Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Pentagon: Six Troops Killed In Crash Of Refueling Plane; Hegseth On Strait Of Hormuz: "Don't Need To Worry About It"; Nation On Edge After Terror Attacks In Michigan, Virgina; AAA: Average Gas Prices Hit $3.63, Up 22 Percent Since War Began; Trump Says Rising Oil Prices Are "Small Price To Pay" For Peace; Poll: Nearly 80 Percent Of Americans Think Terror Attack Likely. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired March 13, 2026 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Welcome to Inside Politics. I'm Dana Bash in Washington, and we start with the breaking news.

The U.S. military confirms all six American service members aboard an air force refueling plane were killed after crashing in western Iraq. Officials say they are still investigating but believe the plane did not come under hostile fire or friendly fire.

All week, President Trump has given conflicting answers on how and when the war in Iran will end, but now he's setting a more personal benchmark. Here's what he said on the Brian Kilmeade show on Fox Radio.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (voiceover): When it's over, and I don't think it's going to be long, when it's over this is going to bounce right back so fast.

BRIAN KILMEADE, FOX & FRIENDS, CO-ANCHOR (voiceover): When you're going to know when it's over?

TRUMP (voiceover): When I feel it.

KILMEADE (voiceover): OK.

TRUMP (voiceover): When I feel it in my bones.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: When I feel it in my bones. The Trump administration is also downplaying the escalating crisis in the Strait of Hormuz as Iranian attacks choke the world's oil supply. The president told -- excuse me, told Fox, quote, these ships should go through the Strait of Hormuz and show some guts. There's nothing to be afraid of. And here's how the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth summed it up this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: As the world is seeing they are exercising sheer desperation in the Strait of Hormuz, something we're dealing with. We have been dealing with it, and don't need to worry about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Don't need to worry about it. Well, I want to talk to retired Air Force Colonel Cedric Leighton and CNN's Phil Mattingly.

Colonel Leighton, I want to start with you, don't need to worry about what's happening in the Strait of Hormuz. He did emphasize the weakened Iranian leadership, the depleted military stock, and also what has happened to the Iranian navy. But here is the reality. The reality is that traffic in the Strait is still very low, and the images that we have seen from there are tankers on fire. Talk about what is happening there in reality from a military point of view.

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON, U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.): Yeah. So, from a military point of view, Dana, what we're looking at is a effective blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Now they haven't deployed very many mines on the Iranian side, but the threat of that deployment is really what's stopping everything from moving forward. So, you have these ships on both sides of the Strait of Hormuz off the coast of the U.A.E. on one side, and off the coast of Oman on the other side of the Strait.

And the reason they're waiting is because the risk is so high. This is basically a risk calculation that the tankers and the cargo vessels are making. And they're taking into account that not only are their mines, but the Iranians could attack them with missiles, like we saw off the coast of Iraq, and that is really what's going on here. This is a very dangerous place.

It is reminiscent of what happened in the 1980s when Iran and Iraq went to war with each other and they blasted each other's tankers and other tankers in the Persian Gulf, and this is exactly the kind of strategy that the Iranians would employ at this point.

BASH: And Phil, the secretary, talked about the planning for the operation in the Strait of Hormuz, insisting that they knew exactly what was going to happen and so forth. I want you to talk about the reporting that you and our colleagues have about going into this war What they were thinking in the Strait of Hormuz.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I think it's incredibly important in this moment, in particular, given what the colonel and you were just discussing about the Strait of Hormuz. And it's really kind of backbone nature to the global economy as a shipping corridor and a transit thoroughfare.

That two things can be true here. The military has long had plans, trained for exercised for protection of military assets, but protection of tanking -- tankers and private sector assets going through the Strait. The colonel mentioned the tanker war. They've actually done it before with naval escorts that has been a central component of Middle East National Security Strategy for the better part of decades. At this point in time that was the case leading up to this.

The administration's willingness and or ability to factor in that Iran would go this far. And keep in mind, in the strikes from June of last year, Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz. They did not. When Qasem Soleimani was taken out in 2020 threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz. They did not. The reason why is because it's kind of a self-wound if you're Iran. They also depend more than any other Gulf country on the Strait of Hormuz being operational.

[12:05:00]

Iranian tankers are still going through the Strait right now. The other Arab countries, the other Gulf countries and any other commerce is not. And what that underscores is what we've seen over the course of the last couple of weeks. This kind of slow-moving recognition inside the administration that not only, oh, they're going to take it to the highest point of the escalatory ladder.

It's an existential crisis for their leadership, but also the ability to try and circumvent that or stop that out right is extraordinarily difficult, because, as the colonel lays out, the risks are not just to the tankers going through, the risk to U.S. naval assets, the risk to any type of coalition assets, the scale of the assets needed to even start an escort process is significant, and is underscoring why they haven't even really gotten close to starting it yet.

BASH: And I just real quick on that when the president said, as we just reported earlier, that these tankers, these oil companies, just have to have guts and kind of push through in the Strait. You're not only talking to sources who understand the intelligence and the planning but also on the economic side, these companies who are very worried about their personnel, never mind their tankers and so forth.

MATTINGLY: Just having spoken to a number of shipping executives or folks in companies that are in this space over the course of the last several days. The president's comments non sensical based on how they approach things. This isn't because they don't have insurance. It isn't because they don't have guts. They care deeply about their personnel. They care deeply about their cargo, which is tens of millions of dollars as well.

And so, the idea of, hey, just risk it, trust us, it'll be fine. Look at what's going on in the Strait right now. And just the threat of that alone is why no shipping company right now is saying, yes, we'd like to send our people through that. We'd like to send our cargo through that. And I think what it's also important to point out is this underscores that even if tomorrow the president declares the war is over, everything should open up.

One, Iran gets a say in this. And two, the process of establishing trust amongst the private sector companies with whatever coalition escort process is involved, with the insurance companies, and then restarting a lot of the kind of stopped in oil that has been kept in some of the producers, or you can talk about fertilizer, you can talk about food prices, all of these things. You can't just stop it and then flip a switch and start it back up again. So, all of this is compounding over time.

BASH: Such important reporting. Colonel Leighton, we did learn that six service members died overnight when a U.S. military refueling aircraft crashed while flying over friendly air space. I want you to listen to what Secretary Hegseth said this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HEGSETH: War is hell. War is chaos. And as we saw yesterday with the tragic crash of our KC-135 tanker. Bad things can happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEIGHTON: True. Bad things can happen, but the planning needs to be done in a way to mitigate those kinds of things. Now, what we probably have here based on what we're seeing is a terrible accident. I'm pretty sure that, based on where this happened in western Iraq, that this was not a either an offensive fire incident or a friendly fire incident.

But what it does show is that there may be a training issue, potentially here, there may be, you know, some kind of weather issue, there are mechanical issues, there are all kinds of things. Aerial refueling is one of the most complicated things that you can do in the Air Force or in any military element.

And when you go into an environment like the Middle East where there are factors such as sand, such as, you know, extreme temperatures, all of these kinds of things. That can impact a lot of what's going on here. So this terrible tragedy was something that, you know, can be mitigated in some -- to some degree by training and by familiarity with the region.

But it is something that is, you know, is not necessarily avoidable because of the type of ops tempo that these people are going through, and the type of things that that they're having to deal with. These crews are basically flying a lot, and they need, you know, to make sure that they get adequate rest as they as they go and conduct their missions. That's one factor and something that will probably be looked into in the investigation.

BASH: Colonel Cedric Leighton, Phil Mattingly, thank you so much. Don't go anywhere we actually want to turn to what's happening here in the United States. Two terror attacks shook the nation yesterday. Hundreds of miles apart. But within just a few hours of each other. In Virginia, one killed and the shooter dead. The FBI says that shooter was a supporter of ISIS previously connected to terror related charges. And in Michigan, a Lebanese born U.S. citizen rammed a synagogue with his car filled with explosives. A synagogue that, of course, was filled with pre-school children. This -- nobody was injured. He ended up losing his life.

[12:10:00]

Here is what President Trump said about the threat to the U.S. homeland in that Fox Radio interview that aired this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP (voiceover): I don't worry about it because if you did you wouldn't be able to function. OK, so you can't worry, you have to do something, and we watch everything at a level that it's never been watched, our country has never been watched over like this ever before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: I want to bring in CNN's chief law enforcement and intelligence analyst, John Miller. Thank you so much for being here, John. Four terror attacks in the U.S. in the two weeks since the war in Iran began, Texas, New York, Michigan and Virginia. How concerned are you as somebody who did this for a living for many, many years about the threat facing Americans right now.

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT & INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: I'd be very concerned but not surprised. At the beginning of the war, the notices sent out by FBI and DHS said, we're going to be in a heightened threat environment. We are likely to see attacks by lone wolf offenders so far, among the four attacks that have occurred on U.S. soil. Since the war began, it appears that most of them were acting alone, including the two young men from Pennsylvania who threw bombs in New York City. It appears they were acting together, but not in concert with a larger group of people.

So, this is the threat unfolding as we understood it might the question, Dana is, what happens next? And if you look at the threats and drivers, the contagion effect is something we're probably seeing here, which is one terrorist attack, spurs a person who might be thinking about doing one to move forward, which spurs the next one?

We also know that the driver of it is going to be the coverage of the war, the stories around the war, and what goes on in those chat rooms and dark places on the internet where ISIS, propaganda is pushed forward and people are urged to violence.

BASH: Jonh Miller, I -- thank you so much for being here. I just want to underscore what you said, because it is so important the contagion effect that sadly, one terror attack begets and often inspires another. We are -- as I've said before, and I'll say it again, we are very lucky to have you with us. Thanks, Jonh.

MILLER: Thanks.

BASH: When we come back. What do swing voters think of this war and what it means for their pocketbooks? Really interesting. New focus group of Michigan voters gives us some clues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BASH: Here's what the Trump administration is saying to Americans who are worried about the war in Iran and high gas prices, except the short-term pain for the long-term gain. On Sunday, the president called it a very small price to pay and said only fools would think differently. Here is how one swing voter in Michigan saw it. She voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and for President Trump in 2024.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LINZI, MICHIGAN VOTER: I'm a fool, I guess.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What, why so, Linzi?

LINZI: Well, the prices were down slightly for a short period of time, but currently, where I'm at, prices have jumped $1. So, for someone like me, who is a working person. I mean, yeah, it's good for him to say who makes, you know, a million dollar a day or whatever, an hour. But on the other hand, it makes a very big difference to someone like me who has to fill in the gas tank every single week and go to work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: My terrific panel is here now. David Chalian?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR & WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: I mean, that's the concern, right, that every politician who's on the ballot this year, he is expressing right now, some privately, some publicly, just about the wrath of voters, especially in the Republican Party, given this was, you know, President Trump's decision to launch this. The desire among Republicans to find a way to get out of this quickly, I don't think cleanly is an option anymore, obviously.

So, but to find a way to get out of this quickly, declare some victory on objectives and start focusing the attention back on economic concerns is all I'm hearing of their desire right now. And I don't know that anybody sees that as a viable option at the moment. It doesn't seem like getting out quickly and being done with it is really an option on the table.

BASH: Right. And then if you kind of compound what's happening now with the president's fundamental belief and policy on tariffs, which has been the same kind of idea, short-term pain, long-term gain. In fact, Aaron Blake, our colleague here, wrote on this very topic this morning. Much like last year, the administration is asking Americans to accept some short-term pain for a promise long-term gain. In 2025, it was tariffs. In 2026, it's the war with Iran. So, I don't think that we can talk about the economic situation now without remembering that it's compounded.

[12:20:00]

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, THE ATLANTA JOURNAL- CONSTITUTION: Yeah, it's compounded. And I think, you know, what we've been saying all along, even with tariffs, it's harder, I think for American people when they're not really explaining what's the reason behind it. You know, why are we bombing Iran and what is going to be the end game here? And the Trump administration has provided several answers to that, and the answers seem to change day-by-day saying with the tariffs. Where was it about getting more manufacturers into the U.S.? Was it about bullying countries to comply with whatever we wanted to comply?

You know, we were given different answers as to what the ultimate goal of the tariffs were. And so, I think there are even voters who would like to give President Trump the benefit of the doubt, but it's hard to do that when they don't have a consistent message to kind of hang their hat on to why they're enduring the short-term pain.

BASH: Look to you, we have perfect examples of that. So, thank you for teeing that up. Again, this is going back to that focus group. These are voters who voted for President Biden in 2020, for President Trump in 2024. So, they supported this president, and they were asked about what they think the reason for this war is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JASMIN, MICHIGAN VOTER: I guess they tried to assassinate him, so he's retaliating.

GINA, MICHIGAN VOTER: They went in there to assassinate, because he was being, like a dictator.

SAM, MICHIGAN VOTER: They were very close to building a nuclear bomb.

MARK, MICHIGAN VOTER: They framed, there was an imminent threat that was to the country, whatever that means.

STEPHANIE, MICHIGAN VOTER: I have that we wanted to defend Israel. That's our ally.

BRANDON, MICHIGAN VOTER: It seems that they're giving that they attacked us first, then there's also deliberation, and then peace in the Middle East.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SEUNG MIN KIM, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, AP: I think that helps explain to the public's viewing of this conflict in Iran right now, because what happened a couple weeks ago is so different from other conflicts that the U.S. had engaged in, where you know, something happens, the administration, the president goes out, makes a clear case to the American people. And at least initially, public support can be higher, even though, obviously that can decline over time.

But in this one, if you look at the early polling, what came out immediately after the strikes, you know, more than half do oppose them. Obviously, Republicans still do largely stand behind the president and his actions, but it doesn't start out on a popular footing. And I think the lack of really clear unambiguous messaging from the president himself, not necessarily the administration, but the president himself is part of that.

And going back to the idea about the short-term pain, long-term game, the president is really with that, whether it's tariffs or Iran. He's asking voters to trust him. And I think, you know, so many of his supporters have been willing to do that for, you know, more than a decade now, because they believe in his power on whether it is vision, on whether it comes to the economy or on other issues.

But when you're asking voters to reconcile, you know, and reconcile what they are seeing now in terms of gas prices and other issues, along with just trust me, it'll work out. I'm going, I'll feel it in my bones once, when this is over. It is a difficult sell for the president.

CHALIAN: I also think -- first of all, I think it has forever been true in politics, right, that the ask of take this short-term pain for long-term gain is a tough ask to ask of voters. It's just not how people think. Secondly, just in that frame, Dana, the clock, the calendar doesn't allow for a lot of short-term pain.

If you are a Republican on the ballot, facing a tough election cycle, short -- I mean, it's now. I mean, this election cycle can really start settling in the minds of voters a little more concretely, maybe by the end of May, June, and then, so you are on a very short timeline to ask voters to adopt some pain.

BASH: Yeah. All right, everybody stand by. Coming up. Americans are on edge, fearing an attack, more attacks on U.S. soil, while lawmakers are still finger pointing. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: The war with Iran has Americans worried about their security here at home. In a Quinnipiac poll, 77 percent of Americans said they believe an attack on American soil was very or somewhat likely as a result of the war in Iran. My smart panel is back now. Tia, we certainly have seen attacks that, you know, we don't have all the facts about the specific nature of -- we know the nature of the attack, but not about whether there is a direct connection with Iran.

You can make some assumptions given the timing and the place and all of those things. But you know, as somebody who reports for a newspaper in Georgia. I know that you talked to your colleagues on the desk there, and obviously the readers who you write for back at home. What are you hearing?

MITCHELL: So, I think it's, you know, all the deaths in people being attacked, whether it's domestically or internationally are very tragic, right? And we don't have all the facts, but we can't ignore the context of the conversations. We can't ignore that perhaps some of the rhetoric may be contributing to antisemitism. Some of the rhetoric may also be, you know, allowing people who already have an inclination for, you know, affinity towards Iran or some of the groups that are considered the opposition, the people we're attacking now, you know.