← The Bulwark
The Bulwark
BREAKING: Trump Claims Lindsey Graham Wanted Deal to End Iran War | Morning Shots
00:19:00
Loading summary
Transcript18 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hey everybody. Welcome to Morning Shots Live. I am Andrew Egger, White House correspondent for the Bulwark, joined as always by my Morning Shots co author Bill Kristol, editor at large of the Bulwark. We are really crash landing into today's live stream. We had all kinds of crazy stuff going on, at least I personally did coming into the office 15 minutes ago. My cortisol is spiking all over the place. But we've got a lot of good stuff to talk about. So we're just going to, we're just going to get right into it and I think it'll go great. I think it's going to go fine. But Bill, we are five months, five months into this war in Iran today. I did not even realize this until you mentioned it to me this morning. I knew we were roughly there. But this, this little excursion, as Trump once liked to call it, I think he's somewhat moved away from the term which was initially billed as a short little several week affair. We're in, we're out. It's going to be fine. We're going to make sure they never get a nuke again. We might get some regime change. You know, we might have all kinds of extra great knock on effects. We're five months in and it is not at all clear how we're going to get out of this thing. Donald Trump did an interview this morning that sort of, if nothing else, led us into his headspace a little bit. And we're going to talk about that. But before we do, can you just kind of give us a sense of where you're at with the thinking about this war, with where this has left, you know, our military, our defense department, how we ought to be thinking about, about American force in the world right now. You had some thoughts on this. Where are you with the war in Iran today?
- [01:30]
B
I mean it's been a failure so far and I don't think it's going to get any better. Unfortunately had a pretty big failure. I'd say its effects have radiated out a little more than I might have expected. I always was against it was I thought it would not succeed. But the consequences have been pretty bad. So what's happened? I mean, five months, we've been through five months beginning the six month, we've lost 18American service members, maybe 400 plus wounded, spent, I don't know, the Defense department says what $37 billion. But that's a very narrow direct accounting. But it's really more in the closer 100 billion. But I think independent analysts Expect expenditures. They're asking for $73 billion from Congress. Right. So they, they say it's cost 37, but they're asking for 73 in the defense, in the budget resolution that the House passed last week. So it's been expensive in human and financial costs. The Strait of Hormuz was open on October, on February 27, 2026. It had been for decades, basically through all kinds of wars and conflicts and tensions. Now it's closed. Maybe will be open under some conditions at some point it probably will, but it's not going to be as open, let's put it that way, or as clearly open as it was before. Iran has survived this big attack by the US And Israel, which by itself makes it stronger. Plus it succeeded in closing the strait and hasn't had to pay. And it seems like it's going to have some say over whether it stays open or closed. So that makes it much stronger in the region. We've blustered and behaved stupidly at the Defense Department, and Hegseth's been an embarrassment and Trump has been all over the place. And you just watch the way we've conducted the war. And I think our allies and the American people would be right to have lost a fair amount of confidence in our leadership. Military, I don't know. They're still very impressive, but at some point, the failures of leadership penetrate down. Right. So it's not just hag Seth who's been misleading. It has been to some degree the military itself. And it was somewhat a DOD signed off on removing those four soldiers who were killed in the last weekend by the Iranian attacks, I guess 10 days ago now from the website, and somehow try to categorize those in other operations because it's inconvenient to Trump's narrative to have this be part of the overall Iran war, even though he himself keeps referring to it as an ongoing war. He's not, in a way, he doesn't quite buy even his own Defense Department's propaganda. So a lot of damage to us, I think, externally, in the world, internally, among the military. I'm a. For example, I'm a hawk, I'm a supporter. I think we do need to spend more on defense. I think we're down to about 3% of GDP at this point. It's a very dangerous world. Getting more dangerous interests, unfortunately, because the last 18 months of Trump and because of other things, too. I don't know. Can I support, though, an increase in defense spending for this Defense Department managed in the way it's been managed to pay for keeping on going at a war that we should end? No, not really. So. And they were ridiculous asking for a ridiculous amount. What is it, 350 billion or something? Increase for next year, which is, they can't even spend. I was talking to a friend who worked high up in the Defense Department that says it's just ludicrous, it's irresponsible and it's going to discredit the notion of, okay, we do need to spend more at some point. So the whole thing, I think internally, externally, in terms of the US Public, the US Military, our allies, and in terms of the actual situation on the ground in the Middle east has been bad. And I would have said, to conclude, I would have said three, four months ago, I expected it to be bad, but maybe bad in a limited way. I hope it's still bad, just in a limited way. But as I say, the effects unfortunately have radiated out more than I might have expected.
- [05:21]
A
Yeah, yeah, no, it's not great. It's not great at all. I think there's one thing you said there, maybe only one thing that you said there, but certainly one that you and Donald Trump would agree on this morning, and that is, boy, do we need to find a way to get out of this war. As a commentator, as a political analyst, one of the things that has driven me up the wall in recent months is just how frequently we have had to come back to make the same point, because the same point keeps being salient, which is that Donald Trump is whip sawing back and forth between this posture of maximal saber rattling, aggressive rhetoric and maximal aerial bombardment. And then maximum man, please let us off this ride. Let's strike a peace deal according to basically any terms. And he has gone back and forth a remarkable number of times. We wrote yesterday about how after two weeks of resumed bombardment, we abruptly stopped over the weekend. We abruptly pulled up stakes in order supposedly to let negotiations resume in the face of a lot of pretty foreboding reports from our military about the state of our missile stockpiles, about the catastrophic damage that would be likely to result to Iran's supply civilian population if we were to go forward with the sort of additional escalation that Donald Trump had once again threatened of attacking bridges and power plants across the country and around Tehran. And so as of this morning, we're right back to the shoe being on the other foot. We're right back to peace, Nick. Donald Trump. We're right back to Trump calling into Fox and Friends today to, I mean, it's just crazy. It's like he's just put back on his hat from one month ago at the G7 of well, look, what do you want me to do? We need a deal basically by any lights, and we're going to go get one. Let's play just a couple of clips from this FOX News interview this morning. I mean, this one just stands out for the sheer wish casting of it. But this is the president talking about the late great Lindsey Graham, who more than pretty much anybody else was instrumental in pushing Donald Trump in this hawkish, extremely anti Iran direction during his second term. So let's hear the president talk about Lindsey.
- [07:36]
C
They'll never have a nuclear weapon. They understand that. And we, we have had some very good talks and very interesting with Lindsey. He was very much a hawk, as you would say, on Iran. And over the last few weeks, I would say that he became like if you could make a deal, it's better that, better making a deal in this case than just destroying the rest of the country. We've destroyed most of it, frankly. But he was, he was somebody that said it's a good time to make a deal. Nice time to make a deal.
- [08:08]
A
Bill, what do you, what do you think of that gloss on how Lindsey Graham felt about Iran?
- [08:12]
B
I mean, I don't know. I wouldn't say that was his public stance, but it could have been his private stance. Donald Trump also was not a reliable narrator, as one might have noticed this over the years and especially about people who have passed away sadly and who aren't there to contradict him. He makes up things right and left. So God knows I think he thinks there will be a reaction from hawks, from pro Israel types, pro Bibi types. Certainly he's meeting with Bibi today. It's on his mind. And so he's trying to drag Lindsey Graham into justifying the bad deal he'll have to make and that I think he should make. But he has to. But the Iranians are not being very cooperative in giving him a very large fig leaf to cover the fact that it's going to be a crummy deal and he's doing more damage by not accepting the crummy deal. So I suppose the price we pay for that is that he has to maybe make up something about Lindsey Graham. It'd be interesting to see if Lindsey had a lot of friends. He was a talkative guy. He confided, he talked to a lot of people, not just in the Senate but in elsewhere in think tanks world and foreign policy world about what he thought It'd be interesting to see if any of them has the same report of what. What he thought as Trump does.
- [09:19]
A
Yeah. My recollection of the last few cycles of Lindsey Graham's rhetoric here. I mean, of course, Graham was sort of the consummate slippery politician, which he played a game that he played very well with respect to Donald Trump. And in terms of cultivating that relationship, a lot of us criticized him a lot for a very long time of a lot of the sacrifices and the compromises he made to do that. But what I remember from Graham is that as the Memorandum of understanding was sort of bubbling up and it was starting to be reported what all was in it, he was extremely bearish on it and said, what the heck? Why are we given. Why are we selling the farm to Iran for basically nothing? And then as soon as it became official, Trump gave it his imprimatur and, and said, this is the deal and I'm going to defend it. Then, of course, Graham flipped and basically was saying, well, you know, you got to give the President his flowers and maybe this is, this is the right thing to do now in order to, you know, deal better with Iran later and, you know, making that sort of politically motivated, maintain your Trump cred type comment. Of course, now, either Trump is just completely making stuff up about Graham, or he is trading on that fact that Graham did endorse the Memorandum of understanding.
- [10:30]
B
The.
- [10:30]
A
I did want to also turn to this meeting that you mentioned with, with Bibi Netanyahu that's happening today because Trump had a little bit to say about him as well. Here is the Fox and Friends gang basically saying, you keep saying, Trump, that we permanently destroyed Iran's nuclear program, but it sure looks like they're digging themselves another mountain fortress to restart the nuclear program. And Bibi Netanyahu has been sounding the alarm about that. So let's play that clip.
- [10:56]
C
Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. There are reports now that Netanyahu is going to talk to you about ongoing excavation at Pickaxe Mountain. Construction vehicles entering and exiting tunnels, paving new access roads. Satellite imagery and intel indicates that Iran is actively constructing and fortifying Pickaxe Mountain. How will we respond? Well, I don't need Bibi to tell me that. Bibi is telling me that because he wants me to stay involved. I mean, I don't necessarily. We have the finest because of Space Force. We have the greatest cameras in the world focused. We know exactly what's going on. But, no, I heard Bibi announced that. I said, why don't you Just tell it to me. Why do you have to announce it to the world? I know exactly what's going on at Pickax. It's not a big problem. We took out their nuclear sites and we'll have to take out Pickaxe if we don't make a deal.
- [11:49]
A
Not really the tone you want to hear if you're a world leader coming to meet with Trump.
- [11:53]
B
Can you imagine? Yeah. Well, also, what's he saying? I mean, he's saying either it's not a problem because it's in Pickaxe Mountain, buried far in there, whatever they're doing, and we would see it if they tried to every bring it out, so to speak, or develop it too much and then we would take action. So it's not a problem. Or it's not a problem because we're about to bomb it if Iran doesn't sign a deal. Or it's not a problem. But isn't the rationale for all this ongoing war from Trump at least, hasn't it all been about the nuclear problem and we can't stop them from getting a nuclear weapon. The centcom's rationale, which I don't think centcom believes, I think they do think it's dug away there and it's not an immediate threat. They never believed it was an immediate threat, though Trump said it was centcom's problem, says, well, no, we have to keep doing this to pressure them to reopen the Strait, which Trump seems to have totally doesn't care about, basically because we, the US don't get that much oil or energy directly through the Strait. We do get some other stuff, incidentally. So much for us being kind of a guardian of international waters and watching out for our allies and stuff. Anyway, I do think, you see there the. He's annoyed at Bibi. I was very struck when he said Bibi's trying to keep me in it. I think he said something like that. Keep. Keep us in it. He really wants to get out. You made this point just about two minutes ago, right? I mean that he, he, deep down, whenever you sort of see, he kind of forgets exactly what the talking points are supposed to be. And he just says what he's. What he feels he really wants this thing over, and he doesn't quite have the nerve to make it over. And maybe the Iranians aren't making it easy, but they certainly aren't making it easy for him. And maybe he can't end. It just takes two to end a war, I guess you could say. But to be Fair to the Iranians. They weren't really. They seemed to be pretty okay with the ceasefire and sort of negotiations about the strait and they liked the mou. Trump's the one who sort of walked it back. The Iranians had felt they had to do some things to remind Trump that he said they had some role to play in. In deciding what happens in the strait. And then the thing escalated and stuff. But. And I'm not in any way defending the Iranians at all, but, yeah, don't
- [13:50]
A
shoot missiles at cargo ships. Iran, the bulwark, doesn't like that.
- [13:53]
B
Yeah, exactly. Right. Or God knows it. Americans, on the other, we, you know, I should say that we've been pummeling them there for ten days and stuff. So anyway, he. I believe we could end this war if we wanted to, at least for now and.
- [14:04]
C
At least.
- [14:04]
B
Or at least, yeah, at least for now. And. And without giving Iran a nuclear weapon. And I think with sort of reopening the strait, but in a bad way with Iran continuing to have the potential to close it and having gotten much more powerful as a result. But so Trump's excuse, if Trump. So he wants to do it, he doesn't quite have the nerve to do it. I mean, one thing that's been shown by this whole five months, he's such a weak. He's a weak. Underneath all the bluster, everything, he's a weak president, whatever. He's Other. God knows their policies that other presidents have had that I haven't liked, but they sort of picked them and stuck to them, at least for a while. Right. And had a certain coherence. Incidentally, one thing I didn't mention, my little list of all the things we haven't done is, yes, so the nuclear program is. We're no better off in respect to the nuclear program than we were five months ago, six months ago. How you say that at the end of five months, we're not better off in terms of. We are somewhat better. We've destroyed some missiles, but we certainly haven't incapacitated or obliterated their missile and drone capacity, as unfortunately, sadly, we've seen in the last days. Both in terms of US hitting US bases, hitting Saudi UAE fields and stuff like that, and the whole helping the Iranian people liberate themselves, which God knows they deserve to be from this terrible regime. Zero. Probably worse, I'd say, you know, the regime is probably a little more entrenched because, you know, they've survived an attack from US and Israel and because the next generation looks no better and maybe worse than the, than the older generation. So it's really bad.
- [15:36]
A
Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I mean, I hardly know what to add to that. It is, it is really, really bad. I got. There is one thing, maybe it's a little bit funny, and if it's funny, it's grimly funny. And it's probably not very funny for Bibi Netanyahu or for Israel. But it has been sort of astonishing the way I was talking about how Trump has ping ponged back and forth between the maximalist hawkish and the maximalist dovish strategies every few weeks. And he's gone back and forth and back and forth and it has just been really surreal. Maybe surreal is a better word. It's been surreal to watch how his approach to Israel and his estimation of Israel and just the feelings that he has toward Bibi Netanyahu specifically have gone completely in lockstep with that bouncing back and forth. I mean, just last week, it was just last week, while we were still in, you know, full bomb Iran mode, Trump was giving Israel remarkable new concessions. Right? I mean, it was, it was, we were making that, that nuclear deal, that domestic, a civilian nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia, and the ink was barely dry on the contract when late last week, Trump got up and he said, actually, I have one more demand for Saudi Arabia. You have to join the Abraham Accords. You have to normalize your relations with Israel if we're going to strike this deal. And then we're only a few days later than that now, and Trump is back in full grump at Bibi mode because Israel and Netanyahu want to continue to attack Iran. And, and Trump is sick of that after two weeks of it and wants out and is back to seeing Netanyahu as one of the primary impediments to his getting out, both in terms of his own determination to keep fighting against various Iranian proxies and in his sort of irritating to Trump willingness to put pressure on Trump in the public space, in the public sphere, which is what Trump was grumping about there. He's like, why would you say these things about Iran's nuclear program that make me look bad on Fox and Friends when you could have just picked up the phone and called me so I could just ignore you a little bit more conveniently to me. And it's just been weird to watch these two things move in tandem. I'm sure there's not a permanent rupture here between Trump and Bibi. On a personal level, Trump has put, you know, bigger stuff behind him before they keep burying the hatchet and then finding some reason to be grumpy at each other again and then burying the hatchet. And for the most part, they have been very staunch allies to one another politically. But it's been weird to see as Trump rediscovers his dovish side, he's once again obviously very mad at Bibi this morning.
- [18:07]
B
Well, and just objectively, this war has been, in my view, bad for Israel. I say it's a long time friend of Israel, not a friend of Bibi, but anymore, but a friend of Israel. And the proof is that Saudi deal you mentioned, which is a bad deal. And Israel's not the only one upset about it. I mean, it's a deal that invites nuclear proliferation. Our friend Eric Adelman has a good piece today at the Dispatch on the long piece, actually. And as a someone who's fought against nuclear proliferation in many, many ways over decades when he was in the Foreign Service and then in the Bush Defense Department, that you know, why this does so much damage to our efforts, reasonably successful over, what, 60 years of containing the number of nations that have their own nuclear weapons capacity. And obviously on Iran, whether one agrees with Obama's way of doing it or other ways to propose that we're doing it, including the bombing a year ago.