Steve Ganyard (2:14)

Here now.

John (2:15)

Jonathan Karl, Good morning. Welcome to THIS Week. Seven weeks into the war with Iran, we begin with two wildly divergent descriptions of what's going on. To hear President Trump describe it, we are on the verge of a real comprehensive peace in the Middle East. On Friday, he told me a deal could come as soon as this weekend. He says the Iranians have agreed to give up their nuclear materials to never again enrich uranium and to fully open the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump told me in one of three conversations over the past 48 hours that the Iranians and the Americans would work together on removing Iran's stockpiles of enriched uranium. What he calls nuclear dust and that it would be brought to the United States. He also said he expects to have a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon. And just a short while ago this morning, he told me that even though Iran has committed what he called a serious violation of the ceasefire by firing on two Indian ships in the Strait of Hormuz, he still thinks a deal will happen one way or another, the nice way or the hard way. If everything in the deal he has described comes together, or even if some of it does, it could be a truly historic moment in the Middle East. But that is a big if. This morning, a top Iranian official said there are still, quote, considerable disagreements. The biggest questions are whether the temporary ceasefire is holding and whether the Strait of Hormuz is actually going to reopen. And just minutes ago, President Trump announced that there will be another round of peace talks beginning tomorrow night in Islamabad, saying that he is offering a very fair and reasonable deal and that if Iran doesn't take it, he will, quote, knock out every single power plant and every single bridge in their country. I'll be talking to the Trump administration's ambassador to the United nations and former National Security Adviser Michael Waltz. And I'll be joined here in the studio by a senior official from the Arab nation that has been attacked by Iran more than any other. But let's start with two people who can help us understand what is happening right now in the Middle East. We have ABC's Steve Ganyard, who has been watching the Strait of Hormuz, and Kareem Sajapour, one of America's leading experts on Iran. Karim, let me start with you. I know you this morning were listening to the speech by the Iranian speaker of the Parliament, who the Trump administration says they've been talking to and see as the leader they can deal with. What message are you hearing from the Iranians right now?

Kareem Sajapour (4:52)

Well, I think we've started a debate within Tehran between those who want to continue to resist the United States and do not trust the United States, and those who argue, listen, we've prevailed. This was a war of regime change for the United States. We've survived. Let's consolidate our gains now. And the speaker of Parliament in Tehran, Kolibov, was trying to make the case to people that we've survived, we've prevailed. Now is the time for compromise.

John (5:17)

But he's also saying there are significant differences that remain. Talking to President Trump, he sounds like a deal could be hashed out tomorrow. The Iranians don't do anything quickly from

Kareem Sajapour (5:27)

1979 to the present. John, Iran has made perhaps only three major compromises. They've only come after months, sometimes years of very difficult negotiations.

John (5:38)

And also we've heard some conflicting messages. So the Foreign Ministry spokesperson said the strait is open. Then we heard, you know, from the military saying that it's not who's actually who's in charge.

Kareem Sajapour (5:51)

Power in Iran essentially now lies with the Revolutionary Guards. But the Revolutionary Guards are not monolithic. You have forces who, they call themselves principalists, loyal to the principles of the 1979 revolution, which are death to America and death to Israel, and forces that are more pragmatic who say, listen, if we want to preserve this revolution, we need to start to put our economic and national interests before revolutionary ideology.

John (6:15)

All right, Karim, thank you. Now, Steve, help us understand that there were the Iranians shot at two Indian flagged vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. What happened?

Steve Ganyard (6:26)

Those are the last two ships that tried to get through the strait. As of this morning, we're seeing no traffic move through. So you can see one of the Iranian Indian tankers as it moved up, trying to go through the strait. So this is Iranian oil that the Indian tanker just bought. And they get up from Iran, from Iran and they get told to turn around. So the tanker captain said, hey, what the heck, it's your oil that I just bought from you. So this was the last attempt. But you'll notice the track that it was on, John, the Iranians have been pushing the normal track out of the Gulf through these two islands here because they're tolling. They're charging up to $2 million per ship to go through this. This is something that the Iranians want to continue to do. But it's a US Red line, no tolling, freedom of movement. That's going to be the red line that the US still has to resolve.

John (7:11)

It's just astounding. They bought oil from Iran and they were stopped by the Iranians who started shooting at them Anyway. What is it going to take to open the Strait of Armuz for shippers to be confident that they can go through?

Steve Ganyard (7:24)

A couple of things have to happen. One, these small boats that we saw attacking the Indian freighters yesterday have to stop their attack. So the Iranians still have hundreds of small boats, some of them in caves, that they can attack shipping within the shipping lane. So if they do that, the insurance companies that are ensuring all these tankers back here are going to say, you're not moving until we know that we're not going to get attacked.

John (7:46)

And these lines were saying this is what it looks like in a normal.

Steve Ganyard (7:49)

This is what it's normal. This is the normal just north of Iran. This is the normal track. This is the track that has been pushing up so that the Iranians can toll but once they get the fast boats stop, don't attack us anymore. There's the other question of mines. Apparently the Iranians have lost track of where the mines are that they put in the water. So the U.S. navy after the shooting stops has to bring in its very sophisticated de mining equipment. Think underwater drones still untested in combat to get all that kit in. It'll be about a week then to clear these lanes. About a week outbound, a week inbound, that's three weeks. If they find any mines at all, you, you can double that timeline. So even if we get everything, if peace breaks out today, it's going to be weeks if not months before this mess starts to get unclogged.

John (8:37)

Meanwhile, there's this US Embargo stopping all Iranian ships from getting out. Explain how that works.

Steve Ganyard (8:44)

Indeed. So if you take a line here from the Pakistan Iran border down to this point of land in Oman, this is where the US is running this blockade. We've got about 22 ships in the region. We're, we could probably do it with about half of that. So they're getting help from aircraft, from satellites. So we're tracking all these ships that are trying to or going up to the line here. So we can do this indefinitely. The thing that's most interesting is that there are reports out there now saying that the US Will board and seize any Iranian oil anywhere in the world. 90% of the Iranian oil goes to China. So if we board a ship, it will most likely be Chinese oil. Just weeks before President Trump is supposed to meet with Xi Jinping in Beijing.

John (9:25)

Sounds like a complicating factor. Steve, thank you very much. Let's bring in the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Waltz for the latest from the Trump administration on this. Certainly a consequential morning here. Mr. Ambassador. These talks are going to be tomorrow night in Islamabad. Who's going to be leading the US Delegation?

Mike Waltz (9:46)

Well, as the President announced, the vice president with our key negotiators looks like they are going to head out for another round. And I have to remind everyone these are the highest level engagements between the United States and the Iranian regime in the 47 years since it first came to power and of course took 66Americans hostage. So it's incredibly significant, as is the first high level direct engagement between the Israelis and the Lebanese governments for the first time in decades. So I don't think anyone can say President Trump isn't putting diplomacy first. Of course, that is backed by significant, very real and very capable military power.

John (10:36)

That cease fire expires on Wednesday. Will it be extended if there isn't a final deal coming out of these talks?

Mike Waltz (10:42)

Well, that's ultimately a decision for the president. But I think the outcome of these talks will be incredibly consequential. And as the president has stated, he is prepared to escalate, to de escalate. He is prepared to actually board and turn around Iranian ships even as far east as the Pacific Ocean. Secretary Bessen, our Treasury Secretary, announced Operation Economic Fury, where we're taking additional economic measures to continue the maximum pressure campaign against the Iranian economy, which is an absolute freefall in terms of its currency, its foreign currency reserves, its ability to perform basic functions. And of course, we have a full court press here at the United nations, where we're seeing our Gulf Arab allies in particular, truly united, pushing forth a resolution that a UN record 135 nations joined us in condemning Iran's attacks on ports, airports, civilian infrastructure, even neighborhoods, to the tunes of thousands of missiles, of drones in civilian infrastructure. So Iran's never been more isolated. Its economy is in free fall. It truly has no cards. And the president's objectives and red lines have been very clear. It cannot and will not ever have a nuclear weapon.

John (12:09)

So the Iranians said they were reopening the Strait of Hormuz. It's not reopened. We saw them firing on an Indian, two Indian ships. What makes you think you can trust the Iranians? Even if you can arrive at a deal coming out of these meetings, what makes you think you can trust them to abide by it?

Mike Waltz (12:29)

Well, the Iranian command and control and government is in absolute disarray because of the devastating attacks across its leadership. You're right. You heard the Iranian foreign minister say, it's open, and then the IRGC step in and say, no, it's closed. Regardless, it's the blockade, the US Navy, and President Trump who's ultimately deciding what gets in and out. So he has completely turned the tables on Iran's attempt to hold the entire world's economies hostage, on its attempt to punish the world as a result of this dispute over its nuclear program. But to your point, I promise you, I assure you, the United States doesn't trust anything. Any agreement that comes out will have to be verifiable and enforceable. And back to my position here in the United nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA and its nuclear inspectors, I'm confident will be a key part of whatever is resolved.

John (13:33)

And if they don't agree, is the president really prepared to go back to full on war, extending this war well beyond what he originally said? It was gonna be four or five, maybe six weeks. We're now going into week eight. Is he prepared to do what he threatened here? He said destroy every power plant and every bridge in the country full on in depth war extended in the Middle East. He's ready for that.

Mike Waltz (13:58)

Well, all options are on the table. Absolutely. Unlike his predecessor, President Trump doesn't publicly take options off the table and tell our adversaries what he's not going to do, therefore giving them leverage. So all options are on the table. We could take that infrastructure out relatively easily. The Iranian air defenses have been absolutely decimated. And just to get ahead of a lot of the critics, and hand wringing, throwing out irresponsible terms like war crimes, attacking, destroying infrastructure that has clearly and historically been used for dual military purposes is not a war crime.

John (14:37)

Mr.

Mike Waltz (14:37)

Ambassador, Democratic lawmakers, we've heard that from others and it is irresponsible and just flat wrong.

John (14:43)

But, but Mr. Ambassador, let me be clear. The president today said that he would knock out every single power plant in every single bridge in Iran. He's not just talking about those that are supporting the military infrastructure. He is saying every bridge in every power plant in the country. That wouldn't be a war crime.

Mike Waltz (15:02)

That would be an escalatory ladder. And if you go back in the history of warfare, go all the way back To World War II, of course, we bombed and took down bridges, other infrastructure, power plants that, yes, could be used for civilian, but also are used to manufacture drones and missiles. So, and the Iranian regime in particular and its terrorist proxies have a long history of actually deliberately hiding military infrastructure in hospitals, schools, neighborhoods and other and other civilian assets. So they are standing on, they have no ground to stand on, number one. Number two, they have a long history of commingling. Number three, it's perfectly acceptable in the rules of land warfare. And number four, the Iranian regime is launching drones and missiles directly into civilian homes, hotels and resorts across the Gulf. So this is just a ridiculous argument we've heard in the media from the Iranians and frankly from some lawmakers here at home.

John (16:06)

I mean, again, hitting every single bridge, every single power plant in the country goes beyond simply those that support the military infrastructure. Thank you very much, Ambassador Waltz. I appreciate your time this morning. Thank you. And an important clarification. I just got off the phone with President Trump yet again. He told me that Vice President Vance will not be leading the US Delegation to Islamabad. He said it's because of security. The Secret Service did not feel comfortable having the Vice President go to Pakistan on 24 hours notice. He's added. JD is great. Now to our next guest. The United Arab Emirates has taken more direct attacks from Iran than any other country, including Israel, in the last seven weeks of war. Joining us now is the UAE's Minister of State for International Cooperation, Reem Al Hashimi. Thank you so much, Madam Secretary, for being here. I want to get to that point. You have been attacked by Iran more than any other country. And we put together the numbers here. This is from the Gulf Research center and it shows. Look at the numbers. I mean, you know them well. You have been attacked more than Israel, more than Saudi Arabia. Why has Iran aimed so much firepower at the uae?

Reem Al Hashimi (17:24)

Thank you very much, John, for having me. Well, in 40 days, we were attacked a little over with 2,800 missiles and drones. And for us, it's very clear that they've chosen to go down this path because we are everything that they're not. We are a model of economic prosperity. We have 200 nationalities that live there. We have religions and cultures from all around the world. We used our oil wealth to build an economic powerhouse. They used their wealth for nuclear programs that are nefarious, for missiles, drones, proxies, et cetera. So whereas we tried to become and have become an international, global, responsible player, they are a pariah state. And they wanted to break that model, but they underestimated our resolve.

John (18:14)

So how concerned are you that at the end of this process, even if there is a deal, that Iran will retain the power to continue once again to attack the uae?

Reem Al Hashimi (18:26)

So we're very concerned because we believe that it's really important that as part of a neighborhood that one is in, that you have neighbors that don't just launch these types of weapons against fellow neighbors. I don't know if you're aware, John, but over 90% of all of their targets was actually civilian infrastructure.

John (18:47)

So they weren't just going after the US bases or US facilities.

Reem Al Hashimi (18:50)

Not at all. And not even the US bases where nothing was actually fired from the US bases. Right. So they really wanted to break what it was that made the UAE special, which is this incredible model of prosperity and tolerance. Now, what we're looking at moving forward is how do you live with the reality of geography in a neighborhood that still holds and upholds not just international law, but also, how are we going to be able to deal with a team in the IRGC that doesn't have such hostile intentions towards us?

John (19:24)

So what do you make of the prospects for these talks in Islamabad? Do you think there's gonna be a deal? Do you think it's.

Reem Al Hashimi (19:30)

Well, eventually there's going to have to be one, but it has to be a good deal, because there's no point in kicking the can down the road when we're just going to end up where we started, maybe even with a more emboldened regime that wants to continue to hurt its neighborhood. So from our perspective, we do want to have peace in our region, but it can't be a bad peace. It can't be a peace where it doesn't address the root causes, which is Iran dealing with proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas and the Houthis having a nefarious missile and drone program, a nuclear enrichment program, being able to weaponize the Straits. I mean, that, I think, is a really serious tool that the Iranians have taken forward, which is to hurt cities from Des Moines to Delhi in spiking up fuel prices, in spiking up food prices. They don't have the right to do that. And that's why what the president has put forward, which is to not allow them to take over the Straits, is going to be really important moving forward.

John (20:32)

And you, I mean, they're your neighbors. You opposed this war in the beginning. You wanted a negotiated agreement in the beginning. Do you think that the Iranians, as the regime now stands, can be trusted to keep commitments, even if they come to an agreement?

Reem Al Hashimi (20:49)

Look, trust is earned, right? And what we've seen so far has been a pure demonstration of a lot of hostilities, hostility. So the onus is really on them to demonstrate that they are not going to be going forward in the way that the trajectory has been so far. But trust is earned, John, and we are not fools. We've seen them even before February 28th, when this started. A couple of weeks before that, one of our senior ministers was in Tehran talking through, how are we going to be able to deal with, as I said, the realities of geography right now. They're going to have to really step up in a significant way for us to be able to believe what they say.

John (21:28)

Again, President Trump has said that there has been regime change in Iran. I mean, obviously, the Supreme Leader was killed. A lot of the other leaders were killed. You don't think there's been regime change

Reem Al Hashimi (21:39)

in Iran I know that personalities have changed, right? You have different characters that are currently in place. But how has that changed the character of the Revolutionary Guard that's yet to see doesn't seem very hopeful though right now.

John (21:51)

And let me ask you also about this threat that he's made to take out every bridge and every power plant if there isn't an agreement, Are you concerned about that?

Reem Al Hashimi (22:00)

We believe that maximum pressure is what actually takes you forward, dealing with the Revolutionary Guard, whether it's military, whether it's economic pressure, which is why that piece is going to be critical. Now that they've weaponized the straits, the tolling of vessels, the fact that they are able to have another amplified revenue source, those are all things that need to be tackled. Ultimately, we don't want to hurt the Iranian people. That's very important to mention. But at the same time, it's the Revolutionary Guard that have taken forward a military stance and a posture not against the US And Israel alone, but against the very neighborhood that they operate in through the Gulf.

John (22:42)

All right, Madam Minister, thank you very much for being here. Really appreciate your time and your pleasure.

Reem Al Hashimi (22:48)

Thank you, John. Thank you so much. Thank you.

John (22:50)

Coming up, has the war in the Middle east broken the U. S. Israeli relationship beyond repair? Some Democrats think so. We'll hear from one of them when we come back.

Reem Al Hashimi (23:04)

We gather here tonight to bring women back to their rightful place.

Nikki Glaser (23:09)

The Testaments, a new Hulu original series from the executive producers of the Handmaid's Tale.

John (23:14)

It's easier to accept a story than believe that the people around you are monsters.

Nikki Glaser (23:18)

The battle isn't over. There comes a time when you have

John (23:21)

to take action, when you have to

Nikki Glaser (23:23)

choose your own destiny. Never quite hesitate. Watch the new Hulu original series, the Testaments, streaming on Hulu and Hulu on Disney for bundle subscribers. Terms apply. Sunday nights on abc. What happens when the person you love the most turns out not to be who you think they are? Everything he told me was a lie. From the number one true crime podcast, Betrayal. He's been living a secret double life. My marriage ended with a 911 call.

John (23:51)

The tape is blood curdling.

Nikki Glaser (23:54)

Betrayal, secrets and lies.

John (23:56)

So many people are living with their own betrayal.

Nikki Glaser (23:59)

Sunday nights at 10, 9 Central on ABC and stream on Disney and Hulu.

John (24:05)

We're joined now by Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna of California. Thank you for being here. Really appreciate it.

Ro Khanna (24:11)

Always good to be here.

John (24:12)

So I know you've obviously been adamantly opposed to this war in the first place. What do you make of this latest Development, though, another round of peace talks.

Ro Khanna (24:21)

Well, they said they want to escalate, to de. Escalate. They've escalated to devastation. I mean, you have the Pope lecturing America about possible war crimes. You have the president, as you pointed out, threatening to destroy all power plants. I didn't think we would ever get to that point. You have the Strait of Hormuz that is now blocked. This never happened before the war. What have we achieved? Gas is up from $2.30 to four bucks. You have now Iran having a more hardline regime, as we just heard, and all our allies like UAE being hit. I mean, we've created devastation and we're being lectured by the Pope.

John (24:59)

But let me ask you, you've called the war. I think I have this correct. The biggest blunder in. In American foreign policy in the 21st century. If this gets to a resolution. I mean, if they actually. And I know that's a big if, but if they actually get to a resolution where Iran has given up its nuclear program and, you know, there is a peace deal, maybe even a peace deal with Lebanon, are you prepared to revise that and say that they actually got something out of it and it wasn't a blunder.

Ro Khanna (25:28)

If we actually achieve something, but the enriched uranium is still there. We have a more hardline regime there. Khamenei Jr. Actually wants to develop nuclear weapons. Does anyone believe that we actually have more leverage of the Strait of Hormuz? We have less. China has more influence in Iran, and we've lost our entire moral credibility. We have a president of the United States threatening to wipe out Iranian civilization, and people think it's normal. And then you have a situation where our troops are at risk, where a president who campaigned on peace is spending now $400 billion to spend more money on these wars. Why aren't we spending that on health care here, jobs here, childcare here? Why aren't we addressing the needs of the American people? On Team America, he seems to be more obsessed with the Middle East.

John (26:13)

So let me ask you about Israel. You were one of 40. 40. I mean, you're not in the Senate, but there were 40 Senate Democrats who voted to halt the sale of military equipment to Israel. Something you agreed with, clearly. Is the Democratic Party no longer a pro Israeli party?

Ro Khanna (26:33)

We're a party that believes in two states and peace. But let me tell you what we're not for. We're not for aid to Israel. They've got a 45 billion defense budget. Why are we giving them money? Why aren't we Providing it for healthcare here. Why aren't we providing it for childcare here? By the way, that's not just a issue on the Democratic Party. You look at Republican voters under 50, they agree with me. And then you look at what the devastation was in Gaza. Why aren't we doing the Arab peace plan, which, by the way, the UAE foreign minister has supported of two states. You have a Palestinian state and a which is demilitarized and an Israeli state. That's what we are for. We should be for peace and we should be for justice in that region.

John (27:12)

But that seemed to be a big moment to see the vast majority of Democrats in the Senate say no more military sales right now to Israel.

Ro Khanna (27:22)

But what they said is no more bulldozers that are destroying Palestinian villages. It's unjust. I mean, the young people in this country. When I met Netanyahu years ago, I said to him, Mr. Prime Minister, you may have won the battle. You've lost the war because you've lost the next generation in America. We don't think you're acting morally. We have a sense that people in Palestine, they deserve justice, they deserve a state. And yes, we need to have a secure Israel, but not in Israel led by NETanyahu, who killed 70,000 people in Gaza, not an Israel that is going to be raining bombs in Beirut and not a prime minister sitting in our Situation Room. Let me tell you what a Democratic president is never going to do. An Israeli prime minister is not going to be sitting in our Situation Room telling the American president what to do. Only Americans will be in that Situation Room.

John (28:09)

You went further than even most of your Democratic colleagues. You called for a stop of funding for defensive weapons to Iran, including Iron Dome, which is something you had supported. I remember you and I spoke about it on this show not all that long ago. You said it was something that protected not just Israelis, but also Palestinians.

Ro Khanna (28:29)

I am for the Iron Dome technology. I'm glad UAE has it. I'm glad Israel has it.

John (28:33)

But you don't think that we should give it to Israel anymore.

Ro Khanna (28:35)

Why? Why can't they afford it with $45 billion even Rahm Emanuel agrees with? I mean, why are we subsidizing one of the richest countries in the world? They have health care for all their people. Why aren't we putting that money in our communities for our jobs? Do I want them to have Iron Dome?

John (28:49)

Absolutely.

Ro Khanna (28:50)

I want any country to have Iron Dome to protect their citizens. But the free ride is over. They're not going to be getting American tax dollars and they're certainly not going to be dictating to the American president. The American president will call the shots.

John (29:04)

And very quickly. It's an election year in Israel. If, if Netanyahu is removed and he faces a tough reelection battle, new leader in Israel, does that change your view on this?

Ro Khanna (29:14)

Doesn't change my view on aid. It does change my view about how we will cooperate or not. I mean, they should recognize that this relationship is going to depend on them fighting for justice, recognizing a Palestinian state, working towards peace, and actually not insulting the American public and the American president. I mean, the American people understand that we have gotten into wars in the Middle East. They're tired of it. They're tired of our money going there. They want us to focus on the economy here at home.

Chris Christie (29:44)

All right.

John (29:44)

Congressman Ro Khanna, really appreciate your time.

Ro Khanna (29:46)

Thank you. Thank you.

John (29:47)

Up next, he's the spiritual leader of 1.4 billion Catholics. So why did President Trump call him weak on crime and terrible on foreign policy? We'll break down the president's feud with Pope Leo after the break. I think that it's important in the

Ro Khanna (30:06)

same way that it's important for the

John (30:07)

vice president, United States to be careful when I talk about matters of public policy. I think it's very, very important for the Pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology. And that was Vice President J.D. vance early last week with a warning for Pope Leo what it means for the Republican Party in the midterms. Our roundtable is here. Stay tuned.

Nikki Glaser (30:31)

Hey, it's Nikki Glaser. My new stand up special, good Girl is now streaming on Hulu. Every single woman loves Good Girl and guys don't want to say it because they're like, it sounds like I'm her dad. And it's like, exactly. Okay, just be my dad at Starbucks. This girl came up to me and she was like, are you? And I was like, yeah. And she was like, aware there's a band aid in your hair. Don't miss Good Girl. Now streaming on Hulu terms apply. What would you do if your online store converted 36% more shoppers? You could take 36% more vacation.

John (31:07)

Another pina colada.

Nikki Glaser (31:08)

Yes, please open a new retail location with 36% more square feet.

John (31:12)

Fantastic.

Nikki Glaser (31:13)

Hire 36% more help.

John (31:15)

You're hired and you're hired.

Nikki Glaser (31:16)

Shopify has the the world's best converting checkout up to 36% better than other e commerce platforms. What you do with those extra sales is up to you. Switch to Shopify today@shopify.com setup and get a $1 trial. Shopify.com setup and let's bring in the

John (31:31)

roundtable, former DNC Chair Donna Brazile, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and National Review editor Ramesh Panuru. So, I mean, let's start with the Pope and J.D. vance. First of all, Governor Chris did you ever think we'd see the vice president tell the Pope to be careful when he talks about theology?

Chris Christie (31:51)

You know, No, I didn't. And especially this vice president who is, you know, now a Catholic convert early on in your Catholicism. Taking on the Pope probably isn't the greatest thing in the world. But, you know, J.D. vance is following, as he always does, the lead of Donald Trump. He cannot get out from Donald Trump's back. He cannot ever do anything that isn't completely 110% supportive of what Trump says. But here's the problem. He's leading himself to, a real, real political problem for himself. Donald Trump knows about as much about the Catholic Church as my phone does.

John (32:33)

There's a lot of data on that phone.

Chris Christie (32:35)

This is a guy. This is a guy who knows nothing about religion, has no religious basis at all. Ramesh and I were speaking in the green room about the time when they asked him about which one he preferred, the New Testament or the Old Testament. He goes, oh, I like them both. I like them both. You know, this is a guy who's a fake. He's a phony. And JD I have a little advice for you this morning. Don't be following a phony on issues of religion and taking on Pope Leo. The other complication here, John, is this is the first American Pope. So American Catholics not only follow him as Catholics, but they have a great pride of ownership in this pope. And so it's personal on top of being theological. And so I think this is a real problem politically for them. Catholics are not going to forget that this president and my party's leadership has taken on Pope Leo in a really, really gross way.

John (33:29)

I mean, I think he's the first pope that's a White Sox fan.

Chris Christie (33:34)

There's so few White Sox fans, Sean.

John (33:36)

That's not the so. But I want to play because Pope Leo actually addressed this whole controversy, even unprompted. It was very interesting talking to reporters on his plane. He's in the middle of a trip to Africa. Tikalism.

Ro Khanna (33:48)

The talk that I gave at the prayer meeting for peace a couple days ago was prepared two weeks ago, well before the president ever commented on myself and on the message of peace that I am promoting. And yet, as it happens, it was looked at as if I was trying to debate again the President, which is not my interest at all.

John (34:13)

And J.D. vance saw that and said, okay, we're all fine. He put out a post on X saying in part, pope Leo preaches the gospel as he should, and that will inevitably mean he offers his opinions on moral issues of the day. The President and his entire administration work to apply those moral principles in a messy world. So he said, the Pope agrees. We're not fighting with the Pope, but they are fighting with the Pope.

Ramesh Panuru (34:39)

You know, John, I agree with Chris. I'm a lifelong Catholic. I come from a very solid Catholic family. On my father's side, my mother converted to Catholicism, raised us in the Catholic Church. And throughout my adult life, I still travel with my rosary beads. I have in my wallet not only a little card with the last Pope Francis, but Leo. Pope Leo not only has American roots and on the south side of Chicago. Let's start there. Yeah, you gonna really pick a fight with somebody from the south side of Chicago? I don't do that. But also New Orleans roots. So that is something for me. It felt personal to see the Vice President, who's a convert to the Catholic Church, really in many ways insult the Pope. He's a calm, mild mannered Pope who served in war torn Peru, who speaks the Gospel the way it is written, who tell us, it really admonished us to worry about the poor, to seek help, to humble ourselves and to see this back and forth. It was just unwarranted. I'm glad that the tensions are hopefully calming down, but it was an insult.

Chris Christie (35:56)

Remember, John, it was the President who started this with his.

John (35:59)

Yeah, this is not J.D.

Chris Christie (36:01)

this doesn't kill J.D. vance over. He's saying, ignorant, saying he's soft on crime.

Jonathan Karl (36:06)

Right. Like he's running an attack ass against. Of course, he is an American Pope, but he's leading a global institution. There are 300 million Catholics in Africa. And when the Pope said in Cameroon, woe to those who make war for selfish reasons. He's talking in a country that has been in the middle of a civil war that has been extremely bloody. And Americans, we have this unfortunate tendency sometimes to think everything's about us. Oh, that's a comment about the midterm elections in the United States. And I think the Pope was quite appropriately saying, no. The other thing is modern Popes are against war. All right. John Paul II was against the first Gulf War, was against the Iraq War. The George H.W. bush administration and the George W. Bush administration were able to disagree with that and take it in stride and not issue deranged attacks in the way that President Trump did. And that, I think, has set the tone for this entire exchange.

John (37:03)

Okay, let's get to the larger issue, though. What is happening? So we heard from the President, we've got another round of talks in Islamabad. I mean, what do you make of this? I mean, it's. Look, whatever is happening, and look, the Strait of Hormuz is not open. The Iranians have made commitments they haven't kept already. But we are seeing something that we really haven't seen. High level talks with the Iranians about a comprehensive.

Chris Christie (37:31)

Look, the idea that there's talks is fine, and I think anybody would support the idea that we're talking. But here's the problem. You've got a regime, and we saw this earlier, attacking an ally and friend of ours at the UAE at twice the level that they're even attacking Israel. They are trying to make this a regional war. They're the ones who closed down the Strait of Hormuz. And by the way, John, all of this was predictable.

John (37:58)

Yes.

Chris Christie (37:59)

When the president decided to do this the way he did it, what do I mean, he didn't bring our allies on board off the bat, and he, more importantly, didn't bring the American people on board off the bat. Every time we've entered one of those conflicts that Ramesh just discussed that were initially very popular. Why? Because the President laid out why we're doing what we're doing and rallied the American people around him. The problem for Donald Trump now is he's got competing interests. He knows that he needs to try to finish the job in Iran, but he knows that that hurts his party, my party, in the midterms. And so he's got this conflict now where he's looking for an off ramp to help himself politically, even though geopolitically the smart thing to do is to finish the job in Iran. And so that's his problem. And this is when you govern without principle, John, and he has no principles.

Ramesh Panuru (38:52)

But, Chris, who is, who is going to Islamabad tomorrow or the next day? Who? The Vice president, Marco Rubio or the two real estate developers. The point is, is that we don't know who the United States will be sending. That's not.

John (39:07)

I mean, it's happening very quickly.

Ramesh Panuru (39:09)

Right.

John (39:10)

And we've had conflicting reports. I mean, it was a minute we heard from, you know, the former national security adviser, the US Ambassador to the UN saying that Vance would be leading the delegation, the President Told me he wouldn't. I just got a message from somebody else saying, well, maybe he will be. But you know, the vice president, whether or not he is going, we are seeing high level talks. And sure, we had that with Secretary of State John Kerry during the nuclear deal negotiations under President Obama, but we have seen higher level talks.

Ramesh Panuru (39:38)

But Iranian. Who will the Iranians send? The prime minister, the foreign Minister who said the strait was reopened, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard who said, we're closing it and we're going to make sure it's closed? So look, we don't know who's going on our side. And we don't know if the hardliners with the backing of the Supreme Leader or the pragmatists who might be running. We don't know. And that's why going into this war, we didn't have a strategy and we don't know how it will end.

Jonathan Karl (40:06)

So thinking about the strategic question, there's so much focus on whether the Strait of Hormuz is going to be open. But keep in mind the best possible outcome here is a restoration of the status quo before the war started. And I think that fundamentally speaks to a flaw in the strategy here. And the other thing is the president keeps threatening war crimes. And at a certain point, you know, I think it's obviously horrible for the President to be doing that, but it's maybe more horrible strategically to keep on bluffing about war crimes. At a certain point, the President's words just don't get taken seriously.

John (40:41)

I think the pushback from the administration, though, would be if it's, if we get a peace deal, it won't be just where it was before because they will have been degraded. Theoretically, there'd be this nuclear deal, but also their missile program has been largely, substantially destroyed.

Chris Christie (40:56)

The president's given a bunch of reasons for why he went to war, but the one, I think, the only one that resonates with the American people is the nuclear issue. And if he does not remove all of the nuclear material from Iran, then we are exactly where Ramesh said, we're back at status quo. And we did all of this for essentially what we had beforehand. And if you talk to the people in the region, they're gonna say they're worse off because Iran is now even more emboldened because he also said regime change. And that didn't happen. Look, the real estate team that he sends over there, the Kushner Wyckoff team, with him as the key strategist, meaning the president, they think this is a real estate Deal where you threaten to pull a deal off the table, you threaten horrible ramifications, and then you all get to a bigger, a better deal somewhere in the middle. That's not what it is when you say you're gonna destroy every power plant and every bridge. He has said that before. The more you bluff, the less you're listened to. And the Iranians are not gonna say to themselves, who cares?

Ramesh Panuru (41:59)

And meanwhile, Russia has been given another 30 days to sell their oil again. Where did that come from? Scott Bessen, the Treasury Secretary, said, no, we struck this deal for just a couple of weeks and now 30 more days to enrich Putin and their war against Ukraine. That's something that the administration should also

Chris Christie (42:19)

be held up and hurt the Ukraine.

John (42:20)

And they're looking at gas prices, they're looking at oil prices. And I mean, actually, Bessen gave a guarantee of sorts that it would be down to $3 a barrel by September. I mean, $3 a gallon.

Jonathan Karl (42:34)

Congressional Republicans desperately want this in the rearview mirror and not in the gas tank.

Ro Khanna (42:39)

Right.

Jonathan Karl (42:39)

Because they see the midterms already being a serious problem for Republicans without high gas prices.

John (42:46)

Hey, we don't have much time left, but I do want to get to Eric Swalwell, which, you know, he's. Since we last spoke, he has resigned from Congress. He's dropped out of the race. He was the front runner for governor, Democratic nominee for governor in California, Christie. You think could he be on his way to being prosecuted? I mean, we've seen investigations open up in both coasts.

Chris Christie (43:09)

Look, if the allegations are true, he should be. And look, I think in Republican circles, this guy was always seen as a joke, a self promoter and a joke and arrogant. Little did we know broadly that he was also someone who engaged in some of the sexual acts that's been alleged against him by all of these women. And now, as was typical with this town, John, now everyone's saying, yeah, we heard about that. We've known about that. Well, why don't we start acting on it? And if he deserves to be prosecuted,

John (43:39)

he should just now, clearly we should say he has denied the allegations of sexual assault, sexual misconduct.

Ramesh Panuru (43:46)

There's something larger here about the Congress itself. As a former congressional staffer, why do we wait until, you know, this happens before Congress say, well, we better take a look at our ethics committee. Mr. Gonzalez also resigned this week, and we've known about that for months. There's other members of Congress.

John (44:02)

You got two more in the.

Jonathan Karl (44:04)

But that's the. We had to have both of those things happen. You had to have this conjunction where the Republicans were willing to get rid of one person and the Democrats are willing to get rid of one person in a tightly divided Congress. And it's actually kind of a sad comment, right? Because if you didn't have that coincidence, either one of them could have survived.

John (44:24)

Kevin McCartney.

Chris Christie (44:25)

Two sexual harassers at once have to

John (44:26)

go bipartisan, find partisan balance. When Kevin McCarthy pulled him off the Intelligence Committee, he said, if you had seen the FBI briefing that I saw on Swalwell, this is years ago now, you know, you would see this is what we had to do. I mean, did people not know more? I mean, these are. Because these are allegations beyond even the others.

Ramesh Panuru (44:44)

This is, you know, when these allegations are raised, I think we should give them serious consideration. And I'm glad the Democrats, along with the leaders, decided it was time for Eric to go. But the House needs to clean up his act and the Senate.

John (44:56)

Thank you, Donna. When we come back, my conversation with the man trying to get inside President Trump's head.

Reem Al Hashimi (45:05)

She knows how did you blab?

Chris Christie (45:07)

No. The Devil Wears Prada, too. He's the movie event 20 Years in the making.

John (45:12)

Honestly can't with the secrets anymore. So I think we just.

Nikki Glaser (45:14)

We should tell her.

Jonathan Karl (45:15)

Will you two please spit it out already?

Chris Christie (45:19)

This Friday. Be the first to experience it. Only in theaters.

Nikki Glaser (45:22)

In light of the recent scandal, I'm here to restore your credibility.

Jonathan Karl (45:26)

Oh, cause we're a team now. That's a nice story.

John (45:29)

The Devil wears Prada, the second of

Chris Christie (45:31)

PG13 may be inappropriate for children under 13.

John (45:34)

In theaters Friday.

Steve Ganyard (45:35)

Road to the NBA Finals is happening now on ESPN and abc.

Oz Perl (45:40)

It's make or break now.

Steve Ganyard (45:42)

Best on best now.

Mike Waltz (45:43)

Oh, and a clergyman.

Steve Ganyard (45:45)

Watch him sit with his chest now. Greatness is up for grabs

John (45:51)

and the world is watching.

Oz Perl (45:53)

Just wait on the home of the NBA Finals.

John (45:58)

All the work, all the sacrifices.

Steve Ganyard (46:00)

The NBA playoffs presented by Google. Continue on ESPN and abc.

Oz Perl (46:06)

You asked me a question. What's his birthday?

John (46:08)

Are you ready?

Oz Perl (46:09)

Whatever your ATM pin code, that fake one you made up, write it down on here. Make sure no one can see it. Hold it close to your heart. Close to your heart. No, no. Don't let them see. Don't let anyone see.

John (46:18)

Closer.

Jonathan Karl (46:18)

I'm letting anyone see.

John (46:19)

You challenged me.

Oz Perl (46:20)

You said, I'm thinking of Ken. And then you asked me what's his last. And then you asked me what's his birthday like, how could I even know that? Watch this. Tell us what is his birthday?

Ramesh Panuru (46:30)

December 25th.

Reem Al Hashimi (46:31)

Oh, my God.

Ramesh Panuru (46:31)

1225.

John (46:32)

1225.

Jonathan Karl (46:34)

That's weird.

John (46:38)

Oz Perlman, the mental hosts of the View. I sat down with him this week in New York to see how he's preparing for what might be his biggest performance yet before President Trump and the White House Correspondents Dinner next weekend. So you're doing the White House Correspondents Dinner?

Oz Perl (46:54)

I sure am.

John (46:55)

Why?

Jonathan Karl (46:56)

Why?

John (46:57)

I think I know it's not because of how much they pay you. I mean, I used to run that organization.

Oz Perl (47:01)

Are you reading my mind? I think it's an incredible opportunity, just in terms of being in a room full of skeptical journalists. That is my bread and butter, to amaze people that like getting to the bottom of things. And I think just in terms of the opportunity of seeing just the eyeballs that are gonna see this and the chance to create an incredibly memorable moment with the most powerful person in the world.

John (47:24)

I mean, Trump is gonna be there. I mean, that's what he says. He's been at the dinner. He's never been there as president.

Oz Perl (47:30)

Right. And people, when I was booked, which, you know, kind of the details of how this works, it was several months ago, and they said to me, it's unprecedented. President Trump has never attended one of these while in office, so he probably won't. And I, at that first call, said, he absolutely will. And they go, how do you know that? And I go, you know what I do for a living, right?

John (47:47)

Yeah.

Oz Perl (47:47)

I get people to do certain things.

John (47:49)

So you see this as a big. I mean, look, you're big. You've like. I mean, you've broken through.

Oz Perl (47:54)

I'm not big at all.

John (47:55)

I mean, my God. But you think this could be.

Oz Perl (47:58)

This will be a defining moment for you? Career defining. This has the potential. You never know what will happen. So I want to explain to you. You know the president?

Chris Christie (48:06)

Yeah.

Oz Perl (48:06)

You know the president?

Ro Khanna (48:07)

Oh, yeah.

Oz Perl (48:07)

There is no world in which I can get him to do what I want that he doesn't want.

John (48:12)

You're not political. I mean, I looked. I tried to find any evidence of anything of you political.

Oz Perl (48:18)

I'm not publicly political.

John (48:19)

Yeah.

Oz Perl (48:20)

So, yeah, I mean, privately, I have opinions, but publicly, two things. One, for this specific event and in life in general, I was brought on to not be political.

Chris Christie (48:30)

Right.

Oz Perl (48:30)

My job is not to come in and roast. I don't think that's what I was brought in for. I think I was brought in to unite. Unite in a sense of wonder and amazement. What do I do? I do things that blow you away, that you get to laugh, wow, gasp, and feel like you're a kid.

John (48:43)

Again, before the interview ended, Oz did a couple of tricks on me.

Oz Perl (48:47)

Let's picture this scenario. You're selling a used car, right? Okay. You're selling a used car. And I need this to be something. I know that you do in the moment. You make up. Make up a number for this car. See, right now, in your mind, what's this car? But give me the number that you're listing it for.

John (49:04)

Okay.

Mike Waltz (49:04)

Yeah, yeah.

Oz Perl (49:05)

Say it.

John (49:06)

Say the number. $35,000.

Oz Perl (49:07)

$35,000. Spontaneous. Yes. All right. In your mind, you know you won't take 35 grand. That's what you listed it for.

Ramesh Panuru (49:14)

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

John (49:14)

So watch this.

Oz Perl (49:16)

Here we go. Think in your mind of how far down you'll go. 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26. Shuffling of the feet, little bit of awkwardness.

John (49:28)

You might not get this.

Oz Perl (49:29)

Yeah, probably not. Probably not. Close your eyes. What did you end up on when we shook hands? We went in for the handshake and said, I'll accept it. What was your final lowest number you would have accepted?

John (49:39)

22,499.

Oz Perl (49:41)

$22,499.

John (49:43)

Out of here.

Steve Ganyard (49:44)

Come on.

John (49:45)

So how do you. I mean, that's. Okay, that's.

Oz Perl (49:48)

What color was the car? What color was the car?

John (49:50)

You know, it was.

Oz Perl (49:50)

Wake up, what color?

John (49:51)

It was a burgundy. It was like a burgundy color.

Oz Perl (49:53)

Burgundy. Yeah.

John (49:53)

Yeah. So it wasn't really. It wasn't a red car. It was dark. It wasn't reckless.

Oz Perl (49:58)

It wasn't reckless. It feels to me this is based on the number. No, no, hold on. It's domestic. It's a Mustang, isn't it?

John (50:04)

Yeah, yeah, it's a Mustang. Well, what year is it?

Oz Perl (50:08)

What year is it?

John (50:08)

Yeah, I mean, come on.

Chris Christie (50:12)

I know what year.

Oz Perl (50:13)

Hold on.

John (50:13)

Yeah, what year is it? I mean, that's unfair. I'm being unfair to you. But, I mean, that's insane that you knew it was a Mustang.

Oz Perl (50:25)

1968. Isn't it?

John (50:29)

68. Cause that's the last of those classic Mustangs.

Oz Perl (50:32)

I knew it.

John (50:32)

That's why the price is high.

Oz Perl (50:34)

You know, I would've gone 27.5, but

John (50:36)

I'm a better negotiator than you, and it's in pretty good shape. I mean, I never. I don't own it, but, you know, that's pretty good. That's pretty good. And when it was over, I brought Oz into the ABC newsroom in New York, where, before long, he attracted a crowd and got inside the heads of a couple of my colleagues.

Oz Perl (50:52)

It's Pele, isn't it?

Steve Ganyard (50:54)

Oh, wow. Whoa. That was it.

John (50:58)

We'll be right back. That's all for us today. Thank you for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out World News tonight and have a great day.

Oz Perl (51:11)

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. You chose to hit play on this podcast today. Smart Choice. Make another smart choice with Auto Quote Explorer to compare rates from multiple car insurance companies all at once. Try it@progressive.com Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and

John (51:28)

affiliates not available in all states or situations. Prices vary based on how you buy.