

We haven't declared war. They declared war on us, but we

[Jen Psaki]

haven't declared war on Secretary Hicks.

[James Talarico]

Haven't declared.

[Jen Psaki]

Now, you said this is war.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

They've called it war. What I was saying.

[Jen Psaki]

Okay, well, that was a misspoke. That was a misspoke, everyone. A misspoke. Nobody in the Trump administration or seemingly people who are speaking vocally on their behalf from the Republican Party seems to know what the hell is going on. So far, the only reliable information we have been able to get has come from the handful of Democrats who have been briefed on the matter. So what can they tell us about what is really happening, what questions they have, where this is all headed? Stern Soften is one of those Democrats. Senator Mark Kelly. During his service as a Navy pilot, he flew 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm. He's now a member of the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence Committees. Senator Kelly, I cannot even imagine, given your background, what has been going through your head over the course of the last five days. Let me just start by asking you this, because one of the things I've been struck by. I'm not a veteran. I've never been in combat. I did work for two commanders in chief, and the seriousness through which they take the decisions about using military force, putting men and women in a position of harm, even in bases around the world, even if they're not in the middle of a combat zone, is the most serious thing they ever do. They seem to be speaking quite flippantly about these decisions inconsistently. What has gone through your head as you've watched the ranging justifications coming from this administration?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, very quickly, I started thinking back to 1991, when I was on an aircraft carrier heading across the Indian Ocean to get into the Persian Gulf at the beginning of the first Gulf War. And I remember my commanding officer, I was in an A6 Intruder Squadron. I was 25, 26 years old. I remember my commander, one day before my first strike, talking to us, how about how they expect us to lose half of the airplanes? Now, that didn't come to pass, but I just remember that leading up to that period of time, how stressful this was for him. He was our boss. He was the commander of the squadron. He was only 39 years old at the time. I remember when he turned 40. He was such a great guy, a great leader, and he was under so much pressure, and he wasn't even the guy that made the decision to send us there, but you could just feel just in his core that he was. He understood, you know, how significant of an issue this was that some of us might die. And he took it so seriously. And he wanted our airplanes to be ready. He wanted the entire team to be ready. And he wasn't sure that was going to happen. And I watch this group of people who are supposed to be leading our country, not just the president, Secretary of defense and others, you know, five people that were on the background on the slide here. And I'm thinking you could pick a random group of people off the street tonight here in Washington, D.C. just a random group. And they could probably do a better job than our government is doing right now with this. They don't have a goal. There's no strategic plan. There's no timeline. And what this is likely to lead to is, again, a long war with a lot of dead Americans and no rationale for how this is helping the

[Jen Psaki]

American people, as you just described. And that's an incredible story. You know, you have been in situations where people are facing life and death. We're putting our men and women at risk around the world right now. And one of the understandable questions I think a lot of people watching right now and staying at home have is about whether men and women will be sent to fight in Iran. And there's been inconsistent answers from the administration. I know you can't tell us everything or much from a classified briefing, but for people who are asking you that question, constituents of yours or people on the street, what do you tell them in terms of your understanding of what their intentions are here or whether that's a possibility?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, I mean, just listen to the public commentary from the administration on this. Yeah, there's. Sure there's a possibility. I mean, there are people who haven't ruled it out. And don't assume for a second from this administration that we're getting much more details in private, you know, in. In an intel space, because we generally don't. I mean, we might get some operational details that can't be shared. But I am just. I've been keeping a list, you know, the reasons we went to war with Iran. I'm up to nine. You just talked about five of them. I have four more.

[Jen Psaki]

What I miss.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, what about the nuclear weapons that we obliterated?

[Jen Psaki]

The one they destroyed last summer?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Yeah, we obliterated it. Now we've got to eliminate the nuclear weapon capability. And just, you know, I realized last summer and I said, well, we didn't obliterate it. We did a lot of damage. The Air Force did a fantastic job. They're not responsible, by the way, for what happens after the bomb hits. That's somebody else's responsibility. Regime change. You know, they've talked a lot about that for a while. We have no idea what comes next. And how do you implement this regime change?

[Jen Psaki]

Maybe the more hard line son of the guy they killed, potentially.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Right. Who then might go all the way to developing a nuclear weapon, or was it ballistic missiles? You know, that's been a big part of this.

[Jen Psaki]

Right.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Saturday, Sunday, and then the Iranian navy, which now the Secretary of Defense says has been totally eliminated. The President said it, too. I hope that's the case. We'll see. But they have a. You know, I'm keeping a running list because this is almost getting comical. But what isn't funny about this, we have six dead Americans who paid the ultimate price, and we have a president. And I'm not going to go into things he said in the past about the military, but we have a president that I have serious concerns about whether he understands his role here. His ultimate job is to protect. Protect U.S. service members, protect U.S. citizens. He talked about it the night of the State of the Union. But why didn't he talk more about this? I mean, he could have discussed this and tried to explain to the American people how is this going to help them with their cost of rent and groceries and healthcare, which, by the way, he made much, much harder for millions of Americans. This is not helping people with their everyday lives. And he didn't offer any explanation. I mean, a little video in the middle of the night.

[Jen Psaki]

No. He could have also asked for primetime time from the networks, and they would have given it to him. I can tell them that. And to explain, they would still give it to him. Justin, they would still give it to him. You brought up the six Americans, and we just learned the of a fifth American. And these areI think everybody at home knows this because everybody has members of the military either in their family or in their neighborhood. These are families, these are communities that are deeply impacted by these losses. I wanted to playI don't know if you've seen this, but something SecretaryDefense Secretary Pete Hegseth said today about this, I just have not been able to stop thinking about this. But let's just play it.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

This is what the fake news misses.

[Jen Psaki]

We've taken control of Iran's airspace and waterways.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Without boots on the ground, we control their fate.

[Jen Psaki]

But when a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it's front page news. I get it. The press only wants to make the president look bad, but try for once to report the reality. Now, I heard part of that. The few drones that got through are, of course, what killed these Americans. And obviously it was.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

And the tragic thing that happened, I just.

[Jen Psaki]

Well, I want to know what you think of that.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, I think. I mean, it's just. It just dismissive of the fact that you have not only six dead Americans. When you think about the age of military service members, you know, many of them are. They have spouses, they have kids, their kids at home. There are kids that are just going to hear who the sixth person is. They're out there, they're going to grow up without a mom or a dad, and they're going to be thinking their entire lives, well, what was that for? What did we get out of it? What did they get personally out of it? What did our country get out of this? And a year ago, the president in 2024, when he was running, he said, well, we're not going to go get into another war. And he has no explanation for why we are here. And this is not making Americans safer. There was no imminent threat, by the way. Imminent and future. Those two words don't go well together. An imminent threat in the future is not an imminent threat. There were other ways to deal with this. They were having a negotiation with the Iranians. They just cut it off. And the next day, you know, we're doing airstrikes into Iran. I do want to commend the service members that are doing this. This is hard. I've done this. It's a challenging job, and not everybody is willing to do it. And six Americans so far have paid the ultimate price.

[Jen Psaki]

We're going to keep you here. Thank you for being so generous with your time. I have more questions. Got to take a quick break. We'll be right back with Senator Mark Kelly.

[MSNow Announcer]

Start your day with the MSNow Daily Newsletter. Sharp insights from voices you tr standout, moments from your favorite shows, and fresh perspectives from experts shaping the news. Sign up at Ms. Now.

[Jen Psaki]

I wish that Pete Hegseth was the only unqualified buffoon we needed to be concerned about during a very dangerous time in this country and the world. But there is, of course, Trump's FBI director, Kash Patel, and a brand new analysis from MSNOW out today that found that basically any time Kash Patel generates unflattering headlines, he quickly carries out mass firings at the FBI. That's quite a knee jerk response, isn't it? I mean, each purge of bureau personnel appears to be Patel's strange way of getting back into Trump's good graces. And it's happened in at least four key instances that our intrepid reporters have reported on. The most recent example took place after Trump expressed his displeasure with Patel's decision to take a government jet to Italy to party with the men's Olympic hockey team. We've all seen that video. Now, just one day later, Patel ordered the firing of at least 10 FBI agents and staff who participated in the investigation of Trump, concealing classified documents at his Mar a Lago club after he left the presidency. Quite a way to make Trump happy, I suppose. But in those firings, Patel targeted an elite FBI counterespionage unit that not only investigates mishandling of classified records, but also has expertise in combating threats from Middle Eastern adversaries, particularly Iran. So he got in trouble for partying and then fired people with expertise on Iran just as we were launching a war with Iran, all to please Donald Trump or stay in his good graces. And then we, of course have Kristi Noem, Donald Trump's Secretary of Homeland Security, who has spent the past two days on Capitol Hill. And it has been brutal. She's been answering for a mountain basically of self inflicted and embarrassing scandals.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Senior administration officials have described these airplane purchases as the world's worst deal and an abuse of federal funds.

[Jen Psaki]

We need to have a long range command and control aircraft that will seat up to 17 people in the Department of Homeland Security for national security purposes.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

This company that received $143 million in taxpayer.

[Jen Psaki]

Has it ever done work for the government before? I don't know. I can't.

[Beto O'Rourke]

The answer is it has not.

[Jen Psaki]

And do you know why we know that? Because it was incorporated eight days Eight days before this contract went out. Have you had sexual relations with Corey Lewandowski? Mr. Chairman, I am shocked that we're going down and peddling tabloid garbage. That was not a no. But Senator Mark Kelly is back with me. Senator, I wanted to play that because I think it's so important for people to know what these cabinet agencies are responsible for and how it impacts everybody watching out there in terms of their safety and security. And let me start with Patel, because it's very obvious why he chose those particular individuals to fire if they worked on overseeing and reviewing contents of classified information Donald Trump had at Mar A Lago. But they also have expertise on an issue we're all facing right now. And one. Let's see, an individual who has worked on this, on these issues basically said he was genuinely frightened for national security because of these firings. What is the impact of an operation like that, a part of law enforcement being essentially gutted to some degree?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, in this case, I mean, these are the folks that work on counterintelligence. So the FBI's role is to keep Americans safe at home. It's not just about crime and arresting people for financial crime and, you know, violent crime that cross state lines. It's not just those things. It's protecting us from these overseas threats, you know, and threats from Iran. You don't have to be at the CIA to be able to make the determination that right now, you know, threats from the Iranians would be up. You know, we are at war with a country. They're going to use every tool they have to respond to this. And it's the FBI's role, but specifically, these individuals who were just fired, it was their job. Who replaces them? You're going to hire somebody from off the street who doesn't have this experience. I mean, these folks are career professionals that have spent years and years building the relationships, and they know how to do this. And now they're out of the agency. So what this means to any person just, you know, at home watching this, a family, you are less safe. Because the FBI director, in order to get into the good graces of the President, fired some important people at the FBI.

[Jen Psaki]

One of the responsibilities under the Department of Homeland Security, as you well know, is cyber threats. And facing that and addressing that. And the person who typically oversees that is any cyber attacks is cisa. The Department of CISA is a cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency. It's understaffed. We know that it's. It's without leadership. And we just learned that the Person who Kristi Noem picked to lead the agency apparently failed a counterintelligence polygraph test, which really does tell you a lot. I don't have more details on the question, but that does tell you a lot. Cyber attacks and threats is certainly something that we're all watching as it relates to Iran and other countries that are adversaries. How concerning is that they have no leader underfunded. How do you think about that?

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Well, you got to assume that the Iranians have cyber tools to use against us. They're a sophisticated enough country. You know, they have the technical means to do these attacks on us. And we need people in these jobs. I mean, I think it shows, again, the incompetence of Kristi Noem, you know, to hire and not vet somebody well enough to be able to determine if they can do something pretty simple that a lot of people in these agencies have to do and pass at a very high level, by the way. So again, you know, we're highlighting the fact that within Trump's cabinet are people that are making such poor decisions that your family and your friends and they're less safe because of this president and the people that he has hired.

[Jen Psaki]

Senator Markelli, I'm so grateful you could be here. I think your background and your service and your expertise is so important for people to hear from in moments like this. Thank you again.

[Senator Mark Kelly]

Thank you.

[Jen Psaki]

Okay, coming up, James Tallarico. I started the show talking about this a little bit. He gave one hell of a victory speech in Austin tonight. And Democrats chances of flipping Texas are looking far better than they have in a very, very long time. In so many ways. Jam Salarico is trying to finish what Beto O' Rourke started back in 2018. And Beto O' Rourke is going to join me to talk about that in just a moment, day or night. VRBoCare is here 24. 7 to help make every part of your stay seamless. If anything comes up or you simply need a little guidance. Support is ready whenever you reach out from the moment you book to the moment you head home. We're here to help things run smoothly because a great trip starts with the right support and hey, a good playlist. This doesn't hurt either.

[MSNow Announcer]

Subscribe to MSNow Premium on Apple Podcasts for early access, ad free listening and bonus content to all of MSNOW's original podcasts, including the chart topping series the Best People with Nicole Wallace. Why is this Happening? Main justice and more. Plus new episodes of all your favorite msnow shows Ad free and ad free listening to all of Rachel Maddow's original series, including Rachel Maddow Presents Burn Order. Subscribe to Ms. Now Premium on Apple Podcasts.

[Jen Psaki]

For months now, Texas incumbent Republican Senator John Cornyn and his rival for their party's nomination for his seat, Texas Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, have been slinging mud at each other in one of the dirtiest primary races I have seen in a very long time. And in this case, dirty is actually rolling in the mud.

[MSNow Announcer]

Dirty. It's voting time, so let's cut through the bull. Crooked Ken Paxton cheated on his wife. She's divorcing him on biblical grounds. So now Paxton's wrecking another home, sleeping

[Beto O'Rourke]

around with a married mother of seven.

[Jen Psaki]

That's just a primary ad. Everyone buckle up. Now, despite ads like that and a lot of campaign spending, I mean, the most expensive, expensive primary in history, I think, was this one. And largely because of the amount John Cornyn spent, neither he nor Ken Paxton won the Republican primary last night. Cornyn, a guy who was almost elected majority leader of the Senate last year, had tens of millions of dollars spent on his behalf and still finished the night ever so slightly ahead, just a little bit. But since neither candidate got 50% of the vote, these guys are headed for a runoff at the end of May and the extension of this primary does not sound pretty. Today, the Texas Tribune wrote that as the dust settled this morning, Texas GOP operatives agreed on one thing, that this runoff will be nasty. No kidding. One leaked local GOP operative saying the runoff would be, quote, a knife fight in a phone booth. Which sounds, well, very painful. Now, today, clearly seeing how harmful that would be for Republican chances come November, President Trump announced that he plans to endorse either Cornyn or Paxton soon and that he expects whoever he doesn't pick to drop out, meaning no runoff would be needed. It's all over. There's really no telling when Trump's endorsement will come or whether the other candidate will actually back out when it does come. And in the meantime, the Republican candidates appear still to be at each other's throats. Now, meanwhile, the Democratic side of the ballot in that race is now a united front. State Representative James Talarico beat U.S. congresswoman Jasmine Crockett in one of the most high profile races of the year. And despite being both being up and coming Democratic Party stars, which they both still are today, Jasmine Crockett conceded gracefully, saying in a statement that Texas is primed to turn blue and we must remain united because this is bigger than any one person in the past 30 years. The closest Democrats have gotten to turning a Senate seat in Texas Blue was Beto O' Rourke in 2018. He was just about 2 1/2% of the vote away from that goal. Now, the question is with Texas today, with James Talarico at the top of the tickets, can Democrats finish what Beto started?

[James Talarico]

The number of young people who showed up to vote in this election is unprecedented. The number, the number of Texans who have never voted before but showed up in this election is unprecedented. The number of independents and Republicans who voted in this Democratic primary is unprecedented. Unprecedented. There is something happening in Texas. The people of this state have given this country a little bit of hope, and a little bit of hope is a dangerous thing.

[Jen Psaki]

A little bit of hope is definitely a dangerous thing. Beto o' Rourker standing by, and he joins me next. Welcome back. And joining me now, as promised, is former Congressman Beto O', Rourke, 2018 US Senate nominee in Texas and founder of the Texas grassroots group Powered by People. What an exciting time. There's like a jolt of energy, I think, going through people just watching what's happening transpired today. But let me start by asking you this. I mean, Democrats, as you well know, you know better than anyone, you came very close in 2018. And since then, though, there have been some Republican gains. Republicans have gained among Latinos over the course of the last several years. They've gained, they've made some headway in South Texas. We've seen encouraging things like almost nearly 200,000 more votes in the Democratic primary and obviously some flips. But it would be seismic for Democrats to win this seat. It does feel like they have a better chance than ever. But why? Why are you jazzed and excited about this possibility this year? Maybe more than you've been in the past?

[Beto O'Rourke]

Yeah, I've never been more excited. I mean, let's start with James Talarico. This is one of, if not the most talented politicians I have ever seen. Those of us who have watched his career in the Texas House have known that he's incredibly talented. But for the rest of the nation, they got to see him in the closing months of this competitive primary, fought against another generational talent in Jasmine Crockett, who made James an even better candidate. We couldn't ask for anyone better to be at the top of the ticket. You have Gina Hinojosa, who is our new nominee for governor against Greg Abbott here. She's phenomenal. And then, Jen, for the first time since 1974, there is a Democrat running for every state House seat In Texas, there's 150 of them. Every state Senate seat, every congressional seat, 38 of them. You have Democrats running 254 counties. All of them will bring net new Democratic voters to the fold in their own races, and they'll send them up to the top of the ticket. For James, as you saw, on January 31st of this year, there was a 31 point swing in what was supposed to be the largest reliably red county in America, Tarrant county, where Taylor Remitt defeated the Republican contender, outspent him 10 to 1, and won that seat by 14 points, the same one that Donald Trump won 17 points in 2024. And then, as you mention, 200,000 more votes cast in the Democratic primary. Even though Republicans spent $90 million tearing each other apart in the Republican Senate primary, those 200,000 votes mean a lot to me because I lost by about 200,000 votes to Ted Cruz in 2018. And then lastly, there are so many great Democrats and just great Texans out there hustling and doing the work, powered by people. The group that I lead is on Texas campuses every day meeting voters where they are, registering them, staying in touch with them, and helping them to make the decision to vote in the most important election of our lifetimes. When James Talarico wins in November, he will be the 51st vote in the U.S. senate. Texas will save the country.

[Jen Psaki]

I think people will. It's such an exciting race to watch. Let me ask you about the Republican side, because they're in a runoff. It has already been brutal. I just played some of an ad and talked a little bit about how Texas reporters are analyzing this to date. Going to endorse at some point soon. Does that matter? What do you see as the impact of this kind of brutal extended primary on the Republican side, on the possibility of Talarico winning in November?

[Beto O'Rourke]

I just, I think it shows you how strong Talarico is and how strong Democrats in Texas are. I mean, Trump would not intervene in this way unless he was panicked. He understands that if Talarico wins, if he is the 51st vote in the US Senate, then there's gonna be a check on Trump's criminality. There's gonna be consequences for his corruption. There's going to be the possibility of free and fair elections in 2028 if we don't win, if Trump is able to hold onto power, if he's able to rig or steal this election before the first vote is cast. And, Jen, he's gonna try to do this in Texas, whether it's purging the voter rolls that Greg Abbott sent him, even though it's unconstitutional or trying to stop mail in voting or something that we can't even dream up right now. Then this slide into authoritarianism I think will be complete. Those are the stakes of this election. I think Trump understands that. The good news is Democrats in Texas understand it as well, and we're meeting this with full force. So, as I mentioned earlier, They've already spent $90 million, Cornyn and Paxton, tearing each other apart. Their runoff for this primary will not be decided until the 26th of May. So for two months, they're gonna be going at each other, even if Trump intervenes. And all the while, James Tallarico, Gina Hinojosa, these great Dem are gonna be consolidating support not just among Democrats, but as James said in his speech last night, amongst independents, amongst Republicans, and amongst people who've never voted in an election before. But now, because they feel hope, they're gonna act on that and they're gonna cast a ballot.

[Jen Psaki]

A little dose of hope. I know that can do people well. Let me ask you about, I mean, you alluded to this, and I think everybody needs to be clear eyed and eyes wide open about the shenanigans that the Republicans could be up to in Texas and all across the country. We saw some of that chaos in Dallas and Williamson Counties. We talked about this a lot last night. What should people be preparing for? What do you hope Texas election officials are doing between now and November to ensure people's votes are counted, they're able to get into polling places, et cetera?

[Beto O'Rourke]

I think because Trump is so panicked, which Jen, reveals his weakness. You know, he tries to project strength and inevitability and this power, but it is a false front. Otherwise he wouldn't have asked Greg Abbott to redraw five congressional districts in Texas, which he did last summer. Here's the good news. In answer to your question, in four of those five newly gerrymandered districts, more Democrats voted in the primary that concluded last night than Republicans. It means that this might be a dummy mander instead of a gerrymander, where Democrats ultimately end up prevailing in these newly drawn districts. So Trump is reading all this right. He reads Talarico's stunning win last night. He reads the losses in these five or four of these five gerrymandered districts. So besides trying to cancel mail in voting, I think that Minneapolis was a preview of what you're gonna see in Austin, in the Rio Grande Valley, in San Antonio, in my hometown of El Paso, sending federal forces, Border patrol and ICE agents to intimidate voters at polling places, seiz ballot boxes. You know, he ruminated to the New York Times that he wished that he'd asked the Guard to seize voting machines in 2020. He is broadcasting to us right now in real time what he plans to do ahead of November 2026. So we have to do everything we can with what we have where we are. That means registering more voters. I mean, this has to be an overwhelming wave that cannot be disputed, that ensures that we know that Democrats win, that there's a check on Trump's power and there's an end to this tyranny. And slide to authorit

[Jen Psaki]

Beto o', Rourke, thank you as always. We'll be right back. A quick heads up on something we've got coming up tomorrow night that I am really looking forward to, because tomorrow night we're going to have four Democratic members of Congress who have served in our armed forces here at this table together to offer their unique perspective on Donald Trump's war with Iran. And I really hope you'll join us. That does it for me tonight. You can catch the show Tuesday through Friday at 9pm Eastern on Ms. And don't forget to follow the show on Blue sky, Instagram and TikTok.

[MSNow Announcer]

As President Trump continues implementing his ambitious agenda. Follow along with the MSNow newsletter Project 47. You'll get weekly updates sent straight to your inbox with expert analysis on the administration's latest actions and how they're affecting the American people.

[Jen Psaki]

The American people are basically telling the president that they are not okay with any the of this.

[MSNow Announcer]

Sign up for the Project 47 newsletter at Ms. Now. Project 47.