Return to Transcripts main page

CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt

U.S. Consulate Grounds In Dubai Hit By Suspected Iranian Drone; Now: Rubio, Hegseth Briefing Congress On Iran War; Now: Dow Falls 400 Points, Oil Surges In Response To Iran War. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired March 03, 2026 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:06]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: The secretary of state saying that it was a parking lot adjacent to the building. We're still gathering more details on exactly what happened.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: He said no injuries. We'll look for details there.

"THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" starts right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Breaking news. An American diplomatic compound coming under suspected attack.

Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA. It's good to have you with us on this Tuesday.

As we come on the air, the grounds of the American consulate in Dubai have been struck by what a source says is suspected to have been an Iranian drone. The Dubai government announcing moments ago that the fire has been extinguished and no one was injured.

Elsewhere in the region, the U.S. embassies in Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Kuwait have all been closed, and numerous other consular facilities have been evacuated, amid mounting Iranian attacks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get away from the windows. Take cover and await further instructions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: This footage coming to us from Jordan as the U.S. embassy there was temporarily evacuated overnight. The State Department is urging Americans across the Middle East to leave the region and readying new resources to facilitate those evacuations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Nine thousand Americans have been able to leave the region since the start of this war. We have about 1,500 Americans that are requesting assistance with departure. It will be a variety of methods, charter flights, military flights and transports, expanded commercial opportunities and in some cases land routes that will allow them to go to neighboring countries who might have open airports at that point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: Right now, the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, still on Capitol Hill. He is briefing the full Senate on the administration's war plans. The full House is expected to receive their own briefing in the next hour.

Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel will be here and we have reporters covering the story from here in the U.S. but also, of course, across the Middle East.

CNN's Clarissa Ward live for us in Iraq. Nick Paton Walsh, we find him in Tel Aviv. Kristen Holmes outside the White House, Vanessa Yurkevich at the New York Stock Exchange.

Clarissa, first to you.

What more are we learning about the strike on the grounds of the U.S. consulate in Dubai? And what else are we seeing? What other movement across the region?

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, Kasie, we still don't have a full picture of exactly what happened in Dubai, although we did hear from secretary rubio there that the fire has been extinguished, that no one was harmed, that it reportedly was some kind of a drone that hit adjacent to the chancery in the parking lot. Dubai Media City also putting out a report saying that the fire has been extinguished, that nobody has been harmed.

But nonetheless, of course, this causing a significant amount of alarm across the region. We've also just heard in the last couple of hours an updated travel announcement from the U.S. State Department with regards to non-emergency government employees here at the U.S. consulate in Erbil, and also at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, that all of them must leave Iraq.

This follows on the warning, telling Americans in 14 different countries to leave Iraq. Obviously, the logistics of this incredibly complex, Kasie, because, simply put there is no easy way to leave Iraq at the moment. And as if to underscore the need for that order, we saw just a few hours ago some booms and bright lights in the sky, and then learned that another drone attack had been intercepted, allegedly targeting the U.S. consulate in Erbil.

It's the U.S. consulate in Erbil and the airport in Erbil that have been the focus of most of these strikes, though interesting to note today, Kasie, we did see a couple of Iranian Kurdish opposition militia groups who are present here in Iraq along the border with Iran come under attack as well. And we have spoken, in fact, to a senior leader from the KDPI, which is one of these Iranian Kurdish militia groups who told us that today President Trump actually made a personal phone call to the president of the KDPI.

Now he did not say what was discussed during the phone call. He said that it was positive. But all of this, of course going to just fuel speculation that the U.S. and Israel may be potentially looking at ways to support Iranian Kurds on the ground, possibly with a view to have them push in for some kind of a ground offensive inside Iran, with all of the complexity and risk that that would entail, Kasie.

HUNT: Indeed, complexity exactly the word for it and yet understating the reality at the same time.

Nick, you're in Tel Aviv right now. What have you been seeing there throughout the day?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Look, Iran's fighting a different fight. Iran is fighting a fight where they need to drive up the -- some interceptors over here, over Tel Aviv, some coming closer to our direction. The sirens sounding. Obviously, everyone buys them to seek shelter.

[16:05:01]

But this is part of a pattern of what we've been seeing here, as indeed, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warns that it will be the U.S. side that is likely to escalate in the coming days and hours in their intensity. We've also just come, Kasie, from northern Israel where we've seen the beginnings of Israel's move on the ground into southern Lebanon.

They're not describing it as a ground invasion. At this stage, merely increasing the buffer zone. Ultimately, the Israelis kept fire positions inside Lebanon after a ceasefire kicked in. They're putting troops now. It seems to widen that and secure settlements just inside northern Israel, but also, too, giving now an extensive list of villages in southern Lebanon that they expect civilians to evacuate from as they intensify their strikes, 60 targets we've just heard from the Israelis hit inside Lebanon today, was 70 yesterday. They're now telling representatives of the Iranian government, they say, to leave Lebanon as quickly as possible.

Indeed, the defense minister of Israel, Israel Katz, saying that they are going to disarm Hezbollah. That is an extensive task, one that's significantly easier than it was when they last launched an assault in late 2024. Clearly, Hezbollah, from what we saw there, some impacts landing near us, a rocket flying overhead, but nothing like the ferocity many talked about in late 2024.

So, Israel having a new frontier, certainly, but it appears so far to be comparatively one sided in terms of Hezbollah's ability to fire back -- Kasie.

HUNT: Okay. So, Kristen Holmes, the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, also the national security advisor, he is on Capitol Hill. He spoke to reporters earlier. He, honestly, you know, he pushed back quite a bit.

I mean, you could -- you could see his kind of reaction to the questions that he was getting about the mixed messaging that seems to be coming from the administration. What are you hearing?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, I mean he was clearly getting frustrated, but largely likely because this caused an enormous amount of pain for the White House, for the State Department.

Yesterday was the first day that we saw consistent messaging up until we heard from the secretary of state, heard President Trump come out publicly laying out objectives. We heard Pete Hegseth come out, similar objectives. And then it got to Marco Rubio, and it seemed as though the secretary of state essentially was implying that we had to follow Israel into this war that then caused problems.

We've heard both President Trump tried -- not even try, just completely undercut that. And then Marco Rubio tried to clean it up. Here are the sequence of all these comments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces. And we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.

REPORTER: Mr. President, Israel forced your hand to launch these strikes against Iran, didn't pull the United States into this war?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No. I might have forced their hand. You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn't do it. I thought we were going to have a situation where we were going to be attacked. They were getting ready to attack Israel. They were getting ready to attack others.

REPORTER: Yesterday, you told us that Israel was going to strike Iran and that that's why we needed to get involved. Today, the president said that Iran was going to get --

RUBIO: No. Yeah. Your statement is false. So that's not what -- I was asked very specifically. Were you there yesterday?

REPORTER: Yes.

RUBIO: Okay. No. Were you the one that. Because somebody asked me a question yesterday, did we go in because of Israel? And I said you asked me that the follow up. And I said, no, I told you this had to happen anyway.

The president made a decision, and the decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ballistic missile program, that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ability to conduct these attacks. That decision had been made. The president systematically -- made a decision to systematically destroy this terroristic capability that they had, and we carried that out. I was very clear on that answer. This was a question of timing of why

this had to happen as a joint operation, not the question of the intent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: So you can see there, Marco Rubio is talking about the follow up question from yesterday when he did say that they believed or they knew that Israel was going to strike, and that in turn, Iran would retaliate on to U.S. forces but there has been a lot of cleanup for those comments.

I just want to quickly note, you know, a lot of what were doing is moving on to new questions about what comes next. I mean, we still hear them tongue tied over the justification for this, but now the questions are who is actually going to be in charge here? What is the United States doing?

President Trump was asked specifically about who he wanted or who he believed would lead Iran and he said that most of them were dead, which certainly continues to beg the question of what the plan is here moving forward.

HUNT: It does beg the question, indeed.

Vanessa Yurkevich the question, of course where you are is what's oil going to do?

[16:10:01]

Oil prices are up at the moment. The president warning it could stay that way for a while. What do the markets do today?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS & POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Well, investors I have been speaking with have just been really surprised by the dramatic swings that we've seen over the last two days. And investors really paring back some of the losses of the day.

The Dow closing -- I'm looking over my shoulder here down 400 points, really crawling back on some of those losses. At one point, the Dow was down 1,200 points. And investors started the day with news kind of in the later evening from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who expressed that the worst was yet to come and so they woke up this morning with the possibility that this could go on for quite some time.

And they also were hearing from Iran that Iran would likely strike any cargo vessel carrying oil moving through that critical passageway, the Strait of Hormuz, which transits 20 percent of the world's oil. And the two key things that I've been hearing from investors are we want to know how long this is going to go on and what this means for the world's oil supply.

They heard from President Trump a little bit later in the afternoon on Truth Social. And during one of his comments to the press that possibly a lot of Iran's military has been knocked out already. Also, that he was directing safe passage from the U.S. Navy to any oil vessels that were crossing through the Strait of Hormuz, also providing any financial insurance should anything happen.

So, investors became a little more satisfied with the president's response to this war. But of course, as you mentioned, Kasie, oil prices still rising just looking here, U.S. crude up 4 percent alone today. And Brent crude up almost 2.5 percent today that translates directly to gas prices.

And what we've seen today alone is the national average for gas prices $3.11. That is up 12 cents since yesterday. That is the steepest rise since March of 2022 and now gas prices today are higher than they were a year ago.

And according to GasBuddy, we could see gas prices increase for consumers another 10 cents to 12 cents in the next week if this situation in the Middle East does not deescalate. But here on Wall Street, a bit of a recovery after some comments from the president, but bracing at the pump for higher prices in the next week -- Kasie.

HUNT: Bracing indeed. Seems like we're bracing for quite a few things across all of the region's topic areas. Everyone here covered so wonderfully for us. Thank you all very much for being here and stay safe to our correspondents in the field.

Coming up next here in THE ARENA, we are monitoring Capitol Hill, where top Trump administration officials are briefing lawmakers right now. We will keep you updated on if they make statements or take questions.

And we'll talk with one house lawmaker who is set to be in that briefing, Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): So, the Trump administration first says it's going to be America first, then puts out a national defense strategy and then goes to war alongside Israel, illegally, unconstitutionally. And that is now the policy of the Trump administration -- say one thing in a campaign, write it down on paper, and then go do whatever the hell you want.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:17:48]

HUNT: All right. Right now, we are continuing to follow breaking news out of the Middle East where the grounds of the U.S. consulate in Dubai were struck by what sources say was a suspected Iranian drone. The Dubai government announcing no one was hurt the fire has been extinguished.

This all coming as other U.S. embassies across the region have also been closed due to increased threats from Iran. Joining me now to discuss, CNN military analyst, retired Admiral James

Stavridis. He is, of course, also the former NATO supreme allied commander.

Admiral, I'm always so grateful to have your perspective here in THE ARENA.

The question I had watching that smoke rise from this hit is, and maybe its unanswerable but id really love to know your thoughts on what is the likeliest scenario here is, this the worst it's going to get, or what is possible next?

ADMIRAL JAMES STAVRIDIS (RET.), CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST: I'll answer that momentarily, but on my last few appearances, I've been talking about our brave military men and women. Hey, we ought to all hit pause and think about our diplomats, our State Department foreign service officers, civilian employees. They are at risk, as you're seeing on the screen right now.

So, we ought to be thinking about them as well as the military.

HUNT: So important. Thank you for that.

STAVRIDIS: Kasie, where is this going? I'll give -- I'll give you some percentages, and we could probably argue about the exact percentage, but let's do the best case outcome first.

I think best case would be the bombing goes on for a couple of weeks. Iran is deeply weakened, the government. And then the people come out and really affect regime change.

Is that possible? I think it's about a 30 percent chance at best, but it's certainly not impossible. And I think the mullahs are deeply worried about it.

Seventy percent chance, here's the bad news, Kasie -- 70 percent chance this regime will hunker down, wait for the worst of it to be over. And then they kind of have some choices about whether they want to try to work a little bit more with us, or just be as hardline as they have always been.

I think unfortunately, there's a higher percentage chance we're looking at even worse following what we have now.

[16:20:03]

So bottom line, I think the risk is going to go up before it comes down.

HUNT: Admiral, is there someone in either the current regime under your 70 percent scenario or alternatively, is there also someone in that 30 percent scenario who you think could emerge to lead Iran? And what's the best-case scenario for the United States?

STAVRIDIS: Extremely unclear in both sides. People will talk about son of the shah, Reza Pahlavi, perhaps he could be a transition figure. I don't see the people of Iran seeking to reestablish the peacock throne in Tehran.

But perhaps he could be a centralizing figure for the resistance. The resistance itself has no clear leadership that I'm aware of. And then over on the other side, yeah there was a pretty defined, pecking order, a depth chart, if you will, but U.S. strikes have consistently gone after those leaders.

And you heard almost the resignation in President Trump's voice when he says -- well, we have some people we thought we could work with, but they're all dead now. So, we're going to have to wait and see what bubbles up over the next few weeks because again, Kasie, I think these strikes both ways are going to go on for a couple of weeks and probably until Iran starts to exhaust their inventory. That's still weeks away, I think.

HUNT: Sir, we have seen a number of different messages from the administration about why we did this and not just why, but why we did it, when we did it. If you were going to articulate why the U.S. went to war with Iran, now, how would you explain it? Do you understand what the administration, why the administration did this now?

STAVRIDIS: I don't think anybody has a clear sight picture of that. But if you kind of pull the different threads of conversation out, what emerges is a sympathy for the protesters and a belief that perhaps that 30 percent scenario could unfold. Secondly, a sense that the nuclear program was at least starting to bubble again. Third, that the ballistic missile threat was still very, very real.

And then fourth, very pragmatically speaking, Kasie, you could say they have never been weaker, the Iranians. So, in this moment, we could choose to degrade their military capabilities in the most effective and wide-ranging way. I think it's a tough case to make because it has so many different tendrils kind of attached to it, but I think the articulation is kind of in that basket.

I'll give you a final thought, by the way, to watch and that is the Strait of Hormuz. Here you have this very narrow waterway. I've sailed it dozens and dozens of times. Under the best of circumstances, it's a challenging navigational voyage. Under Iranian fire, it's very difficult.

And I think that at some point, opening the Strait of Hormuz is going to become a real priority, that will fold in to the other things we're hearing energy costs, cost of oil, I think is going to end up being part of the rationale.

HUNT: Yeah. For sure. So, when I was at the Munich security conference a couple of weeks ago, I was talking to one Republican who has been in the presidents ear urging him to do this. And one of the arguments that was made to me was that this is something that demonstrates strength to China's Xi and Russia's Putin, and that not doing something like this, especially after the kind of buildup that we had, would potentially send the wrong signal to those leaders.

In your view, if you are Xi, if you are Putin, you're sitting in Beijing, you're sitting in Moscow, what are you thinking and how are you feeling about the United States and its adversarial strength?

STAVRIDIS: I'll give you two thoughts on that. And good for you for raising China and Russia. They're kind of missing in the conversations I'm seeing these days.

Point one, very pragmatic one. If you are Xi or Putin, you hate us, but you have to respect the military capability of the United States and it's Midnight Hammer, it's the snatch and grab on Maduro.

[16:25:01]

And now, a pretty massive bombing campaign. And yeah, we'll have some missteps and some footfalls here and there. But when you look at the span of what the U.S. military has done in the last two months, it's pretty extraordinary. And it will get your attention in Beijing and Moscow.

Secondly, in terms of are we demonstrating strength and so on, I don't think that's a reason for going to war, but I would -- I would add to the argument you just made or the individual you spoke with just made is by weakening Iran, you are weakening Russia, you're weakening China.

China looks at Iran as a big investment opportunity. Russia looks at Iran as an arms and technology supplier. Many of the drones flying in Ukraine today were made in Iran.

So, there's a geopolitical pragmatism that can affix itself to these strikes in terms of degrading both Russia and China.

HUNT: Really interesting. Admiral James Stavridis, sir, always grateful to have you. Thank you so much for bringing your perspective.

STAVRIDIS: Thanks, Kasie.

HUNT: All right. We'll see you soon, I hope.

Up next, here in THE ARENA, the different messages from the administration on just why the U.S. launched military strikes in Iran and the reaction it's getting.

(BEGN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TOMMY TUBERVILLE (R-AL): It's unfortunate that we've lost people but that's what wars and conflicts are about. And hopefully, we can end this soon. And you know, have an understanding over the Middle East that we need to free the people of Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:31:04]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RUBIO: We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: We are continuing to follow the breaking news out of the Middle East, as the Trump administration attempts to clean up, clarify its messaging. Secretary of State Marco Rubio was asked about those comments that you just heard. So that was yesterday, Monday.

Then the president, President Trump, seemed to undercut Secretary Rubio's story today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Mr. President, Israel will force your hand to launch these strikes against Iran, the United States into this war.

TRUMP: I might have forced their hand. You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn't do it. I thought we were going to have a situation where we were going to be attacked. They were getting ready to attack Israel. They were getting ready to attack others.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: So, this is how Rubio then seemed to walk back his Monday comments, try to clean them up on Capitol Hill just last hour. He's on a return -- return tour, talking to senators and House members. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Yesterday, you told us that Israel was going to strike Iran and that that's why we needed to get involved. Today, the president said that Iran was going to get --

RUBIO: No. Yeah, your statement is false. So that's not what I was asked very specifically. Were you there yesterday?

REPORTER: Yes.

RUBIO: Okay. Now did you -- were you the one that because -- somebody asked me a question, did we go in because of Israel? And I said, you asked me that, that follow up. And I said, no, I told you this had to happen anyway.

The president made a decision, and the decision he made was that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ballistic missile program, that Iran was not going to be allowed to hide behind its ability to conduct these attacks. That decision had been made. The president systematically made a decision to systematically destroy this terroristic capability that they had, and we carried that out. I was very clear on that answer. This was a question of timing, of why

this had to happen as a joint operation, not the question of the intent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right. My panel is here in THE ARENA. CNN's senior political analyst, Ron Brownstein; political analyst, author of the "Blow the Stack" newsletter, Charles Blow; former Biden White House communications director Kate Bedingfield, and the Republican strategist Brad Todd. They're both CNN political commentators.

Welcome to all of you. Thanks very much for being here.

Brad Todd, it does seem like Marco Rubio got crosswise with President Trump based on those explanations there do you understand what the -- why the administration is doing this?

BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, actually, yesterday, he said he made himself clear yesterday. But most of the bites that you saw made it -- took it out of context. He said yesterday that this was going to happen anyway. They were a year to a year and a half away from achieving immunity, meaning that they had enough capability through ballistic missiles and drones to not be to be a deterrent to anyone trying to take them out.

And so how do you resolve that? You take out their navy, you take out their drone capacity, you take out their missile launchers, you take out their missiles. The president had already made that decision. This presented an opportunity to do that in cooperation with Israel. And this was the right time.

We're like seven presidents overdue on doing this.

KATE BEDINGFIELD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: But I think the bigger challenge the administration has here is this, this Rubio's flip flop here, cleanup is one of about 19 different reasons that we've been given even out of Donald Trump's mouth himself, in terms of justification for why they did this.

So, if you're the average voter, maybe you voted for Donald Trump because you thought he was going to bring prices down. You thought he was going to establish a strong America on the world stage. What you're hearing from him is a mishmash of reasons that suggest that this was a chaotic, sort of haphazard effort. I don't say haphazard to criticize the military. I say haphazard politically and strategically.

HUNT: The military seems to be executing --

BEDINGFIELD: Yes, the military is executing.

HUNT: -- on the orders.

BEDINGFIELD: And I think the fact that we haven't seen any contingency planning from the administration to get Americans out of the region only contributes to a sense that this was not well-thought through. [16:35:04]

And so, again, if you're the average voter, you're looking to November. You're saying, you know, not only is Donald Trump not delivering on what he promised he would do, but he's actually walking back from some of the things that he swore were fundamental to him.

HUNT: Yeah. I mean, Ron Brownstein, you look at this this data all the time. I mean, I want to play for you and for our viewers at home. How the president sounded on the campaign trail. Okay. Part of what President Trump said repeatedly was no more forever wars.

Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're uniting forces to end the endless foreign wars. I will expel the warmongers from our national security state and carry out a much-needed cleanup of the military industrial complex to stop the war profiteering and to put always America first.

She said, look at him, listen to him. He's going to start a war. Listen to his rhetoric. He's going to start a war. I said, no, no, no, my rhetoric is going to keep us out of wars.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: I mean, Ron, you know, political messaging, what's the old axiom, if you're explaining, you're losing.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah, yeah.

HUNT: But the administration is doing a lot of explaining, because that messaging that we just saw was very clear.

BROWNSTEIN: And this is -- this is not happening in a vacuum. I mean, this is happening after all of the other times in his second term, he has already used military force. Look, there is no love lost anywhere on the American political spectrum for the Iranian regime. But I do think he is operating on an extraordinarily narrow ledge with public opinion as this starts.

You know, there's enough support among Republican voters that he's not going to feel pressure from his Republican elected officials to pull the plug anytime soon. But there is essentially no tolerance for reversal. I think on costs on the public. You know, 60 percent of Americans at the outset saying they oppose this, nearly that many in the AP-NORC poll last week saying they don't trust him to make the right decisions when it comes to the use of force abroad.

I don't think he can sustain. And again, given what is already happened and given the contrast between it and his messaging, I think he has incredibly little cushion to politically sustain any kind of reversals, whether its casualties or damage in the region or even a sustained increase in oil prices. I mean that -- you know, this is not we are only eight months from the

election. He was elected above all, far and away because people thought he was going to solve their cost-of-living problems. And at the least he has now another month that he's burning up toward the election where he's not going to see any progress with that collapse of the Iranian regime that might help him. Anything short of that, I think, is a question of mitigating the damage.

HUNT: Well, and, Charles Blow, let's watch what his Vice President Vance, had to say about this last night, because if there was anybody that was stronger in their seeming opposition to starting another forever war, if there was anyone who was even louder than President Trump about keeping the United States out of foreign entanglements, it was J.D. Vance.

Let's watch what he said last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What is different about President Trump? And it's frankly different about both Republicans and Democrats of the past is that he's not going to let this country go to war unless there's a clearly defined objective.

It's pretty clear. It's pretty simple. And I think that means that we're not going to get into the problems that we've had with Iraq and Afghanistan.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: So, he says that the objective has been defined. We are not going to get into the problems that we have had with Iraq and Afghanistan. The problem with that is it's -- George W. Bush didn't want to get into the problems that we got into in Iraq and Afghanistan.

CHARLES BLOW, POLITICAL ANALYST: But even George W. Bush felt compelled to come before the American people and to try to explain whether or not you agree with it or not to give the American people that benefit and that respect of the voters and the citizens. This is a president who is acting like he is not responsible to the voters, and the citizen who acts like he can do whatever he wants and just, you know, kind of give his explanation to indirection, telephone interviews with reporters, you know, an offhand comment another an event for another event or Marco Rubio flip flopping all over the place.

That is part of the damage here. But whether or not he even accepts that he can be damaged by changing American opinion is what this is exposing.

HUNT: Yeah. So, you know one really important piece of this. So, part of what Donald --has made Donald Trump such a dominant figure in our politics for the last decade is one of those things he said way back in 2016 when he was first running, which is that he could walk down Fifth Avenue, shoot someone and his supporters would still be with him. So, it really begs the question, where are his strongest supporters on this particular action?

So, let's start with Megyn Kelly, Erik Prince, Tucker Carlson all in a row and then we'll take a look at Marjorie Taylor Greene.

[16:40:00]

But let's start with those first three.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MEGYN KELLY, HOST, "THE MEGYN KELLY SHOW": I've got serious doubts about what we're doing. I support the president. I voted for the president. I campaigned for the president, as you know. But that doesn't mean -- and being a conservative or being a Trump supporter or being part of MAGA does not mean you have to accept another Middle East war without questions. And anybody who tells you that can suck it.

ERIK PRINCE, CEO, BLACKWATER: I'm not happy about the whole thing. I don't think this was in America's interest.

TUCKER CARLSON, HOST, "THE TUCKER CARLSON SHOW": The public doesn't support it, and it's terrible for the United States

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: Tucker Carlson right there, it's terrible for the United States.

Now, let's watch Marjorie Taylor Greene, who appeared on Megyn Kelly's show, to talk about this. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE, FORMER GEORGIA CONGRESSWOMAN: We're a year in -- a year in and we're in another fucking war. And we've got American troops being killed. I think it's time for America to rip the band aid off, and we need to have a serious conversation about what the fuck is happening to this country, and who in the hell is -- are these decisions being made for, and who is making these decisions?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: Well --

(LAUGHTER)

HUNT: I guess --

BROWNSTEIN: What do you really feel?

(LAUGHTER)

BROWNSTEIN: To Charles's point, I mean, this is really significant. And how he's gone to war, I think is as significant as the fact that he has done it at all. He really has offered less explanation to the public than any president taking the country into a conflict of this magnitude.

And as you see, it's not only Democrats who feel that they are adrift. It is some core Republican conservative voices. Now, look, rank and file Republicans, they are going to stay behind Donald Trump initially. But as our colleague Aaron Blake wrote on CNN today on CNN.com, you know, they are not as strongly in favor of this as you might expect.

They are kind of tolerating, I think, across the political -- look, the public was not on board to begin with. He has made only the most cursory effort to convince them that this is worthwhile, and therefore he is extraordinarily vulnerable to any kind of reversal.

TODD: The clowns you just showed are all part of this fake circus, that is just -- it's not the representation of Republican voters. Our CNN's own polling yesterday came out said 77 percent of Republicans support it. I have a survey that shows 90 --

HUNT: Do you think Republicans and MAGA voters are the same when you talk -- because there are Republicans who vote in midterms. Right. And then there's Republicans and MAGA voters who show up when Trump's on the ballot.

TODD: Well, I can tell you that survey I have says that people who are very favorable to Donald Trump, the people who are deepest in his camp, they're 96 percent in favor of this. They're more so than even the rest of the party is.

HUNT: Sure.

TODD: This is not unusual. In 2011, Republicans were far more likely to support Barack Obama's attacks on Libya than Democrats were. Seventy-three percent of the Tea Party in CNN's polling backed Obama in Libya.

This is really the parallel is Libya and not Iraq. Libya was a swift action. It took out a government that was problematic in exporting terrorism, rendered them incapable of doing that, again. That's the model for what President Trump is doing.

BLOW: Right. But I think that were in the afterglow of a Venezuelan sugar high where we think we can have one action very quickly, accomplish the goal and get out. And I think that, you know, a lot of America now, and I think this is actually, you know, part of this is part of the Obama years, using drones to such a degree but we are now in this kind of -- kind of idea that we can have a way more warfare, that we can do it remotely, you know autonomously. We're not involved, not a lot of people are going to get killed. And we'll get in and get out.

But the Iranians have a strategy here. They cannot match the American and the Israeli war machine. No way. But what they can do is try to expand the scope of the pain. They can spread the war out to a larger battlefield. More countries get involved, close the Straits of Hormuz or hamper it to such a degree, increased inflation around the world, increase the pain. And I think that American voters, regardless of who they voted for, no one wants to go to the tank, to the gas station and have to put $4 gas in the tank. No one wants their grocery prices to go up. That pain if Iran can hold out -- whether or not they have the capacity to hold out is a different thing.

TODD: But it sounds like you're arguing for it to go harder and faster.

HUNT: Very quickly.

BLOW: I'm not arguing for that at all.

BEDINGFIELD: Last word. I think the practical political effect this is going to have, it is going to energize, further, energize Democratic voters who are already -- we're already seeing enthusiasm outstripping Republican voters in early vote in Texas today, by the way, and I think it's going to further depress Republican voters who feel like Trump is walking back on one of the major promises.

Now, I take your point that there are diehard Republican voters who support this kind of interventionism. But I think for MAGA voters, for the coalition that Trump was able to build, I think this will be a depressing -- turnout depressing factor.

HUNT: All right.

Coming up next, here in THE ARENA, the House of Representatives about to get briefed by top administration officials on Iran. Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton will be here live.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Do you think the Congress would need to authorize any military action against Iran beyond the 60-day or 90-day window?

[16:45:04]

SEN. JOHN THUNE (D-SD), MAJORITY LEADER: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: Welcome back.

Right now on Capitol Hill, senators received a classified briefing on the war in Iran. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, the CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Dan Caine, will brief the House of Representatives after the Senate.

Joining me now is one of the lawmakers who plans to be at that House briefing, Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, Seth Moulton.

He is an Iraq war veteran and sits on the House Armed Services Committee.

Congressman, thank you very much for being here.

REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA): Good to see you.

HUNT: We -- of course, thank you for your service and appreciate the perspective that that service can bring to a conversation like this one.

[16:50:04]

And to that point, Senator Chris Murphy, a fellow New England Democrat just came out of the briefing that these officials gave to the senators. And he told reporters, "The briefers told us more Americans are going to die."

What's your reaction to that?

MOULTON: You got to tell us why. You owe that to Congress, to the American people, and most of all, to the troops about to lose their lives. As someone who was on the ground in a -- in an often misguided war, the very least that we want from our commanders is the truth. Just be honest with us.

And these Republicans can't even make up their mind about why they've started the war. You know, is it regime change or nuclear weapons? Is it the ballistic missiles or the oil? Is it some new concocted, self- fabricated theory about why the Iranians somehow influenced the 2020 election? The latest conspiracy theory about why Trump lost? Or is it just because he wanted revenge against the Iranians for threatening to kill him?

I mean, these are all explanations we've heard just in the last few days. That -- that's not doing right by our troops. And it's certainly not doing right by troops who lose their lives.

HUNT: Is there a rationale that they could offer that would convince you that it would be worth sacrificing American blood and treasure?

MOULTON: Certainly not without a plan. And that's the second part, is, even if any one of these rationales are true, they have no plan. It's very clear that they have no plan.

And the parallels here with Iraq are devastating. I mean, for all the problems with the Iraq war, there were two foundational problems. Number one, it was based on a lie about weapons of mass destruction. And just like there was no WMD in Iraq, clearly we did not obliterate Iran's nuclear program like the president and the secretary of defense claimed just months ago.

And then two, there was no plan for the day after in Iraq. So even though the initial invasion was a great tactical success, great military operation, there was no plan for what comes next. And bombing -- bombs and bluster is not a plan. You know, just telling the Iranian people, oh, we're going to take out your leader, we really hope you -- you rise up. Hope is not a strategy. So, these American troops again, who are risking their lives for all

of this, have got to be asking, what lies am I being told by the administration now?

HUNT: And do you think that this is personal for President Trump? Is that what you are convinced of? Because a couple of the reasons that you just suggested as to why they might be doing this really come down to the president himself?

MOULTON: Well, he said, I got him before he got me, and he said that without even mentioning the six Americans who have already died. So that means it's very clear in Trump's mind that his life, what remains of it, is worth more than those six young Americans and the long lives they would have had ahead of them

HUNT: Sir, you also of course, in your -- during your service led an infantry platoon. I mean, you were -- you were on the front lines and you liaised with Iraqi military leaders in the effort to try to rebuild the country. Can you talk a little bit about what that takes and whether we're prepared to do anything remotely like this in a context like this one?

MOULTON: It takes a lot. I mean, apparently it took 20 years. And although Iraq is a semblance of a democracy today, no one would say it's a thriving democracy. So, there are a lot of young Americans who lost their lives, thousands and thousands of more of us who risked our lives, many with life-changing injuries, who can't look back and say, you know it was even necessarily a complete success.

So, the point is that there is never been an example in history of successful regime change without ground troops. And there have been a lot of examples of using ground troops and not even having successful regime change. So, if that's actually what the president wants, he ought to read up on the history a little bit. He ought to think about the war that he didn't go to. That he allowed another American to go to in his place when he dodged the draft, making up some excuse about a sore foot so that he didn't go have to go serve in Vietnam.

There is an example of a war where we sought regime change, where we sought a new government, and it all fell apart within months of our departure.

HUNT: All right. Congressman Seth Moulton, I really appreciate your time today, sir. I hope you'll come back soon.

MOULTON: Good to see you, Kasie.

HUNT: Thanks.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HUNT: All right. Thanks to my panel. Really appreciate you being here. Don't forget, you at home can now stream THE ARENA live or catch up whenever you want to in the CNN app, you can scan the QR code below. You can also catch up by listening to THE ARENA's podcast. You can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheArenaCNN.

But I really did want to leave a quick moment, one note before we go today. Today marks one year that since we here at THE ARENA came on the air and I wanted to just give a very special "thank you" to everyone who works on this team for all of their incredibly hard work. Television is a team sport, and I could not play it without all of you.

That goes also for you who watch every day at home. I really appreciate you.

Appreciate everyone sitting at this table and those who come through as well.

Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".

Hi, Jake.