'This Week' Transcript 3-22-26: Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Sen. Thom Tillis
This is a rush transcript of "This Week" airing Sunday, March 22.
A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, March 22, 2026 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
JONATHAN KARL, ABC “THIS WEEK” CO-ANCHOR: The Pentagon says it needs $200 billion more for the war with Iran, as the costs pile up here at home. “THIS WEEK” starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: Growing fallout. As the war in Iran rages on, Americans face skyrocketing fuel prices.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Diesel is the lifeblood of the entire American economy.
KARL: Scrambling to blunt the impact, the Trump administration lifts some sanctions on Iranian oil.
SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: We will be using the Iranian barrels against the Iranians to keep the price down.
KARL: Meanwhile, the Pentagon prepares to ask Congress and American taxpayers for hundreds of billions of dollars more to fund the war.
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): I think they need to come clean with the American people before they ask for $200 billion.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And it’s a small price to pay to make sure that we stay tippy top.
KARL: And the Homeland Security shutdown snarls air traffic across the country. TSA officers working without pay.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don’t want a rain check, we need a paycheck, and we need it now.
KARL: I’ll speak with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.
Plus --
SEN. THOM TILLIS, (R) NORTH CAROLINA: But I've been pretty plainspoken since I’ve been in politics.
KARL: You seem a little more plainspoken.
KARL: My exclusive with Republican Senator Thom Tillis, on his public breaks with the Trump administration.
TILLIS: I just think that he either has sycophants or cowards around him that need to get out of the way.
KARL: And the roundtable responds to President Trump’s stunning reaction to the death of Robert Mueller
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: From ABC News it’s “THIS WEEK.” Here now, Jonathan Karl.
KARL: Before we get started this morning, a few words about Robert Mueller.
Mueller, who died yesterday, is known by many as the man behind the Mueller report, which, of course, looked into Russian interference in the 2016 election. He also led the FBI for more than a decade, guiding America through the perilous period after the September 11th attacks.
But what perhaps some don’t know about Robert Mueller is that he was a genuine war hero. During a time when many of his peers were trying to avoid military service, he volunteered, joining the Marines after his college roommate was killed in Vietnam.
Mueller served for more than a year in combat in Vietnam, receiving a Purple Heart after he was shot in the leg. And he was awarded multiple times for valor, including a bronze star and a Navy commendation medal.
Donald Trump reacted to the news of his death by posting this just minutes after it was announced. Quote, “Robert Mueller just died. Good. I’m glad he’s dead.”
That’s a remarkable statement for anybody to make, especially a president of the United States. Robert Mueller was a man who served and sacrificed for his country.
We now turn to the war in Iran and the repercussions here at home. Three weeks since the start of the war, there’s little doubt that the U.S. Israeli operation has so far been a military success. Over the weekend, the head of U.S. Central Command laid out where the operation stands.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ADM. BRAD COOPER, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: Iran has lost significant combat capability over the last three weeks. Their navy is not sailing, their tactical fighters are not flying, and they’ve lost the ability to launch missiles and drones at the high rates seen at the beginning of the conflict. Our progress is obvious.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: While all that may be true, Iran has managed to cut off the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf, with ripple effects around the world. The average price of gas here in the United States is now almost $4 a gallon, up $1 since the war started 23 days ago. The cost of air travel has already gone up considerably, as the airlines face skyrocketing costs of jet fuel. The CEO of United Airlines says he’s planning for oil to go as high as $175 a barrel. That’s roughly double what it was just in January.
And the war has sparked renewed concerns about terrorism, retaliatory actions from Iran and its supporters. This as the Department of Homeland Security is effectively shut down with Congress at an impasse over funding. That partial shutdown has TSA officers going without pay, causing long security lines at airports across the country.
We will get to all of that this morning, and we start with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.
Secretary Duffy, thank you for joining.
Let’s start with the DHS funding impasse. Can you give us an update? Is there any sense that we’re any closer to an agreement to getting the department funded?
TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY SEAN DUFFY: Yes, the two sides are exchanging paper the last I know. I’m not intimately involved in the negotiations. But as you know, ICE is funded through 2029, but the president has made concessions to Democrats where ICE would wear body cameras.
I think the real sticker here is Democrats want ICE to take off their face masks. The problem with that is we know the Democrats are going to want to dox those ICE agents, go to their homes, harass their kids. That’s a problem.
And I think there’s a bigger issue here. The Democrats actually want to defund ICE or they want to defund CBP. And so, the commonsense Democrats have to come to the table, figure out a solution to, again, let these lines flow. This is spring break. We have families that are trying to go on vacation and they’re stuck in lines for two, three hours at a time. And it’s painful. With a guy with nine kids, I've traveled with them and it’s really hard just to get right through TSA and travel, let alone sit in lines for two to three hours.
KARL: Yes, it’s definitely getting bad. And I saw the president, just a short while ago this morning, posted this, saying, “on Monday, ICE will be going to airports to help our wonderful TSA agents.”
Is that really the plan? Are we going to see ICE officers manning those airport security checkpoints?
DUFFY: Well, I would say that, you know, one of the leverage points that Iran has is trying to drive up the price of oil. It’s leverage. Democrats want to see long lines at airports as leverage. President Trump’s trying to take that leverage away and not make the American people suffer. So, TSA agents are law enforcement. They know how to pat people down. They know how to run the x-ray machines because they are, again, under Homeland Security with TSA. So, if we can bring in other assets and tools to assist TSA to get rid of these lines, yes, I think that makes a lot of sense. And the president’s looking around every corner to make sure the American people don’t suffer during the shutdown.
KARL: And I understand ICE and TSA are both under DHS, but, obviously, greatly affect what you’re doing at the Department of Transportation and airports. Is there a plan in place? I mean how many ICE agents are we talking about? Do they have any, you know, practical, you know, experience in managing airport security lines?
DUFFY: Sure. Well, you -- they run those same type of security machines at the southern border, right? Packages come through or people come through. They run similar assets.
And again, even if we’re -- look at the line there. To manage the through flow of people and even administratively they’ll be helpful. But again, we have ICE agents who are trained and can provide assistance to agents.
The problem we have is this was like air traffic control. Again, we’ve seen, whether it’s Atlanta, some airports in New York, Houston, have been continual problems, but it depends on who shows up every single day depending -- will dictate how long these lines are. And you don’t know. And so, as travelers are trying to figure out, you know, do I have to come an hour and a half early? Do I have to come four hours early? They don’t know until the day of or the afternoon of their flight.
So, if we can alleviate that, again, the president wants to take away that leverage point for Democrats and make travel easier for the American people.
KARL: And we’ve seen TSA agents last week had to start working without pay. More than 10 percent. Monday and Wednesday, did not show up. We’ve also -- or the very latest we’ve heard is that some 400 TSA officers have quit since the shutdown began. You said, that this -- that the lines we’ve been seeing so far will be child’s play if this goes on much longer. How bad is it going to get? How bad is it going to be this week?
DUFFY: So, I think, as we look forward to Friday, that’s when the next paycheck should come. And if this -- if this Homeland Security funding isn’t resolved, I think you’re going to see more TSA agents, as we come to Thursday, Friday, Saturday of next week, they’re going to quit or they’re not going to show up.
A lot of the starting salaries at TSA, they’re right around $50,000. So, if you live in, you know, one of the big cities of America, L.A. or New York or Miami, it’s hard for these individuals already to make their ends meet. But without getting paychecks, it’s even that much more challenging.
And so, they’re going to take other jobs to put food on the table and pay the rent. So, I do think it’s going to get much worse. And as it gets worse, I think that puts pressure on the Congress to come to a resolution. Democrats have to say, you know what, we’re not going to defund this. We’re going to actually work together, have some common sense reform that the president will work with us on. And, you know, let’s get America working again.
And the last thing you want as you travel is to deal with political fights at the airport. Let that stay in Congress, but don’t extract pain out of me and my family as I’m trying to just go to
Florida and get some sun on my bones during spring break with my kids.
KARL: And what is the administration’s message to these agents -- who, as you point out, they don’t make big money. They’re hardworking Americans, and they’re not being paid.
Is the administration pleading them -- pleading with them to come show up for work, even though they’re not getting paid?
DUFFY: Well, I’ll say right now, yes, I’m asking for them to come, and we’ve asked them to come to work. And, you know, again, they -- they make family decisions that are right on behalf of their finances. But we want them to come.
And by the way, Jon, they’re going to get paid. They’re going to get paid for all the time that was missed. The problem is they’re living in the today, not the tomorrow. And they’re making decisions.
And that’s where the president -- again, thinking outside the box, on what other tools and assets do I have to alleviate the pain at the airports?
You mentioned there’s a 10 percent on average no show rate at airports. That’s true on average, but we have some airports where we’re missing as many as 30 to 40 percent of agents. And that’s when these airports grind to a halt.
And it’s not just the airports, right? The airports -- we’re seeing long lines. We experienced that as Americans.
It’s what else happens across the country. We let -- Democrats let, you know, 12 million, 15 million people in the country, they weren’t that well-vetted. And so, where are those people? And do they want to do us harm at a time when we’re in a conflict with Iran? That’s a real question.
We saw in New York -- I’m sorry, in Michigan, Senator Slotkin said, you know what? Once -- once a place of worship was attacked, then she said we should fund Homeland Security.
We can’t let people get hurt and then make a decision to fund Homeland Security. Let’s do it before Americans lose lives or we're attacked. Let’s fund it before that becomes a reality.
KARL: And another thing you’re dealing with is the skyrocketing costs of gasoline, jet fuel, diesel. This obviously affecting everything that moves around the country.
We’ve seen gas prices go up about $1 since the war started 23 days ago. How much worse is that going to get? And what -- what are -- what mitigating efforts are you taking to deal with that?
DUFFY: So, with regard to aviation, I have spoken to the major carriers. I was -- just want to check in on their supply chain. And are they concerned about supply for jet fuel? All of them were like, nope, we feel very good about our supply chains.
But it is the cost, right? And the president cares about the cost of energy. He cares -- I mean, he’s -- that’s why he’s had the American Energy Dominance Task Force to produce more energy, drive prices down.
I think you’re going to see this as short-lived. When the strait opens up, you’re going to see a little bit of a lag as those carriers get to their destinations. But I think you’re going to see a very quick rebound in energy prices when this conflict is resolved.
And again, we’re at week three. The president said this is going to be, you know, a four to six-week operation.
General Caine, who’s a meticulous planner, has said, you know, again, we’ve anticipated all that’s happening. They plan for it.
And again, they feel like -- and I’m not in the Pentagon, I’m not at War, but from all I’m hearing is they feel like we are doing an incredibly good job. We are on track and on pace to make sure we can bring this conflict to a resolution quickly.
KARL: So, what’s your -- what’s your advice to Americans that are planning air travel in the weeks or months ahead?
I mean, we’ve seen prices have already gone up significantly. You mentioned what United Airlines said.
Should people that have air travel plans in the coming weeks and months postpone buying those tickets with anticipation they’ll come back down? Or are we into a situation where they’re going to be up for a while?
DUFFY: Well, we haven’t seen a significant spike in airline tickets because of this conflict.
Now, Scott Kirby from United said, you know, he could see oil prices go up to, you know, $170. I think airlines do well when they plan for the worst and hope for the best. So, I’ll -- that’s what I think is happening there.
And again, United also said, “We’re going to cut back flights by three percent.” Well, one percent of those flights are to -- are to Israel, and the other one percent is he’s worked with the Department of Transportation to reduce flights in Chicago.
United and American were overbooking all these flights. They couldn’t fly them. And so, we are systematically rolling those back.
So, there’s really no impact on how many flights we’re going to have.
But again, I think we have to offer the president grace. We know the president cares about the economy, gas prices for the American people. He’s talked about that frequently and often. He also cares about peace.
And a lot of people don’t give him credit for that. But he’s proud of the conflicts that he resolves. And he doesn’t want to see conflict.
I hear him talk behind closed doors about the number of young men and women who are lost in battles around the world. He cares about that.
So, I think -- again, he cares about the economy, but also, we can’t have Iran shooting at American bases like they have for the last several years. They can’t hold the economy hostage, wherein 20 percent of the oil --
KARL: Right.
DUFFY: -- comes through the Strait of Hormuz.
I think when you look in the long run, he’s trying to make life better for America, more
secure for America, especially when you have Iran that has now missiles that we saw a couple days ago that can travel 2,500 miles and hit European capitals. And if they had nukes, even worse.
So, again, this is a long term strategy that’s going to make everyone better off and I think the economy stronger.
KARL: All right, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy, thank you for joining us.
Up next, my exclusive interview with the retiring Republican senator who has opposed President Trump’s biggest agenda items during his second term.
We are back in two minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. THOM TILLIS, (R) NORTH CAROLINA: What we’ve seen is a disaster under your leadership, Ms. Noem. A disaster. What we’ve seen is innocent people getting detained that turn out are American citizens. A 14-month-old dog is basically a teenager in dog years. You decided to kill that dog because you had not invested the appropriate time in training, and then you have the audacity to go into a book and say it’s a leadership lesson about tough choices.
We’re an exceptional nation. And one of the reasons we're exceptional is we expect exceptional leadership. And you’ve demonstrated anything but that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: You may recognize Republican Senator Thom Tillis from that viral takedown of soon to be former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem earlier this month. Two days after that, President Trump announced that Noem would be out as DHS secretary. The North Carolina senator is one of the few Republicans in Congress who have been willing to stand up to the Trump administration. But with his retirement looming, he has kicked it up a notch. He voted against President Trump’s big tax bill last summer. He’s a no on the SAVE America Act, now Trump’s top legislative priority. He stands firmly with NATO, and he has criticized what he calls the “sycophants, toadies and bootlickers in the Trump White House.”
But Thom Tillis says that he and the president are on good terms and that he only wants Trump to be successful.
Here is my exclusive interview with Senator Tillis.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KARL: So, you seem a little liberated since you announced you weren’t running for re-election. What’s going on?
SEN. THOM TILLIS, (R) NORTH CAROLINA: Well, number one, I think people need to look back and recognize that I’ve been pretty plain spoken since I’ve been in politics.
KARL: You seem a little more plainspoken.
TILLIS: Well, the -- you know, when people have said, you seem a little bit more liberated. I said, no (EXPLETIVE DELETED), Sherlock, I no longer have to view things through a political lens. Of course. You know, if -- now I have to -- I no longer have to do a kind of a cost benefit analysis. If I say this, what is it going to take me in time and money to explain it to people in the context of an election? I don't have to go through that cost benefit process anymore. And so the only thing that really gates what I say is with an intent to make sure that Republicans are best positioned for elections next year.
I'm not trying to undermine Republicans. I'm trying to undermine efforts that are going to make it very difficult for Republicans to get elected in November. And so what I'm doing is trying to make people mindful. If you think that the state of North Carolina can be won through just the ultra MAGA vote, you haven't passed fifth grade math. If you're not really smart about our priorities, maybe you'll do okay in some of the red states. But we could -- we could wake up on Wednesday morning and find out we -- we're not in the majority anymore in the Senate, and that's the last thing that I want to have happen here.
KARL: So you -- you've gone up against the president's -- or the president or his policies or his Cabinet, really vocally. I mean, you obviously were among the first to really go after Kristi Noem. You called out the efforts to prosecute Democrats who made that video. You, obviously, in terms of the subpoena against the Fed chairman, Jerome Powell, you made it very clear, totally against that. You won't vote for a new Fed chairman until it's done away with.
How does the president take all that?
TILLIS: You know, I generally -- I still have what I believe to be a healthy relationship with the president. I don't criticize the president. You know, people say, well, you're dodging criticizing the president. Look, the president of the United States is like a CEO in any large, complex multinational organization. He can't be an expert in everything. The only thing he can do is get the right people to advise him, because, my goodness, just look at the complexity of the job.
So invariably, there's one of two ways you can give advice -- a bad advice to the president of the United States. One of them is come up with a really bad idea and sell him on it. The other one is he comes up with an idea that may be not so good. And you say, great, great idea, boss. Either way, you've got to say, Mr. President, have you looked around this corner? Have you seen the second and third order of effects that may occur? Are you -- are we sure that this fits with other priorities that you have?
And I just think that he either has sycophants or cowards around him that need to get out of the way so that we can establish a good, solid, enduring legacy of the president producing good results. The president has been very good to me. At a personal level, I like him a lot. I mean, I've called the man on a Sunday morning and said, hey, my mom would just love the chance to talk with you. You have a -- and he'll stop and talk to her for five minutes.
So there are aspects about this president that I admire and will always admire, but I do not admire bad advice, and I hate bad execution. And when I see it, and I think it's undermining the president of the United States' agenda, then I'm going to call them out.
KARL: So who are these sycophants and cowards?
TILLIS: Well, you know, I'm not going to get into details. I think I've shared with you my opinion about Stephen Miller.
KARL: Stephen Miller.
TILLIS: Look, I don't think anybody should think that Stephen Miller is going to be a curator at the Trump Presidential Library when he's done here. He's going to go find another wave to serve, but I don't think that he's particularly loyal. And I also don't believe he's got a particularly great reputation for working with people in the White House. But what really made me angry is when he had the audacity to go to cameras and say, it's the position of the United States that Greenland should become a part of the United States.
That is absolutely the proverbial straw. I had taken and heard a lot of his comments, and I decided to internalize it, but being involved in the Senate-NATO Observer Group, and knowing how offensive that was to our allies, knowing that Denmark had, on a per capita basis, excuse me, the same number of deaths as the U.S. in Afghanistan made me angry. And that's the sort of stuff that -- he doesn't speak for me.
He doesn't speak for the Article I branch, and he does that sort of garbage all the time. And I'm just saying I know that he's got a special relationship with the president, but believe me when I tell you, if the president thinks that Stephen Miller is worried about his legacy, he's fooling himself. Stephen Miller is worried about his own legacy.
KARL: But can I press you a little bit on this question of the president's responsibility for this?
TILLIS: Mm-hmm.
KARL: I mean, it was Donald Trump who put Kristi Noem in charge of the Department of Homeland Security, who has given Stephen Miller the authority that he has. It was Donald Trump who first talked about wanting to acquire Greenland for the United States. These are his policies and the people he chose to execute them.
Doesn't the buck stop with him?
TILLIS: If the -- no, I still think that it goes back to the advice that they're getting. And if one
person can't convince the president, then you get some of the other people together.
You know, with respect to noms, you know, most of the time the president's probably not going, “This is my list of noms, go figure out which one you want”. People are bringing forth noms to him. I wouldn't expect him to have an encyclopedic knowledge of all the people that he's put forward.
Again, I go back to, who was responsible for -- for actually putting forth Kristi Noem as a nom, what was that process about?
Now, I don't have any problem with Kristi Noem, the person, but it was clear to me that no one should have said that that experience she had as governor, or the brief period of time that she was a House member qualified her to run such an enormously complex and consequential organization as the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA.
So, I'm just saying more people around him need to say, “Guys, we got to look at this in terms of the probability of her being successful.” And it could have -- you could have helped her from herself because I took no pleasure in the criticism that I put her way a couple of weeks ago in the hearing, but every single bit of it was substantiated in facts.
KARL: So let me ask you about Iran. Are you -- how would you define right now, three weeks into this? What is the objective, the primary objective?
TILLIS: I don't know, and I think it's a real problem. I think the president did a really good job with Venezuela talking about what the objective is. It was in, it was out, and -- and I think they did a good job there with that -- with extracting Maduro.
I did -- there’s still some argument about whether or not that regime is going to have a long-term commitment to the U.S. or going to realize what I think the president wants to achieve there long term. But I think that it's trending in the right direction.
Here, you know, I thought the initial bombing raid a while back was --
KARL: Last summer.
TILLIS: -- very successful.
I could see why we needed to finish some of the work and go back in and maybe have a week or two back in there, really degrading their capabilities.
Now, it's very -- it's ambiguous. I don't know what our long-term strategic goals are, but we're going to need to know that. I generally support what the president’s doing in Iran, but if we're going to get anything close to the $200 billion supplemental request, we got to get 60 votes, and we're going to have to figure out how to accomplish that.
KARL: Yeah, I mean, they've said four to five weeks to do again, what the objectives are, unclear --
TILLIS: Yeah.
KARL: -- but $200 billion doesn't sound like four or five weeks.
TILLIS: No, it --I mean, if you do the math, my guess is right now -- there were estimates of a billion to billion-and-a-half a day spent. So, let's assume at this point that about $30 billion has been spent sustaining the operation, paying personnel, supporting the kinetic strikes.
We need to know how that money is going to be spent, and if it's going beyond a 60-day horizon, then we really do need to talk about the authorization for the use of military force and longer-term funding trails.
So, we'll look at the request here and see what's baked into it, and then we've got to work on getting Democratic support.
KARL: And what do you make of this notion that the president's been saying that, you know, we don't use the Strait of Hormuz, because that's not our oil, that's not the oil we buy. So, the suggestion is, you know, the United States could basically pick up and leave, and allow somebody else to deal with the fact that the straits have been --
TILLIS: I think that'd be problematic, because obviously, the world -- global supply chains are real. The ships that are available -- I mean, I'm hearing very long time to get back to normal shipping patterns out of that region. We have a number of partners and allies in the region whose economic fortunes rest on the Strait of Hormuz being open.
So even -- even if you stipulate that maybe there's not a direct impact in terms of commerce moving through the Straits of Hormuz, for the US, our allies, our partners and the people we rely on to stabilize the Middle East, and many of our friends in Europe and in Africa rely on it, and we have to keep that in mind.
We can't, all of a sudden, go out there and intervene the way we have and then suddenly become an isolationist in the -- in the back end of it. You just -- you can't have it both ways. We've decided that we're going to project power and try and produce good outcomes in the Middle East. You can't, all of a sudden, walk away after you've kind of created the event and expect other people to pick it up and leave -- and leave a good taste in their mouth.
I mean, a part of this is, you know, the health and hygiene of our partnerships in the region going forward, and if we exit and say, “Now it's your turn to clean it up,” I don't think that that will end well.
KARL: Well, he just -- I mean, just, just today, he called NATO cowards. He said they're cowards for not willing to come in and secure the Strait of Hormuz.
TILLIS: I don't think that they're cowards. I think they're people that weren't consulted on a major military operation, and I'd have the same reaction if I was the head of state. Not that I don't want to get there and help, but I think it’s -- it's not productive to sit there and have created an environment that only -- that did not exist before our action, and then to say, it's time for somebody else to come in.
And look, this is about losing lives. I mean, this is a very dangerous part of the world. This isn't a part -- this isn't just about a ship sinking. This is about a ship's crew and whatever military personnel are deployed there to try and ensure safe passage.
So again, I'm the Republican leader, have been since 2018, of the Senate NATO Observer Group. I know these countries well. I meet with them regularly at the Munich Security Conference, at the NATO Summits. And these folks love the United States. Our mil-to-mil relationships are very strong, but they don't appreciate the way they're being treated right now. And I can absolutely understand that.
KARL: President Trump, just this week, suggested that he could pull out of NATO, and that -- he also added that, you know, I can do that without Congress.
TILLIS: Yeah, well, that's factually not true. The president of the United States cannot withdraw from NATO. Now, having said that, the president can poison the well. The president can make it functionally defunct if he wants to, but I would really encourage him to take a hundred -- the top 100 generals in the Pentagon right now and ask any of them if they think it's a good idea to sever that relationship.
And you'd be hard pressed -- if they're telling you the truth -- you'd be hard pressed to find one, because that has enormous, enormous risk in it. American lives have been saved by the NATO alliance, and American lives will be lost in great numbers without it.
KARL: Coming up a live update on the war with Iran from our correspondent in the region, James Longman.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It's a simple military maneuver. It's relatively safe, but you need a lot of help in the sense of you need ships, you need volume, and NATO could help us, but they so far haven't had the courage to do so, and others could help us. But you know, we don't use it, you know, at a certain point, It'll open itself, at a certain point.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: Well, that was President Trump this week on what it would take to open the Strait of Hormuz. For the latest on the Iran war, let’s get to the region with our chief international correspondent James Longman in northern Iraq.
So, James, bottom line, where are we as we head into week four of this war?
JAMES LONGMAN, ABC NEWS CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think, John, there are two versions of events on this war so far. The first very much from the White House that Iran is beaten. Seven thousand plus targets have been hit. You’ve seen the Navy and the Air Force almost completely obliterated. Missile and drone capacity has almost been totally wiped out. The defense infrastructure is gone too. And every time we see these drone and missile strikes, these are just the acts of a desperate regime lashing out in every direction because they’re in a death spiral.
The other version is this, that there is no sign that the regime is about to fall, that they’ve been carefully planning their response to what they knew would be overwhelming military firepower. And we see two tactics working, this stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz and striking energy infrastructure across this region. They are turning this into a global energy crisis and doesn’t look like the U.S. has much ability to control it.
Now. Hormuz is the most serious. Ninety percent of Saudi oil passes through there. Iran is choking the Gulf. And by the way, only Iranian-approved tankers are getting through, like the Iranian oil that still is going to China, for example. So, the U.S. might not be a direct customer of this oil, but the impact on global oil prices cannot be avoided. And America’s adversaries, China and Russia, are gaining.
Jon.
KARL: And, James, we know more U.S. forces are headed to the region. So, are boots on the ground considered a real possibility to open up the strait?
LONGMAN: Yes, I think that is reasonable to assume. Kharg Island might be the tactic here. That’s the terminal on the Persian Gulf where 90 percent of Iranian crude is processed. Could that be held hostage in some way as a bargaining chip, because the dangers in the strait aren’t just coming from missile launches, we saw bunker busters didn’t seem to work along the coast there. These are unmanned surface vessels. They’re essentially booby-trapped speedboats that are being driven into the side of tankers.
So, what is the simple military maneuver that is needed? Arguably, you need boots on the ground to stop this or a ceasefire, which is what the Europeans are asking for. Now, Trump has said he might blow up power plants if Iran doesn’t open the strait. That would, obviously, be catastrophic for the nation of Iran and also probably sour public sentiment against this war. Many Iranians have welcomed the possibility of bringing down the regime, but blowing up power plants doesn’t mean revolution, it means chaos.
Jon.
KARL: Our thanks to James Longman.
Coming up, the roundtable on the political fallout here at home. We’re back in two minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JON OSSOFF (D-GA): Was it the intelligence community’s assessment that nevertheless, despite this obliteration, there was a, quote, “imminent” nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime? Yes or no?
TULSI GABBARD, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat. That is up to the president based on a volume --
OSSOFF: OK. Here’s the problem --
GABBARD: -- of information that he receives.
OSSOFF: No, it is -- it is precisely -- it is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: That was Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff challenging Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard over the threat from Iran.
Let’s bring in the roundtable. Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, former DNC Chair Donna Brazile, “Washington Post” congressional reporter Marianna Sotomayor, and SCOTUSBlog editor, Sarah Isgur, author of the upcoming book, “The Last Branch Standing”.
So, Governor Christie, just resolved that thing there about imminent threat. Is it the president that determines that, or is it the intelligence community?
CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) FORMER NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think the way it should be divided is the intelligence community decides whether the threat is imminent and the president decides what to do.
KARL: Right.
CHRISTIE: And, you know, look, Tulsi Gabbard obviously disagrees with this move in Iran. She’s been a regular critic of these kind of actions by the United States, but she’s part of the Trump cabinet, which means everyone must nod and say, “Great idea, sir.”
And so, that’s what you saw in her testimony. She didn’t lie under oath. She just didn’t tell the whole truth.
But when you look at what’s going on here, Jon, the worst part of this is many of us predicted this during the presidential campaign. America First, as Donald Trump does, it is going to mean America alone. And we saw the ramifications of that this week with our allies.
When the president wanted them to come and help in the Straits of Hormuz, but, you know, after you whack them with tariffs over and over again in a completely ill-advised way, when you tell Denmark you’re going to steal Greenland from them militarily if need be, and when you regularly call them cowards, and then you call up and ask them for a favor -- you know, it’s not playing chess to figure out that that probably isn’t going to work.
KARL: Well, and you ask them to come to your aid after you didn’t tell them a damn thing about what you were going to do in Iran.
CHRISTIE: Yeah.
KARL: So --
DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER DNC CHAIR & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: There’s something else that we have to put on the table. When you -- you eased the sanctions on Russia. So, they’re getting money. And you eased the sanctions on Iranian oil.
And what is the strategy? We still have no strategy going into the fourth week. No strategy.
You don’t consult with allies, and yet you want them to come to your rescue, and you’re not involving Congress in any of the long-term implications of what these missile strikes are going to do.
When Iran has the capabilities -- and I’m not -- you know, clearly my dad was much better at military than I am. But when they have ballistic missiles that can go 400 -- 4,000 kilometers toward Diego Garcia --
KARL: Yeah.
BRAZILE: -- and we take down one -- and one is whatever -- that is something that the president is not telling the American people.
So, they have no strategy. They’re holding press conferences and they’re contradicting themselves every day of the week.
KARL: And then we had Joe Kent, who was the head of the national counterterrorism center, appointed by President Trump and somebody who was very close to Tulsi Gabbard, resigned in protest over the war.
And this is what he said in his letter of resignation: “I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation.” He then goes on to attack Israel and suggest this was all about Israel.
But that was quite a moment.
SARAH ISGUR, EDITOR AT SCOTUSBLOG & ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: This is an interesting time for Republicans in the Senate to think about their role in advise and consent, as we saw from Senator Tillis, right? Are they supposed to give the president whatever advisors he wants, or do they actually have some substantive job to make sure these people can do the job that they’re being asked to do?
Joe Kent obviously never should have been confirmed. He shouldn’t have had the position that he had. And the resignation, as we’ve seen with a lot of things with Republicans these days, there is this idea of a fracture within the Republican Party, this idea of sort of the Tucker Carlson, Joe Kent wing of the party trying to push back on Donald Trump, but we don’t actually have political parties, I think, as people used to think of them.
We got rid of political parties 25 years ago, and instead we have Donald Trump. And so, when you actually poll Republicans, this sort of, you know, splinter group of the Republican Party is going nowhere. Donald Trump remains incredibly popular with Republicans.
KARL: You don’t see a big movement following Tucker Carlson --
ISGUR: It’s not happening. And so, when you look, whether it’s the SAVE Act or Iran or anything else that the president is doing, the party doesn’t move voters. The leader of the party does. And that’s true for Democrats and Republicans.
KARL: But the Pentagon is now preparing a budget request, $200 billion, to fund the war.
Marianna, what’s your sense is -- I mean, first of all, that’s a lot of money.
MARIANNA SOTOMAYOR, WASHINGTON POST CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER: It’s a lot.
KARL: I mean, it sounds like more than a three- or four-week operation. Tillis says you can't do that without, you know, Democratic support. Have you found any Democrats that are going to support that?
SOTOMAYOR: No, not right now. There are many Democratic leaders who have already said that they are unlikely to support this, even though there is pushback of, well, what are we going to do with all the ammunitions that we have used? The U.S. has to refill that stockpile.
But a lot of Republican leaders are also not necessarily touching this yet, because they haven't officially gotten that request. It's really the first thing that Congress is going to debate over this issue. We have not seen any investigations. We have -- we don't expect that to happen among Republicans anytime soon.
And it is going to be difficult because you do need 60 votes in the Senate to make this happen. And it's unlikely at least anytime soon, unless something worse happens. And potentially, if boots are placed on the ground, maybe that's where you're going to see more Republicans start to ask questions and push back.
But that's really been the only condition I've heard coming from the Republican side.
BRAZILE: Well, first of all, Democrats understand that Iran has posed a threat not just to the region, the Gulf, but to the world itself. I mean, but the question is why now after Operation -- what was it? Midnight Summer? I forget.
KARL: Hammer.
BRAZILE: Well, thank you. I'm not a rap star, so clearly, I can't get these operations together. But we supposedly obliterated their nuclear capabilities, but not all of their strategic ballistic missiles and these drones that look like they bought them all out of RadioShack.
And we're trying to take them out with our big advanced missiles. Again, you take us to war with a strategy, you take us to war with allies, you take us to war with authorization from Congress. Democrats must continue to use whatever leverage they have to raise these questions.
And the media needs to raise these questions. This is a serious time because we're paying for it at the pump. Now, I don't want to tell you what kind of car I drive because I have two cars. And clearly, one of them will stay in the garage because it is expensive.
Any moment now, it's going to eat into my other little money that I put aside for my chips and dips because gas prices is really -- it's just going up and up and up with no end in sight.
KARL: And this is all happening as we have this shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, basically, no funding for anything except for ICE. I mean, where is this going? What's your sense, Governor?
CHRISTIE: Well, look, as it continues to impact lines at airports.
KARL: Yeah.
CHRISTIE: As we get closer to the summer when people are going to be going on vacation, you know, it's going to have to come to a head. And when you have a two-and-a-half hour line in Atlanta, in the busiest airport in the country, this is going to become a huge problem.
But look, what everyone is saying around the table here is an indication that the president plays checkers, not chess. This is a guy who just looks at what jump he can make today, doesn't look if there's a double jump coming in the other direction.
So you do what you do with Iran. You don't think about what happens with the Strait of Hormuz. You don't think that what that is going to force you to do to deal with gas prices that Donna just talked about, is to relieve sanctions on Russia and Iran, who you're going to war with?
I mean, the American people see this stuff. And my point on this, Jon, is this goes to competence. It goes to, are you competent to run the government and make these decisions? And every time one decision is made, another domino gets knocked down. And the president and the people around him are not considering those things.
KARL: But the Democrats have forced this shutdown. They have offered we'll fund, you know, TSA and then still continue the impasse over everything else for negotiations there. But Marianna, is there any doubt that this is a wise course of action, you know, forcing a shutdown at a time when there is no doubt an increasing terror threat, and when the thing you're opposing is already funded for the next two years?
SOTOMAYOR: Yeah, I mean, the pressure is building and there is some good news. Finally, some negotiations happening on the Senate side, bipartisan, but we're still a ways away to an actual deal. What will that look like?
And as you mentioned, ICE, for example, which was the Democrats' first argument against funding DHS, they're already funded. They are able to get their paychecks. They are working. So I do think Democrats, as of right now, they are still pushing the requirements that they want, you know, face masks, videos for these ICE agents.
But because the backdrop has changed, there is more pressure on them to finally start at least a good faith negotiation (ph).
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: I'm glad the Democrats show backbone every now and then, because we get bullied for being weak and indecisive. What the Democrats said pursuant to funding the rest of the government was that, they wanted some reforms with ICE, the judicial warrants, the identification. They can't act like rent-a-cops. They have to act like law enforcement.
They cannot ram through our house. Look, I have witnessed ICE.
ISGUR: Donna, it's all funded. They're just holding up --
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: They are funded but they –
(CROSSTALK)
BRAZILE: They're funded, but their --
ISGUR: This reminds me of when President Obama shut down the national parks during that shutdown because the point was for the American people to feel the pain of the shutdown.
KARL: I mean, the shutdown was caused by the Republicans in that case.
ISGUR: That's right. And it was --
KARL: And he did the most visible thing. Yes.
ISGUR: That's right. And so here we have Democrats --
BRAZILE: Well, Democrats --
(CROSSTALK)
ISGUR: ICE has been funded --
BRAZILE: Opportunities to fund.
ISGUR: They do not have leverage here on ICE.
BRAZILE: But Democrats have offered opportunities to fund FAA, TSA, and every other. But the Republicans have rejected it. I agree with you. The negotiations are ongoing and hopefully Tom Homan will be able to strike a deal with moderate Democrats and get the government fully funded.
CHRISTIE: This is a dumb move by both parties. This is a dumb move by both parties. This is why Congress's approval rating is in the single digits, because the American people say, we sent you down there to operate the government, not to close it. And both of them look for these tactical ways that it may help them. But in the end --
ISGUR: We just had a shutdown.
(CROSSTALK)
KARL: All right.
CHRISTIE: -- them with the American people. Democrats and Republicans.
KARL: We have to take a quick break.
Coming up, the president's stunning response to former FBI director Robert Mueller's death. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KARL: All right, we're back with the round table. And I want to get to the death of Robert Mueller. And just as a reminder, here is what Donald Trump posted just minutes after the death was announced. "Robert Mueller just died. Good. I'm glad he's dead. He can no longer hurt innocent people."
Governor Christie, you knew Robert Mueller for many years. What do you -- what do you make of that?
CHRISTIE: Well, look, first of all, it's reprehensible for anyone to say that about someone who had the life of service that Robert Mueller had. Even more reprehensible for somebody
who is the commander-in-chief of the military to say that about a veteran --
BRAZILE: Right.
CHRISTIE: -- who was a decorated veteran in Vietnam War. And by the way, who didn't get drafted, volunteered, as you noted earlier in the program.
KARL: While many others were doing everything they could to stay out of it.
CHRISTIE: Yeah, of course. I don't know who you're talking about, but yeah. So the fact is, I knew Bob very well. We worked together for seven years when I was U.S. Attorney. And by the way, we had some epic fights during that time.
KARL: I've heard some stories. Yeah.
CHRISTIE: Yes. And so it's not like I'm an unadulterated Bob Mueller fan. There were a lot of things we disagreed on. But the one thing I can tell you about him is that when his country called him to service, he never said no. And he never put conditions on it.
And even times when the Russia investigation went on, when he was brought into play there, he wasn't up to it. I mean, we saw that at the end.
KARL: Yeah.
CHRISTIE: But he couldn't say no when his country called him and asked him to serve. And this is something -- to say what the president said about Bob Mueller just shows you how completely self-consumed the president is, because that's where it comes from. It comes from his own sense that the only thing that matters in the world is him.
(CROSSTALK)
KARL: I mean, it was instantaneous the way he did it.
CHRISTIE: Well, of course, that's what a child does, Jon.
KARL: And by the way, Sarah, when Barack Obama decided to extend Mueller's service as FBI Director, he had served the full 10 years, there had to be another vote at the Senate. Do you remember what the vote was?
ISGUR: I believe it was unanimous.
KARL: It was 100 to nothing.
ISGUR: That's right.
KARL: And it was a recorded vote.
ISGUR: He was only the sixth ever FBI director, most -- many FBI personnel would tell you he was probably the best director that the FBI ever had.
KARL: No Kash Patel though.
(LAUGH)
ISGUR: I do marvel at the sort of Streisand effect of this. Would we be talking about Robert Mueller's service today if Donald Trump hadn't said that? And that's really what Donald Trump has always been so good at, is picking these sort of more cultural-ish fights that aren't about policy. They're not even about politics.
And you have folks, I think, correctly pointing out that these are the same people who, when anyone said something negative about Charlie Kirk, that they said, that's absurd. They were right. And yet, here we are.
BRAZILE: I didn't know Mr. Mueller, but I admired him from afar. His legacy to our nation will outlive any tweet or any statement of the current president.
KARL: All right. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KARL: And that's all for today. Thank you for sharing part of your Sunday with us. Check out "World News Tonight" and have a great day.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
Popular Reads
ABC News Live