Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump Contradicts Himself Repeatedly On Status, Length Of War; Trump Adds New War Justification, Iran Was Set To Take Over Region; Video Appears To Show U.S. Strike Near Iranian School; Trump Downplays Spikes In Oil Prices Brought By The Iran War; Trump Suggests Democrats To Blame The Shutdown If Sleeper Cells From Iran Attack The U.S. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired March 09, 2026 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST (voice over): Tonight, the pressure mounts, Donald Trump all over the place on the status of the war from very complete to not enough wins, to over very soon.
Plus --
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): I think it's unforgivable under any circumstances.
PHILLIP: -- one of America's first strikes on the first day appears to have killed scores at a girls' school, but the president is backing off his claim.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran.
I just don't know enough about it.
PHILLIP: Also, will the shockwaves to the economy end this war sooner than expected?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: $5.39, $5.59 and $5.79, this is ridiculous. We went from threes to fives.
PHILLIP: And the president suggests any sleeper cell attacks on the homeland should be blamed on Democrats.
TRUMP: The shutdown doesn't allow us to do what we have to do.
PHILLIP: Live at the table, Scott Jennings, Bakari Sellers, Sabrina Singh, Marc Short, Beth Sanner, and Bobby Ghosh.
This is CNN's special live coverage of the war against Iran.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP (on camera): Good evening. I'm Abby Philip in New York.
As the war with Iran gets messier, so does President Trump's messaging about it. Tonight, in the span of about three hours, the president gave wildly different accounts about where the conflict stands right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We've already won in many ways, but we haven't won enough.
I think you'll see it's going to be a short-term excursion.
Short-term, short-term.
We're achieving major strides toward completing our military objective, and some people could say they're pretty well complete.
REPORTER: On Iran, you called it an excursion, you said it would be over soon. Are you thinking this week it will be over?
TRUMP: No.
REPORTER: Are you talking about days?
TRUMP: I think so.
REPORTER: Okay. And with respect to --
TRUMP: Very soon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Now, it's not clear what the actual status of the war is, but the president's comments contradict what his own defense secretary said just recently.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: What I want your viewers to understand is this is only just the beginning.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Hegseth's Department of War echoed that statement writing on social media just hours before Trump spoke, we have only just begun to fight.
And if you're keeping track of all the various reasons why the Trump administration decided to go to war with Iran, the president offered up a new justification today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Iran's a very powerful country. They were going to take over the Middle East. If we did not hit them, they were going to take over the Middle East. They had thousands and thousands -- since their last hit, they had thousands and thousands of missiles and everything else.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: What are the American people supposed to believe, Marc?
MARC SHORT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Look, I think the American people should know that for 47 years, Iran's been trying to attack Americans and westerners for 47 years. They've launched attacks on Marines in Lebanon. They've funded Hezbollah. They funded Hamas. And so I think they should know the president is committed to trying to demilitarize Iran and take away the offensive capability that they have.
PHILLIP: But don't they deserve real answers about where this war is right now, where it's headed, how long it may be, what the military objectives are, how close we are to reaching those objectives, any of that?
SHORT: I think some of the objectives could be clear. And I think one thing that would be helpful is if the administration had fewer people speaking on their behalf. I think that would help keep the messaging simpler. But I don't know that that there is confusion as to where we are in this offensive, Abby. I think that we've clearly eliminated the navy for Iran. We've clearly eliminated the air force. We've taken away a lot of their offensive capabilities. And so I think there is still a question of like what is the long-term mission here, but I think there's not a question about what's been happening thus far.
SABRINA SINGH, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: I think Marc is right that this administration has taken incredible military action to eliminate Iran's naval capabilities, air defenses, I mean, you name it, but I think the president's also trying to have it both ways and saying that we've eliminated all of these military capabilities and. We have to continue to go on because they posed such a threat where, you know, last year in June you heard this administration take a winning lapsing that we've destroyed and obliterated all their military capabilities.
So, I think you're hearing conflicting messages because no one can also get on the same page and have the same picture of where Iran actually is.
PHILLIP: And to that point, I mean, the president said, you heard him saying that Iran was about to take over the Middle East had they not struck.
[22:05:03]
But here's what the rest of his administration has been saying over the last few weeks and over the last year. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: That regime is probably weaker than has ever been.
HEGSETH: This president sees the threat plainly and acts decisively. No more half measures, especially when Iran is at its weakest.
RUBIO: This is the weakest they've ever been. Now is the time to go after him.
MIEK WALTZ, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: The reason President Trump went now is because they were at their weakest point.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: So, look, I mean, I guess the real question is why not just tell the truth? I mean, if the truth is what Marc said, which is that Iran is a nuisance, we decided to take them out regardless of the immediate threat that they posed in this moment, why not just say that and then also tell us what you want to see at the end of the day? Is it a new regime? Is it just that you want to take out their capabilities? I think honesty is the piece that I think is missing here.
BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, I mean, look, Iran absolutely a threat, right? So, the why of Iran isn't, I think, in dispute, at least it's not with me. It's the why now. And I think that the why now matters because there was this kind of improvisation going on, and I feel like we almost kind of stumbled into this by accident and therefore the lack of clarity about what we want, you know, it produced that.
So, you know, I went to the National War College, I studied war, and it's very clear what you're supposed to do. You're supposed to have ends as the first thing you define, and then you work on ways and means in order to get there. And instead, I think we're focused kind of on ways and means, and we kind of miss the end. But the end is very clear and it has been very well-defined by the Defense Department, you know, end the navy, end the missile threat, make sure that there isn't nuclear. And we've achieved those things or are very close. And that's what the president said today, right?
So, I kind of sense that if he had just almost stuck with what we were this afternoon, maybe we would be on a different path, but somebody talked to him and we're in this kind of, oh, wait, maybe we're not over yet.
PHILLIP: We can keep going. But what about the political aspect of it, because that's the other thing that the president keeps bringing up. He wants to see a more compliant, more pliable regime, and he doesn't seem to be getting that. Let me just play what a senior Iranian official told CNN this week in an interview.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAMAL KHAZAR, FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER, OFFICE OF THE SUPREME LEADER: I don't see any room for diplomacy anymore. Iranian military is quite strong, as you see, because they have the motivation, they have the arms that they need, which are produced in Iran. As a matter of fact, we are not dependent on any other country for weapons and arms.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: So, there's that. There's the fact that Ali Khameini's son is a hardliner, is -- has been appointed as the new supreme leader. On the political side of things, are we going to then not beat the president's own objectives, which is to have an Iran that he can work with, an Iran that's doing what he wants them to do?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I mean, what does he want them to do? He wants them to not have nuclear weapons. He wants them to not have a ballistic missile program. He wants them to not have an aggressive navy. And he wants them to not be an exporter of terrorism around the world.
Now, whatever happens to the next regime, I don't know, but I know this, we will not permit them to do any of those things.
The nuclear piece to me is the most important. You cannot have a nuclear-armed Iran. They showed up at the negotiations with Witkoff and said, oh, well, we've got enough material to make 11 nuclear weapons. Well, I think having them described as ultimately being compliant or someone you can work with, I don't think that's the vector.
But you have to understand about these people is that they're fanatics. They would like to bring about the end of the world by causing a nuclear war that brings in, you know, the religious piece of this for them. So, they're not going to ever be compliant about that. They have this worldview. We have to take away their capacity to enact that worldview, which is to me why the nuclear piece is vital issue. You cannot have them sitting out there with any material --
PHILLIP: For now. But then what, I guess, the question.
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think we're talking about the leadership of Iran. We're talking about the individuals who the ones you were referring to, because I actually agree with everybody at the table. I know this is a show where we come on and we're supposed to, you know, have our differing opinions and probably climb across the table.
But the facts are this. We had an Iran nuclear deal, which, however you feel about it, Iran was not closer to a nuclear weapon when that deal was in place than when Donald Trump tore it up. We know that. I mean, Barack Obama actually went out and actually negotiated with these people and had an Iran nuclear deal.
[22:10:05]
And now we're talking about, we have six soldiers, six people --
PHILLIP: Seven now.
SELLERS: Seven who have died. Nobody's mentioned that yet. We have seven people.
And the part about it that drives them the American public crazy is they don't know why. They're afraid of having another Afghanistan. They're afraid of having another Iraq. I mean, you can't --
JENNINGS: It's been one week. It's literally been one week.
(CROSSTALKS)
SINGH: Scott actually is right. I agree with Scott on the nuclear program.
SELLERS: Why do we minimalize that though?
SINGH: But I actually -- I think Scott makes -- and like we were -- we've been talking about this, like the nuclear program is something that everyone is concerned about. But an air campaign alone is not going to get at the nuclear program. It actually gets it --
SELLERS: I mean, we didn't obliterate their -- we did not obliterate their nuclear program.
SINGH: No, I completely agree with you.
JENNINGS: No, we obliterated facilities. But obviously they retained nuclear material and they also -- and I think the key issues is --
PHILLIP: Isn't that relevant? Isn't that relevant? I mean, if that's the -- I think that's what my follow up to what you said earlier was all of those objectives, military objectives, it seems plausible that they can be achieved in this moment. But if you have a regime that is fundamentally more radicalized and aimed at the same things as they were before, it's just a matter of time. It seems like it's a matter of time before they rearm, before they reconstitute their missile program or their drone program or their nuclear program.
And so are we just deferring this?
SANNER: I mean, we could be. I think that, you know, look. Israel has been mowing the grass, as they call it. It's kind of an unpleasant phrase, but it's like, you know, you look at the problem set and if it pops up whack-a-mole, you whack it down again, right? That's been the path that we're on. And so here's where I hear the president this afternoon talking. He says, you know, if we're not going to change this regime, we might as well just like get rid of it once and for all.
And so there is an issue that, you know, we've wade into this war of choice, a war of choice. It was not a threat. I completely disagree with the president that the United States' immediate interests were at threat at this moment, I do not agree with that, but, you know, here we are. And I think that this is something that we all have to grapple with. What is the threat? Is it better to keep mowing the grass?
I think that maybe in the long run it is because I think that Iran will not have the missile capability to strike us. Iran will not have the nuclear capability to strike us. And we can watch and see whether it reconstitutes. Should we be doing a deal with the devil? This is a question Americans should be answering. And I think it's complicated.
(CROSSTALKS)
SHORT: It's hard to say that there's not a threat. And just a couple years ago, they slaughtered thousands of Israelis. They continue to fund those terror -- the terrorist attacks on westerners.
PHILLIP: Sure.
SHORT: And that has not stopped. So, to say they're not a threat, I don't agree with that.
PHILLIP: Well, I guess --
(CROSSTALKS)
SANNER: Well, asymmetric threat, but they're not going to have missiles to do what they were doing.
PHILLIP: They're not bad actors --
SANNER: -- because they're taken care of
PHILLIP: But hold on. Nobody's suggesting that they're not bad actors. I think the question is, the bar for the United States to engage in offensive military action is a threat to us on the homeland. And I do think that that's what has always been in question. That's why the administration itself at the beginning tried to make it sound like there was an imminent threat when there wasn't. They later acknowledged --
SELLERS: I mean, I guess my question to Marc and Scott is like, so we all agree on Iran not being a great actor to say the least, right, over the last 47 years, as you articulated very clearly when you opened up. I mean, Iran has been -- has just funded terrorism. I mean, they are a bad actor on the world stage. They're a threat to our greatest ally in Israel in the Middle East. Like we -- I agree with you wholeheartedly. But what we're not getting, and one of the reasons why I wish Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump actually went to Congress so we could have this debate, like that's why you do it. And I think they would've actually been more successful than they would've guessed.
SINGH: Or used his State of the Union to outline --
SHORT: But what is --
JENNINGS: To telegraphed to the enemy that we were (INAUDIBLE).
(CROSSTALKS)
SELLERS: How do we get out of it? And my last question is how do we make sure 7 is not 14, or 21, or 700? Like what's the cost?
PHILLIP: And when do we stop?
SELLERS: Correct.
PHILLIP: Let me just say we have more to discuss on this as we go ahead, much, much more.
New evidence appears that the U.S. is responsible for the strike on an Iranian school, and tonight the president is responding to that.
Plus, between the markets and gas prices, are the economic shockwaves going to be the thing that ends this war sooner? Trump is making a huge threat to Iran over oil tonight.
Stay with us.
[22:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, more evidence of the U.S. was likely behind the strike on that school in Iran. Iranian media says that it killed at least 168 children and 14 teachers. This video shows what experts say is a U.S. Tomahawk missile striking an Iranian navy base right next to that school the same day the school was struck.
This weekend, President Trump insisted it was Iran who attacked the school, and today he appeared to somewhat back off that claim, but he still suggested that it could have been Iran.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I will say that the Tomahawk, which is one of the most powerful weapons around, is used by -- you know, is sold and used by other countries.
[22:20:05]
You know that. Whether it's Iran or somebody else, the fact that a Tomahawk, a Tomahawk is very generic, it's sold to other countries. But that's being investigated right now.
REPORTER: You just suggested that Iran somehow got its hands on a Tomahawk and bombed its own elementary school on the first day of the war, but you're the only person in your government saying this. Why are you the only person saying this?
TRUMP: Because I just don't know enough about it. I think it's something that I was told is under investigation. But Tomahawks are used by others, as you know. Numerous other nations have Tomahawks. They buy them from us. But I will certainly -- whatever the report shows, I'm willing to live with that report.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: But experts tell CNN the Tomahawk missiles are not generic. And while other countries, like the United Kingdom and Australia do possess them, Iran does not. But Pete Hegseth is striking also a very different tone from the president on this story. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HEGSETH: Well, we're still investigating, and that's where I'll leave it today. But what I will emphasize to you and to the world is that unlike our adversaries, the Iranians, we never target civilians.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was a report late in the week from two officials that it was likely U.S. involvement. Is that report false?
HEGSETH: I've already said we're investigating.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you could tell the American public it definitively was not us, you would tell us, wouldn't you?
HEGSETH: I would say that it's being investigated, which is the only answer I'm prepared to give.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: It is a question whether they would tell us because the president acknowledged in his comments today that he didn't know what happened. I have questions about why that is at this stage. But also then he spins this whole false narrative about, it could have been anyone, including the Iranians, because everybody has tomahawks, when that's very much not true. I mean, if you're anyone listening to that, how can you believe that they are interested in getting to the truthful answer here?
SINGH: Well, you know, I will not agree with Pete Hegseth that often, but I think he did give the right response in that interview that this is under investigation. It does have to be looked at. And because when something goes under investigation, especially by the Department of Defense, you have to let the investigation play out even if there is definitive video. And I think that is important that he acknowledged that.
I will say that when I was at the Department of Defense under Secretary Austin, we had a center of excellence that mitigated civilian harm. That was an office that was basically been completely gutted by Secretary Hegseth by I think like 90 percent. But these were civilians embedded with combatant commands, such as CENTCOM, that would launch strikes and be part of their targeting process.
So, I'm not saying that is why this strike happened. I think there has to be an investigation.
PHILLIP: And why is Trump misleading about it, because he is misleading about it?
SELLERS: But, I mean, but I hear you. Lloyd Austin was former commander general of St. Tom, four star general, Pete Hegseth, Fox News host.
SINGH: Yes, very different resumes.
SELLERS: Okay, very different resumes.
JENNINGS: Decorated military. SELLERS: Very different resumes.
JENNINGS: Decorated military.
SELLERS: There is no one -- there is --
JENNINGS: Do you not acknowledge that the man served?
SELLERS: There is -- the man served. Yes, the man served. He definitely --
JENNINGS: Highly decorated.
SINGH: Not in combat.
SELLERS: Not in combat.
JENNINGS: Hegseth?
SINGH: He wasn't in combat.
SHORT: Iraq and Afghanistan.
JENNINGS: I mean, he -- the man served --
PHILLIP: And he, I think, had a bronze star for his services.
SELLERS: But my point that I want to get back to is that there is a level of competence that the American public is thirsting for that they are not getting from Pete Hegseth, and we're seeing that. When he is up there --
SINGH: Transparency.
SELLERS: Transparency, that's all we want. We're talking about 160 children that were killed. All we want is an honest answer that comes from you and the president of the United States. This isn't politics. This isn't Lindsey Graham versus Cory Booker.
This is just, tell us what we're doing. Because we have seven soldiers, as Abby corrected me last segment, we have seven soldiers who've died. We have 160 children who've died. We understand that this is the fog of war. However, we want a level of competence from Pete Hegseth that we're not getting.
SANNER: I do think that we are going to know --
JENNINGS: What is incompetent about this military operation, in your opinion, in your expert opinion?
SELLERS: I don't -- first of all, I never served. And let me just -- let me start by saying that.
JENNINGS: You're quick to say this is incompetent. I want to know --
SELLERS: No. I think Pete Hegseth is incompetent. JENNINGS: Why? What's happening?
SELLERS: Because he has an inability to tell the truth.
JENNINGS: What did he say that was false?
SELLERS: Because we know what happened.
JENNINGS: No, we don't. They're investigating.
PHILLIP: Well, I mean, look, there is -- wait, hold on.
SELLERS: No, no, no, no, no. I want all of you all to go out on a limb right now and tell me that the United States, even during the fog of war, did not kill those kids. Tell me they didn't.
JENNINGS: I don't know. They're investigating it. And I'm willing to abide by the results.
(CROSSTALKS)
PHILLIP: It is fine and important for there to be an investigation. I actually think Major Garrett's last question might have been the most --
SELLERS: Was the most important.
PHILLIP: -- important, which is if the investigation does find that we are responsible, would you tell us? Because I think that's what, to me, when I think about the United States military and how we act on the world stage, that is one of the main things that makes us different.
[22:25:01]
SANNER: Right. And I think that right now we have to assume, and I'm going to assume that the U.S. military, because the level of these investigations are handled is like nowhere near any political thing. My thing, I believe that the U.S. military will conduct a very fair and thorough investigation and they will come up with the answer.
I looked at the imagery myself. I think the answer is going to be that we did it. But I don't know because I'm just looking at imagery, right, just like the Americans are. But I think --
PHILLIP: I mean, I know they'll do an investigation, but will they tell us?
SANNER: So, I think that it'll come out, so if the military investigators come out with that is the answer, if they do not tell the truth at that moment, if they suppress that, we know we are in a completely different --
SELLERS: I don't think anybody has -- I don't think anybody has faith that Pete Hegseth will stand in front of a camera and say that we did this -- SANNER: But mistakes happen in war.
SHORT: Did you call for the same transparency when Lloyd Austin was AWOL, he had his medical issues and was not present.
SELLERS: He wasn't AWOL. He had a medical issue.
SINGH: And there was an investigation into that and we released.
SHORT: And there was an investigation.
SELLERS: She was there.
SINGH: I was there.
SELLERS: She's saying she was there.
SINGH: Yes, I was there. We released not only that investigation, we released about the withdrawal, we released about Afghanistan and Iraq. No, no, we released every single investigation, and he took full accountability and responsibility for that.
JENNINGS: Did you agree with the president when the president, after all the Afghanistan investigations judge to be a raging success, President Biden.
SINGH: Well, I didn't say -- well, I didn't say that. And also he didn't say.
(CROSSTALKS)
SINGH: No. And he actually expressed a celebrity of the moment of the withdrawal.
PHILLIP: Investigations into the Afghanistan withdrawal and all the failures that went into that.
JENNINGS: I know, but the commander-in-chief still thinks it was great.
PHILLIP: So, that was done and --
SINGH: I do not think he came out with the deaths of service members were there -- when we had death service members --
PHILLIP: Are you suggesting --
JENNINGS: You checked his watch at the remains transferred, didn't he?
SINGH: I mean --
SELLERS: First of all, Donald Trump -- literally. Donald Trump literally was talking about ballrooms after six soldiers died and wore a hat.
JENNINGS: I think the most important thing Hegseth said, and all Americans need to know and understand this, the difference between us and the enemy, we do not target civilians. When it happens, and it will happen in war, it is tragic and it is not meant to be. The enemy targets civilians. They hide behind civilians. They fund people who set up bases in hospitals so that civilians are in the way. That's not what we do.
An investigation needs to occur. All the truth needs to be told. And we will give transparency to the American people. But there's two parts of this war, our part and the enemy. The enemy target surveillance. Look what they're doing all over the region, firing missiles --
PHILLIP: But the story doesn't end there, Scott. The story is not just we don't target civilians. It is also that when mistakes happen on the battlefield, we take accountability for them. That's the important, that's the important part.
SELLERS: Nobody has faith in this administration.
SHORT: You're presuming a lot.
PHILLIP: Well, no. I mean --
SHORT: The investigation is not over yet.
PHILLIP: Well, listen, I'm just -- I started by asking the basic question, why is the president of the United States misleading about some basic information about who has Tomahawk missiles and who doesn't? Answer that.
SHORT: Abby, I think the investigation's still going on. I don't know why he said people have -- other countries have Tomahawks.
PHILLIP: And then why is he saying as if it is fact --
SHORT: (INAUDIBLE) investigation. So, why do you assume they're not going to be honest to the American people?
PHILLIP: Okay. So, why is he stating as if it is fact when the investigation hasn't been completed that Iran was responsible?
SHORT: Look, what we do know --
PHILLIP: That's why I'm asking these questions, because the president is making false statements about something that is awful.
SHORT: Yes. And it's tragic. It's tragic, period. It's an absolute tragedy.
JENNINGS: Yes.
SHORT: We also know that I ran funded people who raped and killed young girls in Israel.
PHILLIP: Trust me, I understand that fully. And there's actually -- there is no equivalency between Iran's malignants on the world stage and this. And, in fact, it is the opposite of an equivalency. It's actually an insistence on the United States upholding its own standards.
SELLERS: We just have a higher standard.
PHILLIP: That's what it's for.
SHORT: Of course.
PHILLIP: And, listen, don't -- and, listen --
(CROSSTALKS)
SELLERS: But we cannot -- I say this all the time. You know, when you roll around with pigs, you both get dirty, but the pig likes it, right? But we cannot drag ourselves down to that level of depravity. And all I want --
JENNINGS: We're not.
SELLERS: We're not. I believe that the American public, when you have soldiers who go to battle, who die, deserve truth and honesty and accountability, and that's all I want. And I'm just saying that from my perspective, one that's naive, country boy from South Carolina, right, I don't believe Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump to be honest, because they can't tell you the truth about simple things.
SINGH: Can I just jump in on, but what Bakari's saying, because I do, I take your point on the honesty and transparency into what Abby's saying. It's like why did the president lie about this? It's so blatant. If Iran had Raytheon technology, that would be a huge problem.
I do think that we have to acknowledge here -- Raytheon makes the Tomahawks.
[22:30:00]
So, I think we have to acknowledge here that Congress has a role to play, and Congress, to the questions about the Secretary's health, the questions about the Afghanistan withdrawal, they also have an oversight committee that can conduct an investigation and can demand records from the department that we also supplied during that time. So I think Congress has a voice.
PHILLIP: Look, you know, Laura Ingraham, I think, has been sending a few messages about this directly to the administration, not only saying that there needs to be accountability, it has to be addressed publicly, but also saying that it needs to be wrapped, the investigation needs to be wrapped up quickly and addressed head on.
I think speed is actually important here, because if you wait for the news outlets to do their sort of layman's investigation, you can at least say some, I know there's going to be a full picture of this in great detail, but the administration could say more than they're saying now, and they could tell the President to stop misleading. That's the other thing that they could do.
And I think that part of that is that, you know, the President is not on message because someone didn't tell him what the message was.
BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, AND FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Right, I mean, I don't really, you know, I'm not, I'm guessing that he's not, like, willfully blaming Iran when he knows, I just feel like this whole thing is a lot of not really telling each other what they're supposed to say. This entire episode is filled and not well-informed. They could do a better job.
PHILLIP: Next for us, rising gas prices are sending shockwaves through the United States economy and global markets. We'll debate if the President can keep downplaying it as, quote, a little glitch. Another special guest is going to be with us at the table, that's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: President Trump is promising death, fire and fury to Iran if they stop the flow of oil in the Strait of Hormuz. He says that Iran will be hit 20 times harder than they already have been if they do anything to the ships in that strait.
The threat comes as the average cost of a gallon of regular gas in America has reached $3.52, that is $0.55 higher than it was when the war started with Iran.
Now, Trump says that he's not concerned about that surge. He told ABC News that it was, quote, "fine and a little glitch." And on Truth Social, he said "short-term oil prices is a very small price to pay," he added, "only fools would think differently."
He remained confident today. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We're putting an end to all of this threat once and for all, and the result will be lower oil prices, oil and gas prices for American families.
Well, we're looking to keep the oil prices down. We went artificially up because of this excursion into a very positive thing. I mean, this was an excursion that a lot of people wouldn't have done.
I knew oil prices would go up if I did this, and they've gone up probably less than I thought they'd go up. But I don't think anybody thought we were going to be this quickly successful.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Bobby Ghosh is joining us at the table. And Bobby, I want to play for you, this is another quote from an Iranian official interviewed by our friend, Fred Pleitgen.
And I have to note that CNN operates in Iran only with government permission, but we're able to get these pretty much immediate reactions. And here's what they said about how they view the oil threat in this conflict. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SR. INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: How does all of this end, then? If you say right now there's no room for negotiation, President Trump says he wants complete surrender. What does that lead to?
KAMAL KHARAZI, FOREIGN POLICY ADVISOR TO THE OFFICE OF THE SUPREME LEADER: There's no room unless the economic pressure would be built up to the extent that other countries would intervene to guarantee this termination of aggression of Americans and Israelis against Iran.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Iran seems to understand that they can put the screw, turn the screws on the economic stuff and that that might be actually the thing that brings this conflict to an end.
BOBBY GHOSH, COLUMNIST AND GEOPOLITICS ANALYST: They've said that all along. This is not the first time they've said it.
They've said this for years, that that is their ultimate weapon. They can block the Straits of Hormuz. And now, finally, they're demonstrating.
We should expect a certain amount of braggadocio from both sides in the middle of the war, so I would discount a little bit, certainly, the tone that the Iranian official is taking. But it's not surprising that they would use the oil weapon, if you like.
The thing is that if that's your weapon, then what you're doing essentially is you are inviting your enemies to try and inflict much more damage much quicker. If you think that patience is your virtue, then you're basically inviting the other side to try and checkmate that patience by going in harder and faster.
PHILLIP: And actually, that's what Trump signaled tonight.
GHOSH: That's right.
PHILLIP: He signaled that when he said, we will take out easily destroyable targets, we'll make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever build back as a nation again. Death, fire and fury will rain upon them. I have to say that is an expansion of the threat beyond the military that is different.
GHOSH: And the F.T. did a story overnight that basically points out that the United States and Israel have not yet targeted Karg Island. Karg Island is an island in the Persian Gulf, which is absolutely crucial to Iran's oil industry. [22:40:08]
Most of Iran's oil exports of refined petroleum comes from Karg Island. That has not been touched at all, which is actually quite striking and surprising. And when the President says we could hit them a lot harder, if I had to guess, that's where it would be.
PHILLIP: But he is sensitive to the oil prices rising, because he thinks that's the key to his whole economic argument to the American people. When gas prices go down, everything goes down, is what he said.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SR. POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, AND FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO GEORGE W. BUSH: I mean, every President is sensitive to that.
You know, gas station signs are like America's economic scoreboard. When they're going up, you feel like you're losing. When they're going down, you feel like you're winning.
And so all political leaders are sensitive to that. It was interesting, you know, the barrel of price spiked overnight in the early morning and then throughout the day. Today it crashed, it wound up around $86 at the end of the day today.
So it felt like people sort of panicked and then all of a sudden realized, you know, there's a path forward here that's not necessarily going to be a huge problem. It's not the supply of oil in the world that's the issue, it's obviously just the logistics of the strait there. And to the extent people have some kind of confidence that we can keep that open, I think this is likely to keep going.
PHILLIP: I mean, that is a supply problem. That is a supply problem.
JENNINGS: Not for the United States.
PHILLIP: It's a supply problem for the global market.
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, AND FORMER SOUTH CAROLINA DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE: But it's something we've been talking about the entire show tonight. I mean, there has to be some end game. There has to be some transparency, there has to be some honesty and accountability.
Because of the American public, when we see gas prices go up, when you read headlines about XYZ or soldiers dying or kids dying, we need to know how we're getting out of this. And when Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump refused to outline a plan to get out of this, like, I'm not arguing the logistics that you talked about so eloquently.
I'm simply talking about the politics of the matter. If gas prices continue to go up and elections in November, people will, I mean, Republicans all around the country will begin to tighten up because at the end of the day, you're not going to win those elections. We'll continue to see those headlines and we're not getting that truth out.
GHOSH: I think you're exactly, forgive me. I think you're exactly right. I think, again, this is a matter of communication.
If the President now saying, this is just a blip, I knew this was happening, why didn't you tell us a week ago, listen, we're going into this. There will be a little blip.
SELLERS: There'll be some pain.
GHOSH: There will be some pain. You know, understand that that's what happens at the time of war. The oil prices will go up and then they'll come down.
PHILLIP: I think that he didn't say that because he doesn't know that that's true and it may not be true. I mean, it may not be that this is short. It may not be that oil prices will actually stay low because one of the reasons that those changes happen is because the President, right before the markets closed, said that this thing was going to end soon and then he said the opposite.
SINGH: But the markets reacted to his words because if they think it's going to wrap up soon, the markets reacted to that and that's why the barrel, the price dropped to about $85, $95.
JENNINGS: It was happening all day. Not just at one moment.
SINGH: But I also, I also think, I think the President is going to Ohio on Wednesday and last week the price of oil in Ohio, or gas, was $2.77. Today it's $3.43.
It's going to keep going up and I think the President on Wednesday is going to have to make the real case to Ohioans on why your gas prices are going up, which also might mean airline flights might be going up, your fertilizer prices might be going up. And that is going to hit, I think, pretty hard in a state like Ohio.
PHILLIP: All right. And also for us tonight, Cities on a high alert after Trump implies the terror sleeper cells may be coming active right here at home. After a close call in New York City this weekend, we'll discuss the aftermath next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight Donald Trump says that he has someone, that someone should be blamed if there is an Iranian attack on the homeland.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Has Iran activated any sleeper cells inside the U.S.? There's reports that they have pressed that trigger button to activate those cells, at least abroad.
TRUMP: Well, we've been, they've been trying for a long time. And we've been very much on top of it. One of the things we have to do is get the Democrats to stop the Democrat shutdown. Because as you know, the apparatus that looks into that, Schumer and the Democrats have shut it down, which tells you they probably hate our country a lot.
We're watching every single one of them. Yes, we know a lot about them. But the shutdown doesn't allow us to do what we have to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Anxieties are already high. And over the weekend, two men were charged with using a weapon of mass destruction and providing material support to ISIS after a pair of homemade bombs were thrown at anti-Muslim protesters outside of the New York City mayor's residence on Saturday.
That attack, according to the NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tish, is not related to what's going on in Iran. So is it fair to blame Democrats when things like that happen?
MARC SHORT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR DURING THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Abby, I think it's unconscionable that Democrats are not funding Department of Homeland Security when we're in a military conflict with the world's greatest sponsor of terrorism.
At this point in time, it's a notion that Democrats will say, well, we need change in policy. You've had the secretary fired, you've had Homan replaced, you've had ICE agents pull out of Minneapolis.
This is a pure political stunt that they're playing. And it's incredibly risky right now to be doing that when we're at war with the greatest sponsor of terror in the world.
[22:50:03]
SINGH: Respectfully, we control no lever of power in government right now. Democrats are in the minority in everything. So I think it's unfair to put blame solely on the Democrats for horrific actions that are happening in New York
SHORT: You know as well as I do that you need 60 votes in the Senate. And so all Republicans voted to fund the government, and it's only Democrats who voted against it.
SELLERS: Marc, I have a great deal of respect for you.
I love you to death. But I think that what is incomprehensible is the fact that we have seen the Department of Homeland Security, and we have a short memory, murder Americans in the streets. And that is the reaction.
And yes, you're right. Times have changed. Things are different now.
We're at war now. I agree with that. I wish that we could have eight people who run this country, who are the most powerful people in the world, get in a room and work this out. But the fact is the Department of Homeland Security, they ran amok. We saw the images. We saw the images of Renee Good get--
SHORT: Gunned down in the streets. So your solution is to keep more Americans vulnerable?
SELLERS: No. Not at all.
GHOSH: There's another point to be made here, which is that it is a little bit precious for the President to be crying about the Democrats not funding the security apparatus. Just a few weeks ago, before all the shutdown stuff was going on, Kash Patel fired from the FBI a group of officers.
Guess what? Their job is to study Iran.
That was done by his FBI director, it was not done by the Democrats. This is an administration that has systematically weakened our own ability to deal with these sleeper cells.
And now to say that we should be worried about sleeper cells? That's a little rich, don't you think?
SHORT: There's more acknowledging they're sleeper cells than you're basically acknowledging.
SINGH: There definitely are.
SHORT: You're acknowledging the solution is, hey, let's not fund them. Let's not frame them.
GHOSH: So why did they fire these guys? Why did we fire the FBI guys? Sleeper cells. They tried to kill my friend here in New York City.
SHORT: -- Trump administration a lot of things. That doesn't mean I'm sitting here and say, hey, the solution is let's not fund Homeland Security.
GHOSH: They tried to kill an Iranian-American friend of mine here in New York City. There's no doubt that there are sleeper cells. We should be doubling up on the FBI's capacity to do that.
SINGH: And Democrats and Republicans are highlighting that.
GHOSH: Firing people who know how to do this is not the great place to start.
JENNINGS: But does anyone here believe that we should keep the Department of Homeland Security, that's the name of it, indefinitely shut down to try to force ICE policy changes on an agency that's already funded until 2029, when you acknowledge they're sleeper cells, when we all see radical Islamic terrorists throwing IEDs in New York City, when we saw a radical Muslim terrorist shoot up a bar in Austin, when we had tornadoes in Oklahoma and Michigan this weekend, when we had TSA lines of five hours in airports.
We had all these things going on. Is it even remotely reasonable to keep it closed?
SELLERS: What I believe is that Democrats and Republicans need to get their shit together. Everybody does at this particular time.
Kash Patel, Kristi Noem, look as if they're swimming at a time when we need strong leadership. We don't have it.
That's what we're thirsting for.
PHILLIP: Marc made it interesting, and I think you laid out actually a lot of changes that suggest that the administration acknowledged that they needed to make a change in terms of how their immigration enforcement was operating. It seems to me they've already moved quite a bit, but only a few other things, like masks and masks reinforcing Fourth Amendment protections, that would get them over the finish line.
Why can't we get over the finish line and why not just lay that all out on the table and say, hey, Democrats, you wanted this? Here you go. Let's open the government up.
SHORT: I think Republicans, you just said, have given a lot of concessions on the policy they had, Abby. I think they've basically given them a lot of things that Democrats asked for. At this point, again, Sabrina's point about Republicans controlling all areas of government, it requires 60 votes in the Senate.
Every Republican has voted for it, every Democrat has voted against it.
PHILLIP: Don't you think that by comparison to the scope of the issue, masks on DHS agents and again, reiterating existing Fourth Amendment protections are actually kind of small ball?
It seems to me like that seems like an easy thing that Republicans could say, yes, we're going to make some adjustments on that. Let's reopen the government.
SHORT: I agree with you. I agree with you on the masking, Abby. But I think it's small ball on both sides.
SELLERS: Yes. I just said that. I literally just said that.
PHILLIP: Exactly.
SELLERS: We don't have any agreement. Thank you, I'm sorry. But leadership matters.
PHILLIP: There you go.
SELLERS: Leadership matters.
PHILLIP: We came to an agreement on that one, everyone. Thank you very much for being here.
Next, we'll remember the seventh American soldier that was lost in this conflict. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHILLIP: Tonight, the seventh service member killed in the Iran war was brought home.
Vice President Vance, Secretary Hegseth and General Caine oversaw the dignified transfer of 26-year-old Army Sergeant Benjamin Pennington. He sustained injuries during an attack in Saudi Arabia last week. He's from Glendale, Kentucky, and Pennington enlisted in the Army in 2017 and was assigned to 1st Space Battalion, 1st Space Brigade, a unit that is within the Army Space and Missile Defense Command.
[23:00:03]
His unit's commanding officer said that Pennington was dedicated and led with strength, professionalism and a sense of duty. He received multiple awards over the course of his service, and he will be posthumously promoted to Staff Sergeant. Our thoughts and our prayers are with his entire family and the families of all those who've been lost.
