Return to Transcripts main page

The Story Is with Elex Michaelson

Trump Gives Conflicting Answers on How Long War Will Last; Interview with Representative Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY); Interview with Representative Kevin Kiley (I-CA); U.S. Investigating Strike on Iranian Elementary School; Iranian Supreme Leader's Foreign Policy Advisor Weighs in on War; 5 Iranian Women's Soccer Players Granted Visas in Australia. Aired 12-1a ET

Aired March 10, 2026 - 00:00   ET

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

[00:00:00]

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR: Tell me, do you carry your family with you when you're running?

NATHAN MARTIN, L.A. MARATHON WINNER: A hundred percent. They mean the world to me. You know, my parents were some of my biggest cheerleaders, and it was awesome when I had them around and just being able to celebrate when I accomplish things. I just remember so many different times with my dad. I would accomplish something and he would find it in a newspaper and tell anybody he could and just to kind of cheers from my mom as well.

And, yes. No, it was awesome having them, and my sisters right now are awesome, sharing all my stuff on social media, calling me, just saying how proud they are. And yes, I know it's awesome being able to share that with them.

COATES: We're all so proud. Nathan Martin, congratulations.

MARTIN: Well, thank you.

COATES: Thank you all for watching. "THE STORY IS WITH ELEX MICHAELSON" starts right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR: And welcome to THE STORY IS. I'm Elex Michaelson back live in Los Angeles.

Our top story, breaking news, the war with Iran. Standing by live, the top House Democrat, Hakeem Jeffries. We will talk to him in a moment from San Francisco. You see him there. But we begin with the major headlines from the day in Iran. And let's get to that right now.

We are entering the 11th day of the war, and President Trump is giving conflicting answers on just how much longer this war will last. On one hand saying the war is very complete. And then, quote, "We haven't won enough." What is clear is that strikes across the Middle East are still ongoing. Social media video shows damage in Bahrain after the Interior Ministry there said an Iranian missile struck a residential building overnight, killing at least one person and injuring eight others.

A top Iranian official is signaling that Iran is willing to keep attacking Gulf countries in an effort to persuade them to convince President Trump to step back from the conflict. But the president, who just held his first formal press conference since the war began, had this message.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We've already won in many ways but we haven't won enough. We go forward more, determined than ever to achieve ultimate victory that will end this long-running danger once and for all. 47 years. It should have been done a long time ago. The world would have been a different place had some president had the courage to go and do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAELSON: President Trump says he discussed the war during a, quote, "very good call" with his Russian counterpart, and that Vladimir Putin wants to be helpful.

It's important to note CNN has reported that according to sources, Russia is providing Iran with intelligence about the locations and movements of U.S. troops, ships and aircraft.

Meantime, a recent poll shows 56 percent of Americans are against military action in Iran, just 36 percent approve of how the president is dealing with that country.

CNN's Mike Valerio is live for us in Beijing to start things off.

Mike, why are some people saying President Trump is sending out mixed signals about the war.

MIKE VALERIO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean, we can take you through the day of what exactly he said. And it really started, Elex, with our colleague from CBS News, Weijia Jiang, when she called the president, and paraphrasing her interview ever so slightly for our conversation, he seemed to be satisfied, with his conversation with Weijia Jiang, with what his war against Iran with Israel has achieved.

But then we fast-forward to when he took the lectern there in Doral, Florida. He was meeting with a group of House Republicans. And he says at the lectern, as we just heard a couple seconds ago, that perhaps we haven't won enough. We've already won in many ways but, quote, "we haven't won enough."

He then takes questions from members of the press including our own Manu Raju and Julia Benbrook who are in the audience, and then he seems to dial that back, saying that the war is, quote, "pretty well complete" and that the war could well end soon. But what leaders and certainly traders in this side of the world, in Asia, are looking at are his Truth -- I should say, is his Truth Social posts because the crux of the matter in terms of the economy and whether we pay more for stuff and for fuel, is the Strait of Hormuz.

So the president writing later in the 8:00 p.m. hour, this, quote, "If Iran does anything that stops the flow of oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America 20 times harder than they have been hit thus far," he wrote, and continuing, "We will take out easily destroyable targets that will make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back. Death, fire and fury will rain upon them," but finishing with, "I hope and pray that it does not happen."

[00:05:09]

So what our reporting goals are, again, in this corner of the world, in East Asia, are to follow what Iran says in the next couple of hours, whether or not there's going to be a system set up for which ships can possibly pass through. Of course, we all want all ships to pass through in the name of free trade, and you know, our energy costs, but there seems to be at least some movement.

There's a post on X from the Bangladeshi military that says one of its ships are being able to pass through with permission of the regime in Iran. So that is what we are going to be watching if there is some sort of greater movement of ship and energy traffic through the strait as we enter the second week -- Elex.

MICHAELSON: Mike Valerio in Beijing. Mike, thank you. We'll talk more to you in our next hour.

Approvals and funding for the war with Iran remain contentious topics in Washington. Last week, the House and Senate tried to rein in President Trump's war powers, and both votes failed, mostly along party lines. Well, now there's talk of the Trump administration possibly asking Congress for more defense funding. Analysts estimate that the conflict is costing American taxpayers about $890 million a day.

The House minority leader did not say whether Democrats would block the potential funding request, but told NBC that it would be a tough case to make at Capitol Hill. Hakeem Jeffries adding that the White House has failed to justify this, quote, "war of choice." He reminds Americans that Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to avoid, quote, "endless wars."

Hakeem Jeffries is joining us live from San Francisco.

Mr. Leader, welcome to THE STORY IS for the first time.

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Good evening. Great to be with you.

MICHAELSON: What do you think our objective is in Iran, and when is it time to stop the bombing?

JEFFRIES: Well, it's an incredibly important question because the president has failed to articulate a compelling reason for why the United States preemptively struck Iran and is now plunged us into a war of choice where billions of dollars are being spent to drop bombs in the Middle East. In fact, the entire region is in flames right now, and the president and Republicans are unwilling to actually spend a dime to make life more affordable for the American people, to drop the price of groceries, drop the cost of housing, or drop the cost of health insurance to make sure that Americans can afford to go see a doctor when they need one.

And so, in my view, we've advanced this war powers resolution that narrowly failed because the American people understand that this war is not making them safer. In fact, I think it's creating potential harms to our national security. And the president has not offered a justification as to why this should continue unabated.

MICHAELSON: What we know Iranians, though, have attacked Americans and attacked people throughout the world for years through their proxies as well. We have seen thousands of Americans in the streets thanking President Trump, saying that they are grateful for the U.S. finally acting. A lot of them talk about the fact that their family members were killed by that regime. What do you say to those people?

JEFFRIES: Well, Iran is definitively a bad actor and needs to be aggressively confronted. And there are a variety of different tools to be able to do that, including aggressive diplomacy or making sure that the sanctions regime continues to tighten as it relates to what had been put in place by Democrats and Republicans over the years.

But on matters of war and peace, I mean, the framers were very clear. They gave Congress the sole authority to declare war, understanding that it's a serious thing when we decide to put our servicemen and women in harm's way. And we've already lost seven heroic, patriotic, brave service members and certainly it's the case that our heart goes out to them and our prayers continue to be with them, and our support will continue to be with their families.

But this is a very serious decision, and Donald Trump has not taken it seriously. He's just unilaterally plunged us into this conflict that now has spread to more than a dozen countries and has not provided us with a compelling justification, sort of a set of objectives as to what we're trying to accomplish, and hasn't provided a strategy as to how this all is going to end.

MICHAELSON: But we know that U.S. presidents have done military actions without going to Congress before. President Obama did this with Libya. And what leverage do you have to stop what you call an illegal war? What leverage do you have to do something about it?

[00:10:08]

JEFFRIES: Well, unquestionably, it's an unlawful war of choice that Donald Trump has plunged us into and he's making decisions --

MICHAELSON: How is that different from what President Obama did or other leaders have done when they launched military incursions without going to Congress as well? I mean, don't they -- the president has 60 days to launch military action before he has to come to Congress.

JEFFRIES: Well, this isn't simply a series of military strikes. This is an all-out war against Iran that now involves more than a dozen different countries. And the expenditure of billions of dollars perhaps a day to drop bombs in the Middle East without a clear, objective or clear strategy or a clear end game. And so that's the problem. This is the first president as far as we can tell to launch this type of military conflict without bothering to try to convince the American people as to why it is all taking place to persuade the American people.

It's one of the reasons why we believe that the war is already so deeply unpopular with the American people throughout the country.

MICHAELSON: So is it time to get out now?

JEFFRIES: Well, listen, I think our view as it relates to the resolution that we voted on, that I strongly supported, that the overwhelming majority of Democrats supported, along with two Republicans, is that these type of hostilities should cease until there's an actual debate and the president makes his case to the Congress and to the American people, and seeks the authorization for the use of military force.

There's no justification for it. But that is what the Constitution requires in our view. And that step, of course, has not been taken.

MICHAELSON: So right now there is still a sort of fight and shutdown over DHS funding that started before this war happened. There's a question now that some have raised about this possibility that Iran may enact its sleeper cells and activate them in the United States. President Trump talked about that today. Here's some of what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Yes, we know a lot about them. The biggest problem we have is the Democrats shutdown. We know a lot about them. But the shutdown doesn't allow us to do what we have to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAELSON: So the president saying that Americans are being endangered because the Department of Homeland Security cannot go after Iranian sleeper cells. What's your response to that?

JEFFRIES: Well, the president is lying to the American people. He's fearmongering, and he knows that. Now Republicans have made the decision they would rather shut down every other aspect of the Department of Homeland Security which we as Democrats have repeatedly made clear we are prepared to fund. That includes, of course, FEMA and the Coast Guard and TSA and the national security, cyber security parts of the Department of Homeland Security that are separate and apart from ICE and from the other agencies that have been brutalizing the American people using taxpayer dollars.

This is a president who promised to go after the worst of the worst. Instead, ICE agents are targeting law-abiding immigrant families and using taxpayer dollars to brutalize and in some cases, kill American citizens, as was horrifically the case with Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti. And unfortunately, the administration has decided that they don't want to get ICE under control. And so they forced the Congress into a situation where DHS funding is not moving forward.

And we've indicated, both House Democrats and Senate Democrats, that we are prepared to fund every other aspect of the Department of Homeland Security while making sure that until ICE enacts the type of dramatic, bold and meaningful changes that force ICE to conduct themselves like every other law enforcement agency in the country, that the DHS funding bill with respect to immigration enforcement, interior to the country --

MICHAELSON: Is there any --

JEFFRIES: -- should absolutely not move forward.

MICHAELSON: Is there any actual negotiation happening on this front? Are you talking with Republicans in a serious way to come to an agreement?

JEFFRIES: Yes. Yes, listen, there are ongoing conversations and as Democrats we've made clear that we will continue to be prepared to sit down with anyone, anytime, anyplace to discuss how we can move forward in a way that allows for immigration enforcement in this country to be fair, to be just and to be humane. That's what the American people want to see and we're going to continue to support the notion that changes need to be made that are transformational in terms of the way in which ICE conducts itself.

MICHAELSON: You're here in California. There was big news when it comes to the California caucus today. Kevin Kiley, who is -- has been a Republican member of the House, decided to leave the Republican Party but become an independent, although he's still caucusing with the Republicans.

[00:15:13]

Right now he is running as a no party preference person after his district was gerrymandered by Democrats after Texas Republicans gerrymandered their district, and he said that he may be open to being a Democrat in the next Congress. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KEVIN KILEY (I-CA): As far as next term, you know, I think that the appropriate posture as an independent is to say I'm going to do whatever serves my constituents. And so, you know, that's a decision that I'll make. At the time, I think that, you know, first and foremost I'll be looking at what's going to best lower the cost of living for the folks that I represent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAELSON: So Congressman Kiley is actually our guest next. What's your message? Are you ready to welcome him into the Democratic caucus?

JEFFRIES: Well, I think the congressman is going to have to explain to the people he hopes to represent in the next Congress why he voted for the Republican one big, ugly bill. Think about this. Republicans enacted the largest cut to Medicaid in American history. They literally ripped health care away from about 14 million Americans. In that same bill, they enacted the largest cut to nutritional assistance ever, $186 billion taken away, literally ripping food from the mouths of hungry children, seniors and veterans in order to provide massive tax breaks for their billionaire donors.

And in the same bill gave ICE a $75 billion slush fund so that the Trump administration can unleash these violent individuals who are masked and untrained to brutalize the American people and in some cases kill them. And so I think the first question for us is going to be, well, does he regret that vote? And does he plan to partner with Democrats to reverse the damage that has been done by the Trump policies to date?

MICHAELSON: OK, so if he does, you're ready to welcome him in, it sounds like.

JEFFRIES: Well, I mean, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. But there's a lot of explaining that he has to do to his constituents and to those of us on the Democratic side of the aisle.

MICHAELSON: All right. Hakeem Jeffries, thank you so much for sharing your views. We appreciate it.

JEFFRIES: Thank you.

MICHAELSON: Let's bring in now live from Washington, Congressman Kevin Kiley.

Congressman, welcome back to THE STORY IS. I guess you just heard what Hakeem Jeffries said there. What's your response? Do you regret voting for what he calls the big ugly bill?

KILEY: Well, first of all, to be clear I'm an independent. And so that's, you know, I think you're referring to the matter of caucusing which under the existing House rules, you're sort of forced to choose one caucus or the other. I think that's actually kind of crazy. I think that if you're going to be an independent, you should have the ability to decide whether or not you want to affiliate with either caucus.

But, you know, in any case, the idea that, you know, if you voted for one piece of legislation that Leader Jeffries happens to disagree with, that that somehow, you know, defines your political identity, I think that's exactly what's wrong with politics in this country, is people are trying to put you in a box and say, if you don't agree with me on this, then I don't want to work with you on that.

And by the way, when you're talking about that particular piece of legislation, it actually is true that there were some fairly significant cuts to Medicaid that were initially proposed. I opposed those, as did some others in the House, and as a result those did not make it into the final version of the bill. The final version of the bill actually increases Medicaid spending over the course of the next 10 years. And the reforms it includes of saying that if you're going to receive free, taxpayer funded health care from the government and you're a young, able-bodied person without dependents, then maybe you should at least be looking for a job or volunteering 20 hours a week.

I think that's broadly supported by Republicans, Democrats and independents across the country. Not to mention the fact that this particular piece of legislation is giving people substantial tax relief, middle class families, child tax credit that people are seeing in their tax returns right now.

MICHAELSON: So it doesn't sound like you regret voting for it.

KILEY: No, I mean, no piece of legislation is perfect. That particular bill was a pretty massive piece of legislation. I actually don't think that's the best way to do legislating. It's sort of the habit that the House has gotten itself into. But at the end of the day, you know, this legislation included this significant tax relief that if we hadn't passed the bill, we would have had the biggest tax increase in American history.

We also had significant funding for securing our border, important defense funding in that bill. And then, by the way, the things that I didn't want in the bill, I actually succeeded in getting out of it so there was a provision in there that would have allowed for public lands that I represented big public lands district to be sold without meaningful local input.

I very actively insisted that I could not vote for that, and it was out of the bill as well as these -- the genuine cuts to Medicaid that were proposed by some did not make it in the bill because I opposed them.

[00:20:02]

MICHAELSON: So you brought up this idea of the caucusing. And it is an important issue because of the way that the House works. So the way that the House works for people that aren't political junkies is basically everybody has got to vote for speaker. Whoever wins speaker then gets to determine who's on all the committees, who's voting when, how it's run. The House is really driven by majority rule, and that's where you get your power in the House. Seniority and majority rule.

So if you're a legislator, you say you're going to decide based off of what's better for your district, is there a world where you vote for Hakeem Jeffries for speaker? What would need to happen for you to think that that's in the best interest of your district?

KILEY: So you got close to correct, Elex. So the committee assignments are sort of the property of the two parties, and so that's where -- that's one of the manifestations, I think, of what's kind of broken about Washington is that everything is driven by partisanship. And so the way that the rules of the House are structured right now is that even if you are an independent, you are forced for administrative purposes to associate yourself with one party or the other.

So what I said is that, you know, because I was elected for this term with the Republicans, of course, it makes sense to, for those administrative purposes, to finish out the term without association, even though I am an independent. And that's how I'll continue to approach every vote. So, yes, as far as next term, of course I'll decide at the time based on whoever the candidates are what's best for the folks that I represent.

MICHAELSON: But in a way, wouldn't it be the best thing to vote for whoever is in the majority to give yourself a better chance at it? I mean, I'm just trying to think of your -- the rationale because it is an important thing. I mean, determining control of the House, we saw how close the margins are. Your one vote could determine who the speaker of the House is and then control all the different committees and control what happens in Washington.

And that's why I think there is interest in wanting to know so that people don't feel misled one way or another. I mean, you understand that there's a legitimate question there.

KILEY: Well, I mean, I didn't give any indication of who I would support for speaker. you know, when I ran in the first place. And so I think that --

MICHAELSON: We knew you weren't going to support Hakeem Jeffries. Right? I think that was pretty clear.

KILEY: I think the folks that I represent care about, you know, the issues that are important to them and so they're not there. You know, I'm not, when I run necessarily, telling people how I'm going to vote on each and every issue because you can't anticipate each and every issue that comes up.

MICHAELSON: But that's a pretty big issue. No?

KILEY: But I do -- what I do communicate in the campaign is the values that I'll support and that I'll try to fight for as the representative. And that will be the case with each and every vote and I think right now, the biggest issue facing most people in this country is just how unaffordable it is especially in my state of California, which is why, by the way, you know, I think it will be helpful to have a representative who is willing to fight against the policies, both in Sacramento, that are driving up costs as well as fighting to lower costs in Washington.

MICHAELSON: Is there anything that the Democrats are doing on affordability that you think is better than what the Republicans are doing?

KILEY: I think there's plenty of common ground that we could find, you know, especially on issues of health care. Like you had me on your show a few months ago, and we talked about a bill that myself and Sam Liccardo came up with to provide for a temporary extension of these health care subsidies that were expiring. And we got broad bipartisan support for that bill.

Unfortunately you know, it was not brought to the floor for a vote. I think that kind of the leadership of both parties did not have an interest in making that happen. And so it didn't happen. So yes, I think there's plenty of opportunities to partner with both sides to address these issues. I think there are more opportunities than meets the eye but it's sort of the, you know, the endemic partisanship of Washington that prevents them from moving forward.

MICHAELSON: Well, there's no doubt that there is major partisanship problems in Washington and that is something we could have a much longer conversation about. But we appreciate you coming on here to make your case.

Kevin Kiley, now independent member of Congress from California. Thank you so much, and good luck on the run.

KILEY: You bet. Thanks for having me.

MICHAELSON: Still to come, oil market whiplash, crude prices, seesawed in another wild day of trading as President Trump tries to reassure the world that the volatility we're seeing is no big deal.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:28:42]

MICHAELSON: The roller coaster ride for the world's oil market showing no sign of slowing down. Crude oil prices at one point soared to almost $120 a barrel on Monday. They later settled down under $100.

President Trump told CBS News he thought the war with Iran was, quote, "very complete." You see the number now, closer to $90. While that remains to be seen, the president continues to downplay the surge in prices.

We're now looking at Brent crude here at about $95. And we were looking on Friday at this same time, that was about $80. Here's some of the president today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: 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. This was a military success, the likes of which people haven't seen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAELSON: President Trump now appears to be softening his stance that Tehran was responsible for a strike on a girls' school in southern Iran.

New video evidence suggests that the U.S. was targeting a nearby revolutionary guard base with a Tomahawk missile at that very time of the impact. That strike happened on February 28th, the first day of the war, and it is believed to be the deadliest so far, killing at least 168 children and 14 teachers.

On Monday, the president said he didn't know enough about it, despite blaming Iran over the weekend.

[00:30:12]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I think it's something that I was told is under investigation. But Tomahawks are -- 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)

MICHAELSON: CNN's Isobel Yeung has been analyzing the video in London.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ISOBEL YEUNG, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is the moment a missile slammed into an Iranian base in Minab, a city in Southern Iran, just over a week ago.

In this freeze frame, you can see it clearly. Weapons experts tell CNN the wings and tail are consistent with a Tomahawk missile.

This new video is the clearest evidence yet that suggests it was the United States that struck an elementary school next to that Revolutionary Guards base, killing scores of students.

The U.S. has been firing those Tomahawk missiles at Iran from ships and submarines for more than a week now. Israel doesn't use them, experts tell us.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. President, did the United States bomb a girls' elementary school in Southern Iran on the first day of the war and kill 170 people?

TRUMP: No. In my opinion, based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is that true, Mr. Hegseth? It was Iran who did that?

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: We're certainly investigating it.

YEUNG (voice-over): Iran also doesn't use Tomahawk missiles. And using satellite images, it's clear the school was struck nearly simultaneously with strikes on an adjacent Revolutionary Guards base.

That suggests precision targeting.

CNN geolocated this video. We think this missile struck the military base, not the school. You can see that other buildings in the direction of the school had just been struck when this was filmed.

Isobel Yeung, CNN, London. (END VIDEOTAPE)

MICHAELSON: U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance participated in the dignified transfer of the seventh U.S. service member killed in the Iran war.

The U.S. Central Command had announced that the service member died from injuries received from a March 1 attack on U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. The military on Monday identified him as 26-year-old Army Sergeant Benjamin M. Pennington of Glendale, Kentucky.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:37:06]

TRUMP: It's the beginning of building a new country, but they certainly -- they have no navy. They have no air force. They have no anti-aircraft equipment. It's all been blown up. They have no radar. They have no telecommunications, and they have no leadership. It's all gone.

So, you know, you could look at that statement. We could -- we could call it a tremendous success right now. As we leave here, I could call it. Or we could go further, and we're going to go further.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAELSON: The president sort of making conflicting statements there. He says that the U.S. is prepared to continue its war with Iran. He also said that he thinks it could end soon.

The conflict now entering its second full week.

Iran's government is pushing back on President Trump's claim that it has no leadership. Iranian officials say the newly appointed supreme leader, the son of the previous supreme leader, would lead the defense capability of Iran even though [SIC] a long war with the U.S. and Israel.

Khamenei's foreign policy advisor spoke with CNN's Fred Pleitgen in an exclusive interview. CNN operates in Iran with the permission of the Iranian government, as is required under local regulations, but maintains full editorial control over what it reports. Here's part of their conversation.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Iran has a new supreme leader. What does that mean for your military effort and the confrontation with the United States and Israel?

KAMAL KHARAZI, FOREIGN POLICY ADVISOR, OFFICE OF THE SUPREME LEADER: That means the system is quite functioning.

PLEITGEN: So, the United States says it's drastically degraded the Iranian military, the capabilities as far as missiles is concerned drones is concerned. How much longer can you do this?

KHARAZI: That is one of the false narratives that the United States government is producing. 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.

PLEITGEN: So, your side is ready for a long war, if the United States and Israel choose that. Do you consider this an existential threat to the Islamic Republic?

KHARAZI: It is an existential threat to the Islamic Republic, and therefore, we have to stay with full might, as we are doing now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAELSON: For more perspective, we are joined live now by CNN political and national security analyst David Sanger, who also is one of the top writers at "The New York Times."

Welcome. Good to see you in person.

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Thank you. Good to be back here.

MICHAELSON: So first off, we've got a new supreme leader. How different is he than the old supreme leader?

SANGER: Well, we don't know very much about him. He's obviously the son of Ali Khamenei, the previous ayatollah.

He is reported to be significantly more conservative and better tied, in some ways, to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Certainly, he was not President Trump's preferred candidate, but I thought it was sort of interesting that the president today didn't completely rule out working with him.

MICHAELSON: Yes. So, President Trump, throughout his time as president, even before his time as president, has argued against this idea of these endless Mideast wars. He sort of mocked George W. Bush for staying in Iraq and Afghanistan for too long.

So, if President Trump is sort of laying the stage for saying we're done. We accomplished what we wanted. We're getting out. So, he gets out; ends this thing in the next week or two. What does that mean for Iran, and where do they go from here?

SANGER: Well, I think the first question is what has the president accomplished if he gets out in a week or two?

MICHAELSON: Right.

SANGER: So, let's run through his list of objectives. We're not going to use our objectives. We're going to use his objectives.

MICHAELSON: Yes.

SANGER: OK. The first is regime change. Well, certainly, the supreme leader is dead. But if he's replaced by his son, may not be that bit --

MICHAELSON: His younger son when he was 86 years old to begin with.

SANGER: That's right, yes. Right. OK. So that's No. 1.

Second big objective was rid them of the nuclear program. Well, so far, as far as we can see, they have carefully not touched the military program with the bombing. They do want to get the near-bomb grade uranium that's stored largely at Isfahan out of the country. That was one of the diplomatic objectives. It's one of the objectives, obviously today.

Over the weekend, there was thought and discussion about whether they might send in a Special Forces group to get it. That would be pretty difficult.

But that would be No. 2. Has he gotten it out so far? No.

No. 3, has he brought down the arsenal of missiles? Well, certainly, they've depleted a fair bit of that, and they've --

MICHAELSON: More than a fair bit.

SANGER: More than a fair bit. Some has been shot off; some of it has been destroyed. Some of the launchers have. He may be doing fairly well on that one. We just don't know what's left.

And then the fourth is, has he helped the protesters who he said help is on the way.

MICHAELSON: Yes.

SANGER: And so far we haven't seen any evidence that he has moved them toward overthrowing the government, which he said he wanted to go do, and democratization.

MICHAELSON: But, if he sees really bad poll numbers, if he sees the price of oil going through the roof, if he sees bad numbers at the Dow, if he sees his own Republicans getting weary because they've got midterm elections, and he just says, I've had enough, I'm done. I want to change the channel on this TV show.

SANGER: Yes.

MICHAELSON: And he leaves, which is not an impossibility that that's what happens. Right?

SANGER: No. That's right.

MICHAELSON: What is Iran left with? And is it -- and is it more dangerous for us? SANGER: Well, it could be. I mean if you're a country that has just

gone through what Iran has gone through here, the impulse to go finish that nuclear weapon is going to be a whole lot greater.

Look, there are two countries that have been big adversaries for Donald Trump along the way. North Korea in the first term, Iran in the second term. What's the difference?

North Korea raced ahead, got their nuclear weapons.

MICHAELSON: Yes.

SANGER: Now has 60 or more and can reach the United States. Have you heard President Trump talk very much about North Korea in recent times?

MICHAELSON: No. And by the way, ended up sending, you know, love letters to President Trump. And then they got a meeting in person.

SANGER: They got their meetings. They went through their diplomacy.

MICHAELSON: Yes.

SANGER: It failed. He said he would get these -- the weapons dismantled. He didn't, and so forth. So, if you're the Iranians, what lesson do you emerge from with that?

MICHAELSON: Yes, same with the Ukrainians, by the way, who didn't get their nuclear weapon. And now --

SANGER: Well, they had them and gave them away.

MICHAELSON: And they gave them away.

So, let's talk about something else that's interesting, because this is not just the United States' war with Iran.

SANGER: No.

MICHAELSON: There's also Israel.

SANGER: That's right.

MICHAELSON: And Benjamin Netanyahu, who has a lot of incentive to keep this war going, because as long as there's a war, then he's not facing some of his corruption charges.

Where does the U.S. and Israeli interests align, and where do they maybe break apart?

SANGER: Well, so, they do overlap considerably, but the Israelis keep discussing regime change and want the government of Iran to be left without the structure of the clerical leadership, of the Khamenei family now and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

It's pretty clear that President Trump is happier to do what we've heard from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and from some of the members of the Defense Department, which is just degrade Iran's capability to show -- to exercise any power beyond its borders.

[00:45:12}

MICHAELSON: But Israel doesn't go -- So, if Israel says that's not enough for us, were staying with this.

SANGER: That's a real problem for the president, because they came into this together. Now, whether they came into this because, as Secretary Rubio said, the Israelis were going to go in anyway --

MICHAELSON: Said we're going, so you better come along.

SANGER: Or whether, as President Trump said, no, he made the decision. And if anything, the Israelis followed him. We haven't sorted that out fully yet. But it would be really difficult for one to stop and the other not to.

MICHAELSON: Well, it's fascinating. It's been so great to see your coverage here on CNN and your articles in "The New York Times" and your comments on the daily and everywhere. There's no better guide to all this. So, David Sanger, it means a lot to have you here with us tonight.

SANGER: Great to be with you.

MICHAELSON: Thank you.

Iran's national women's soccer team is facing an uncertain future after an on-field incident made them a target of the Islamic regime. We'll have their story ahead on THE STORY IS.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:50:54]

MICHAELSON: Five members of Iran's women's national soccer team, known as the Lionesses, have been granted humanitarian visas in Australia.

supporters had raised fears that the players may face consequences upon their return to Iran. Australian officials say they have extended further offers of assistance to that team, if needed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY BURKE, AUSTRALIAN HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER: Last night, I was able to tell five members of the Iranian women's soccer team that they are welcome to stay in Australia, that they are safe here, and they should feel at home here.

I say to the other members of the team the same opportunity is there. Australia has taken the Iranian women's soccer team into our hearts.

(END VIDEO CLIP) MICHAELSON: CNN's Christina Macfarlane explains how a moment on the

field turned these athletes into targets of the Iranian Islamic regime.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRISTINA MACFARLANE, CNN SPORT (voice-over): As Israeli and American bombs began falling on Iran, a group of women were thousands of miles away on a soccer pitch in Australia.

On March 2, just days into the war, the Iranian women's national team had come to the Gold Coast to play in the AFC Women's Asian Cup.

But what they did next was an act of sporting bravery that has made them targets at home, and icons to millions who oppose the regime, watching from abroad.

Their tournament had barely begun when the team made a decision to stand in silence as their national anthem played. Back in Tehran, state TV's reaction was swift.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

MACFARLANE (voice-over): This host calling the move a pinnacle of dishonor, saying they were traitors during wartime who must be dealt with more severely.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (SPEAKING FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

MACFARLANE (voice-over): For some of the players, the drama off the pitch became too much to contain.

SARA DIDAR, IRANIAN WOMEN'S SOCCER PLAYER (through translator): Obviously, we're all concerned and sad at what's happened to Iran and our families and our loved ones. But I really hope it's very good for our country to have good news ahead, and I hope that my country would be strongly alive.

MACFARLANE (voice-over): Three days later, something had changed. Before their second game in Australia, the players sang the anthem and saluted, prompting fears of coercion by traveling Iranian minders.

MARZIYEH JAFARI, IRANIAN HEAD COACH (through translator): We have so much concern regarding our families and the people in Iran. Nobody loves war, but here we are coming to play football professionally, and we do our best to concentrate on our football and match ahead.

MACFARLANE (voice-over): Eliminated from the tournament with their team bus surrounded by supporters, chanting, "Save our girls," focus turned to whether any of the players would look to defect.

Earlier Monday, the answer came: news that five women had fled the team hotel and are now, a source says, seeking asylum under the protection of Australian police.

The story has now reached the very top, with U.S. President Donald Trump posting about the players' possible fate, congratulating the Australian prime minister for doing a, quote, "very good job.:

Christina Macfarlane, CNN, London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MICHAELSON: We have more breaking coverage on the war in Iran in the hour ahead. There are more Iranians living in Los Angeles than any other city outside of Iran. We talked to many of them for their take on what's happening, still ahead on THE STORY IS.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:58:55]

MICHAELSON: A live look right now at Capitol Hill. And for all you racing fans, IndyCar is gearing up to celebrate America's 250th birthday this year.

We just learned that the track layout for the Freedom 250 Grand Prix in Washington this summer. The 1.7-mile street circuit is the first ever auto race to be held on the National Mall, and it will showcase some of D.C.'s most iconic landmarks, including the Capitol, the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum.

And good news. It is free and open to the public, much like the Smithsonians [SIC] themselves. So, that's going to be something to see. There's going to be a lot of cool things happening in the year ahead to mark the 250th anniversary.

Thanks for watching the first hour of THE STORY IS. The next hour starts right now with breaking news.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

MICHAELSON: And welcome to THE STORY IS. I'm Elex Michaelson, live in Los Angeles.

We are now entering the 11th day of the war with Iran. And President Trump is giving conflicting answers on just how much longer it will last. On one hand, saying the war is very complete. And then, quote, "We haven't won enough."

What is clear, is that strikes are continuing in the Middle East.