Return to Transcripts main page
CNN's The Arena with Kasie Hunt
Hegseth Vowing "Most Intense Day Of Strikes" In Iran; White House On U.S. Ground Troops In Iran: Nothing Off Table; White House Downplays Rising Gas Prices As "Temporary". Aired 4-5p ET
Aired March 10, 2026 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:00]
PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: They say some of them are working part time work as DoorDash, or some are even donating blood. It's a really tough time for them right now.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: They also played such a huge role in keeping people safe. So, yeah.
MUNTEAN: Yeah.
SANCHEZ: Not getting paid.
Our producers are yelling at us that we have to go. But, Pete, it's always a pleasure to have you. Always wish we had more time, buddy.
MUNTEAN: Yeah.
SANCHEZ: Thanks for joining us.
"THE ARENA WITH KASIE HUNT" starts right now
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Hi, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. Welcome to THE ARENA. It's great to have you with us on this Tuesday.
As we come on the air, there's immense uncertainty and volatility as the war with Iran rages into its 11th day. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth vowing today's airstrikes would be the most intense yet.
And just moments ago, the White House offered yet another explanation for when this conflict will end.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Ultimately, the operations will end when the commander in chief determines the military objectives have been met, fully realized, and that Iran is in a position of complete and unconditional surrender, whether they say it or not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Whether they say it or not.
It is worth taking a moment to unpack that statement. Previously, the Trump administration said this was about Iran's nuclear program and missiles and that it would last four to six weeks.
Now, the White House is saying the war will go on until the president personally decides that Iran is in a, quote, "position of complete and unconditional surrender," end quote, even if the Iranians don't actually surrender. This is just the latest explanation from the Trump administration about how long the war will last and how it will end.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: This is only just the beginning.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We've already won in many ways, but we haven't won enough.
REPORTER: You've said the war is, quote, "very complete," but your defense secretary says this is just the beginning. So, which is it? And how long should Americans be --
TRUMP: Well, I think you can say both.
HEGSETH: This is not endless. It's not protracted. We're not allowing mission creep.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Okay. As that happens, we now know some of the financial cost of this war, based on a Pentagon assessment that was provided to Congress. Two sources telling CNN that the military estimates it used more than $5.6 billion worth of munitions in just the first two days of this war. Multiple congressional sources say the Trump administration will likely soon need to ask Congress to approve additional funding.
So, we at CNN have the first team on the ground in Iran since the start of the war. Our senior international correspondent Fred Pleitgen and senior producer Claudia Otto just visited the site of a recent airstrike, and they filed a report that we are about to show you.
Now, we do want to note CNN is able to report from Iran only with the permission of the country's government. Still, we maintain full editorial control over our work. The Iranian government does not review or approve any of our reporting prior to our broadcast. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): There's been heavy bombardment in Tehran over the past 24 hours, as we both heard and felt.
This morning, we visited a site when all of a sudden, it was targeted again.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think we should go.
PLEITGEN: Yeah, we should go.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We go, we go.
PLEITGEN: Yeah. Okay, we're hearing jets overhead. There's anti- aircraft fire going up. We got to get out of here as fast as possible.
So that just goes to show how fast things can turn bad here. We were filming at a site as apparently -- rid of this mask -- struck yesterday.
PLEITGEN (voice-over): Earlier, we'd spoken to folks caught in the attack.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was in the basement and was thrown against the opposite wall. I was under the rubble. That's it -- I don't know what else to say. I'm sorry.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HUNT: All right. Let's get off the sidelines and head into THE ARENA. My panel is going to be here to weigh in.
We are also joined live by CNN senior international correspondent Frederik Pleitgen. He is in northern Iran right now we also have with us, CNN national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand.
Now, Natasha, we'll start with you briefly because you have some new reporting on the Strait of Hormuz. What can you tell us? And we're going to talk to Fred about it.
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. That really vital waterway that serves as an energy production waterway for the entire world essentially, shipping oil through that key strait there. Iran has apparently begun laying mines in that waterway in recent days. And that could, of course, significantly jeopardize even further global shipments of oil through that waterway, something that President Trump had said the U.S. was looking into potentially escorting boats through that waterway.
But now, of course, if Iran is laying mines like we're told that they are, that could get exponentially more difficult. Now, we are told that this mining has not been extensive just yet.
[16:05:00]
There have been a few dozen mines laid by the Iranians in recent days. But according to one of the sources that we spoke to, Iran still retains upwards of 80 to 90 percent of its small boats and mine layers, so its forces could feasibly lay hundreds of additional mines in the coming days.
President Trump has told the Iranians, through a post on Truth Social that if for any reasons, mines were placed and they are not removed forthwith, the military consequences to Iran will be at a level never seen before and he said, if, on the other hand, they are removed it will be a giant step in the right direction.
So, obviously, this is not a welcome development given the spike in oil prices that we have seen in recent days because largely of the fact that Iran has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz. And it remains to be seen, of course if Iran takes this warning or if they continue to lay mines in that waterway, Kasie.
HUNT: All right. Natasha Bertrand for us, Natasha, thank you very much.
Now, Fred, as you take that in, in northern Iran, this of course, against the backdrop of the Iranians essentially saying at least trying to say that the war is going to end on their terms. What's your reaction to that reporting?
PLEITGEN: Yeah. First of all, you're absolutely right. They are saying that the war is going to end on their terms. And of course, one of the ways that they want to achieve that is exactly through the Strait of Hormuz. They obviously haven't confirmed that there's any sort of mines in the Strait of Hormuz. But they did say, and this came yesterday from a senior security source, that they have a chokehold if they want to, on the Strait of Hormuz.
The Iranians say they are the ones who control the taps of the world's oil flow. And that's exactly what we've been hearing really, from many senior politicians and also military commanders as well. It was quite interesting because the head of Iran's national security council, supreme national security council, Ali Larijani, who right now is one of the most powerful people here in Iran, he did a post on X today where he said that the Strait of Hormuz, as he put it, could be a strait of peace, or it can be a graveyard, as he put it, for the war mongers. Obviously in this case referring to the United States.
So clearly, the Iranians believe in this asymmetric warfare that's going on right now, where a lot of cities, as we saw before, are being pounded by the Israelis and by the United States. They believe the fact that they can close the streets, the Strait of Hormuz, where they say they can close the Strait of Hormuz, is really the leverage that they have to try and get an outcome to all of this that they want.
The Iranians continue to say, you're absolutely right that they are not interested in peace negotiations at this point in time. They say that the war is going to end on their terms. But a senior official also told me yesterday that the way that they want to achieve that, or they believe that they can achieve that, is through economic pressure, not just on countries in that region around the Persian Gulf, but of course, all of the countries around the world that get energy from the Persian Gulf -- Kasie.
HUNT: Yeah. So, Fred, the Iranians are also have been saying, suggesting that essentially they were underestimated by the United States and by Israel, that the stockpile of weapons that they have could last six months at this rate, that they could keep firing off these missiles.
Can you help us understand what of this we should believe what of it is bluster because were also, of course, getting reporting off Capitol Hill here in Washington that it's possible that American munitions may not be as well stocked as we would have assumed that they should be.
PLEITGEN: Well, I think for the Iranians, the metrics are just different. And I think their definition of what it means to be ahead or to be on the winning side is definitely different as well. Obviously, the Iranians understand that technologically, they're definitely not on the same level as the Israelis and the United States.
It was quite interesting because I think it was a year and a half ago or so. I was actually with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in a place where they show people their missiles, and they said the reason why they actually developed their missile program is because they understood that they could never keep up with jets from the United States, with jets from Europe, and in general with air power from those countries. That's why they have their ballistic missile program, and that's also why they have their drone program as well, because it's cheap and they believe that it can be effective.
For the Iranians right now, they say that as long as they are there, as long as their leadership structure is still effective and still very much intact, as stable, and as long as they have that leverage in the Persian Gulf area, they believe that they can hold out for an extended period of time.
And when you go out on the streets in Tehran, one of the things that you do notice is that there are a lot of security forces on the ground and where they are also internally projecting that they are still very much in charge and still have very much have that grip on power. And of course, for them they believe as long as they have, that they're not going to be unseated, Kasie.
HUNT: You know, Fred, I was actually just going to ask you about that because, of course, one of the things that was said in the immediate aftermath of the launch of this campaign is its time for the people of Iran who had been protesting the regime to rise up and change things on the ground. But there was this big question about what impact an American intervention might have.
[16:10:00]
Would that simply complicate things for those protesters? Would it make them feel less inclined to do something like overthrow the regime?
What have you found the reaction to be among the Iranian people?
HUNT: Well, first of all, a lot of it is obviously very difficult to ascertain because right now, with that air campaign going on, of course a lot of people are actually quite afraid to go out on the streets. And, you know, one of the things that President Trump said when he launched the campaign is he urged people to stay inside, saying that the campaign, the aerial campaign would take several weeks and then they should, as he put it, go out and take their country back. Now, we're seeing so far very little signs of that actually happening.
Of course, as the aerial campaign goes on, what you also do invariably have is in certain cases is that you'll have civilian casualties as well. And that's definitely something that obviously makes people less inclined to then eventually go out, possibly in the future and try and maybe change things in the country.
But one of the things that I think we do have to keep in mind, and you notice this when you're on the street, is that there are a lot more security forces on the streets than anybody would think. It's not just the ones who are from the military or from the police or the Revolutionary Guard. Theres a lot of plainclothes people as well. All of them are armed. All of them obviously have a certain motivation as well.
So, it certainly seems to us when were on the ground there, that this this power structure, if you will this whole structure, structure of the state still does seem to be very much intact.
And one of the things that we've seen also over the past couple of days after the new supreme leader was put in place, Mojtaba Khamenei, is that there were people who still do support the clerical power structure. There were big gatherings that took place, for instance, in Tehran, but also in other cities as well. So, there is still a certain power base that is definitely there.
And to us, it certainly seems as though this governing structure that's in place right now might not be as weak as some in the west believe.
HUNT: That's just fascinating and such helpful reporting and perspective.
Fred Pleitgen for us live in northern Iran -- thank you.
Natasha is still with us. Natasha, thanks to you as well.
And again, we do need to note, underscore, CNN is able to report from Iran only with the permission of the country's government. But we do -- Fred does maintain full editorial control over his work, over our work. The Iranian government does not review or approve any of our reporting before we broadcast it here.
All right. Our panel is here live in THE ARENA to react. CNN political analyst, investigative reporter at "The New York Times", David Fahrenthold; CNN contributor, "New York Times" journalist Lulu Garcia- Navarro; former communications director at the DNC, Mo Elleithee; and former Republican congressman from Michigan, Peter Meijer.
Thank you all very much for being here.
Lulu, I actually just want to talk a little bit about what we learned from Fred there because, of course, he's just one of the very few sets of western eyes that we have on the ground there. And him essentially reporting that the structure that keeps the Iranian regime in power is still alive and well. LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I first want to say incredible
reporting. So unbelievably valuable under great peril to have Fred there to report, to let us see and understand what is happening on the other side of this conflict, because as we know, in conflict and in war, information is seen as part of the battlefield.
And so, people want to control it and it's very important to have independent journalists there like Fred. And what we are hearing from him is indeed a snapshot, a picture. It doesn't give us the whole understanding of what's happening behind the scenes.
HUNT: That kind of reporting never can.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Never can, exactly, exactly, precisely. But it's telling us something really, really important, which is that the regime feels emboldened enough, powerful enough still to be on the streets to try and make sure that they are keeping the population under control. So, if you wanted regime change, so far, that is not what we're seeing, according to what I've heard here and what I've read elsewhere.
HUNT: Right. Well, and of course, this all comes at David as the White House is having a very difficult time getting the story straight for the however many a day in a row because there's -- there's -- this is, as we started at the top, just the latest explanation of how it's going to end.
DAVID FAHRENTHOLD, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. We've heard radically different views of how this will end from President Trump and the people who work for him. Marco Rubio, Pete Hegseth have talked about limited objectives. We're going to get rid of Iran's navy. Stop their ballistic missile capacity, stop their nuclear weapons program, stop their ability to project their power beyond their borders.
Then President Trump says, no, forget about that. We want unconditional surrender. We want them to be like the Japanese in World War Two. We want them to totally lay down their arms, give over their government to us. And if you're the Iranians, you would be you would smile at that right? Because your adversary has no idea even what they want, or when they would declare they were they were going to win. They could declare victory.
HUNT: Yeah. Peter Meijer, and the president has been with House Republicans, of which you were formerly one, in part trying to convince them of the wisdom of what he's doing. Where are you? How are you thinking about this right now? Because -- and I think we should put up if we have it, although we may not.
[16:15:04]
But there's a remarkable chart that shows the support for various wars over the years. With World War Two at 97 percent Republican support, the war in Iran, just one alongside the Libya intervention, that's below 50 percent support from the American people. I mean, this is normally something any president spends a lot of time convincing people is the right thing to do before they do it. PETER MEIJER (R), FORMER MICHIGAN CONGRESSMAN: Yeah, no, and if you
look at the Venezuelan intervention that we saw earlier this year, that is currently polling about 30 points higher in Venezuela than in the U.S. So generally speaking, I mean, the approval of whatever Donald Trump does will match Donald Trump's approval. That's a challenge this administration has to deal with.
On the House Republican side, they're obviously concerned about the midterms. They're concerned about the price of gas. I'm very surprised to see the Iranians start to actually mine the Straits of Hormuz, because China, one of their patrons, were about 45 percent right now of their crude oil goes through that strait. And unlike missiles, unlike Shahed drones, you cannot have the mind go towards this EIS -- the -- you know, kind of maritime --
HUNT: They're indiscriminate, right?
MEIJER: They're indiscriminate.
HUNT: Yeah.
MEIJER: They're just closing that down. So, that is -- on the one sense, obviously troubling from a global oil markets perspective. On the other hand, that is showing a sign of desperation because it is not the we will go after these countries and these ships that is saying we are going to shut everything down, even if it hurts the people that are dependent on us and that are allied with us at the same time.
HUNT: Yeah. And I think we do have that chart now. It's my fault for calling for it. We don't have it yet.
You can see it here, right? This is something -- even the Iraq war, right? Starts out in 2003 with two thirds. Yeah. Three fourths support from the American people, Mo. And it is actually I mean, even when time is not spent convincing people or I don't know that we've got that many examples of it, but usually, they would at least have a straight story about why. And this is day 11 and it's still evolving.
MO ELLEITHEE, FORMER DNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: It's still evolving. It's changing every day, sometimes multiple times a day, depending on who we talk to. And so, I'm not surprised to see those numbers at all.
Look people in the United States, I think are weary of conflict generally. They're just tired of it, right? That's one of the reasons why the president won, because he said he was going to put America first. He wasn't going to -- he promised that he wasn't going to engage in in these types of wars and we've now seen he's launched more military strikes on other nations in the first year of his second term than almost any other president in American history.
He hasn't made a compelling case, and people are starting to actually see all the downside of this. We have multiple American casualties, hundreds injured. We have -- they're feeling it in their pocketbooks as gas prices go up. We're hearing now what the cost is to the treasury for all of this, they're beginning to see cracks in the military in some ways are.
I have nothing but praise for our fighting men and women. But the fact that we are now finding out we may not have the munitions that we need, and it's going to cost us billions of dollars to get them. They see that we turn down an offer from Ukraine, which has a lot of experience dealing with Iranian manufactured drones in the war with Russia, that we turned down an offer of assistance.
HUNT: What's that? What's the phrase, "cut off your nose to spite your face"?
ELLEITHEE: And now we're -- right, and now we're saying, oh, maybe we do need your help, Ukraine. There's -- of course, there's a lack of confidence from the American people in this. White House isn't doing anything to fix it.
MEIJER: I will just say -- I mean, we are a week and a half into this conflict. If you were to ask me what I would think as somebody who studied this very, very diligently, including when I was in the military in terms of backfilling folks who would be involved in this, this is far beyond where I would have expected us to be. If oil trading at $85 a barrel a week and a half in is the worst thing that's happened so far -- I mean, obviously, we've seen a loss of American lives that is, frankly consistent with what the IRGC has done to us in Iraq and Afghanistan and specifically in Syria over the last couple of years.
But this is, I think, far more advanced in terms of the potential upside and far more limited on the downside than I would have expected.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: You and I were covered, you know, I covered wars and we were just talking before we came on air about, you know, you being in Iraq. We were there at the same time and I think you would agree with me that wars start in a certain way, right? Someone fires a missile, someone crosses a border that they shouldn't, or they or they choose it. But you can never determine how they end.
[16:20:02]
Once you started a war, you saying, I'm going to declare victory or this is not going to have some kind of unforeseen fallout. Unfortunately, that's just not the way that they work. And so, this is where we find ourselves now.
HUNT: We learned that the hard way.
I'm sorry, guys, we could obviously keep going. We're going to have to come back to this.
Coming up in THE ARENA, we're going to talk live with one member of the House and one in the Senate, a veteran of the Afghanistan war, Democratic Congressman Jake Auchincloss will be here.
We're also going to be joined on set by Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, as the White House responds to comments a top lawmaker made after a closed door briefing on the war today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): We seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:25:15]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: As for boots on the ground the president has talked about this repeatedly. Wisely, he does not rule options out as commander in chief. So again, I would hesitate to confirm anything that a Democrat on Capitol Hill says right now about the president's thinking.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: The White House today once again refusing to rule out sending U.S. troops into Iran as questions continue to swirl about the worst timeline. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt's remarks coming as the Pentagon confirms approximately 140 U.S. service members have been injured thus far in the 10 days of Operation Epic Fury.
Leavitt this afternoon appeared to be referring to comments from Democratic senators who emerging from a classified briefing on the war, suggested that boots on the ground was not a far-off possibility.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BLUMENTHAL: I emerged from this briefing as dissatisfied and angry frankly, as I have from any past briefing in my 15 years in the Senate. We seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: Joining me now to discuss, Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, Jake Auchincloss. He has commanded infantry in Afghanistan and special operations in Panama.
Congressman, thanks very much for being here. And briefly I want to correct myself from earlier. We're day 11, not day 10 here.
This is a remarkable conversation to be having, though. What is your reaction to this idea that not only will the administration not rule out these ground troops, but that these briefings are suggesting to Democratic colleagues of yours in Congress that perhaps it's actually a real possibility?
REP. JAKE AUCHINCLOSS (D-MA): It's alarming. What we're hearing from the White House and the cabinet is unearned arrogance. Arrogance because whether it's the press secretary, whether it's Pete Hegseth, they're saying the commander in chief doesn't know the American public or Congress an answer on whether we're going to put boots on the ground. He doesn't know them an answer about how long this war might last. He doesn't even know the answer about the strategic objectives of this conflict.
That's arrogance. And its unearned because the American public is rightfully looking at not just the last 25 years of American military adventurism, but also at the last one week of this -- this Operation Epic Fury, which the speaker calls a special military operation just like Vladimir Putin called his war in Ukraine.
And what they're seeing is that while our military has performed admirably, the strategy is discombobulated. You've got the IRGC in placing Mojtaba Khamenei, who is even more extremist, even more hardline than his father. You've got Iran trying to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, and if we don't clear it, we're going to demonstrate to the world that Iran has a veto over Middle Eastern policy.
And you've got Russia's war effort against Ukraine, buttressed by higher gas and oil prices. This is not a sound strategic outcome from day number ten.
HUNT: Well, and of course, speaking of money, there's, of course, reporting that the Trump administration is preparing to request an additional $50 billion in funding for the war. Now, the Democratic leader in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, wouldn't say whether Democrats would back a supplemental funding bill for that.
Where do you think Democrats should be on such a measure?
AUCHINCLOSS: I mean, I'll say. No dollars without a congressional authorization that tightly scopes the strategic outcomes this president is seeking. If this president is trying to seek for example, the capture of the fissile material that is loose in Iran, that is a reasonable mission that makes the Middle East safer. If he is seeking to allow the Strait of Hormuz to be trafficked by navies and merchant marine from around the world, that is a reasonable mission.
But if he wants some open-ended green light for boots on the ground, for persistent aerial strikes against civilian infrastructure in Tehran, absolutely not. I don't see how that serves America or its allies' purposes.
HUNT: Do you -- I know that you talked to colleagues in your own party, but also across the aisle. The president was speaking with House Republicans just this week in Florida. How high is skepticism across the board in Congress both Republican and Democrat about this operation?
[16:30:03]
AUCHINCLOSS: I think there's three different angles here. One angle is constitutional. Does the president have the authority to do this on his own? There, the Democratic Party is united. No, he does not. And any reading of the War Powers Act that would claim otherwise is a very tortured one, and it is a call to action for Congress, my goodness, to rewrite this thing and restore congressional supremacy over the declaration of war.
Number two is, you know the military operation itself. And there I think what we're seeing is that the U.S. military is exceptional, that it does, in fact have air dominance, that its service members are able to integrate effects on target better than any other military in the history of the world, and that it's a potent weapon.
But then number three is unfortunately a pattern that we have become exhausted by seeing as Americans over the 21st century, which is a terrific military, failed by political strategists because, as I said, this president has not formulated or delivered upon a strategic victory for Operation Epic Fury. We have the strait of Hormuz that has been closed, which has demonstrated Iranian power and a very dangerous way. And it's a precedent that we cannot allow to stand.
You've got a new hardliner in office. We had an 86-year-old guy who was awful. Now, we have a 56-year-old guy who's awful. That is not a win to me.
And you got Russia with a stronger hand against Ukraine, while American consumers are paying more at the pump. So, the president is failing his military right now by not being able to formulate a commanders intent, and not getting congressional buy-in on it.
HUNT: All right. Congressman Jake Auchincloss, thanks very much for your time, sir. Appreciate it.
AUCHINCLOSS: Sure. Thank you.
HUNT: All right. coming up next here in THE ARENA, Americans across the country paying a very literal price because of the war in Iran. Many Republicans now warning the White House the party could pay a political price as well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: A recent increase in oil and gas prices is temporary, and this operation will result in lower gas prices in the long term.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:36:22]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: Rest assured, to the American people that the recent increase in oil and gas prices is temporary. And this operation will result in lower gas prices in the long term. Once the national security objectives of Operation Epic Fury are fully achieved, Americans will see oil and gas prices drop rapidly, potentially even lower than they were prior to the start of the operation. (END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: The White House continues to try to downplay the global concern over oil. Right now, it's trading at $86 a barrel after a volatile day. It started around $90.
Despite this decline in oil prices, gas prices continue to climb. The national average has increased 56 cents since the start of this war. A new poll from Quinnipiac University found 74 percent of registered voters said they were concerned that prices will rise as a result of the war.
"Shark Tank" investor, Mr. Wonderful himself, Kevin O'Leary joins our panel now.
Kevin, always great to see you. Thank you so much for being here.
We have been actually having this conversation off camera about the price of oil, and I'm interested to know if you would have thought when America went to war with Iran, this is how much oil would cost. It's also worth noting that we're reporting here, they're mining the Strait of Hormuz.
How bad do you think this is right now?
KEVIN O'LEARY, "SHARK TANK" INVESTOR: I'm less concerned. Of course, I don't like war.
But the thing about energy and input costs in the U.S. is you have to think about it as no other commodity. It's unique in the sense that it affects the input cost of all 11 sectors of the economy. You don't have an economy without energy, so you really care about how long these prices are elevated. And let's make the assumption, the stable price of oil post this, whenever this ends, it's going to be between $60 and $70.
Oil was less expensive in recent times, but we didn't top up the strategic reserve. So, we got to start thinking about that. But I kind of -- in my role in what I have to do every day is to deploy capital and find the path of least resistance. So, yes, I'm concerned about this and I was listening to the narrative earlier.
You talked about the cost of the war so far being $5 billion. And that's horrible that obviously that's happening but in the context of a global economy that is concerned about recession fears if they are cut off from energy, that's irrelevant. And so, you have to think about what is the end game here.
And remember, Persia or Iran was a very advanced society for centuries until the last 60 years. And when we had some bad actors that have started to affect the stability of the whole region.
And what's unique about this situation, I'm not pro or con on this. I'm just telling you it's obvious to everybody that's an investor is they somehow turned the entire world against them. They're disrupting every single economy in the world and shooting missiles at their neighbors that were once not their adversaries.
And so, I'm thinking to myself, okay, what's going to happen as an outside of this, when this ends whatever happens. Number one, we're going to start to talk about energy security and safety in North America in a way we've never had before. That's going to be a number one agenda, because obviously there's risk out there.
Number two is this war is being fought with A.I. and very advanced technology, and there's a mismatch between the price of their drones and the technology we're using to shoot them down. That's got to get fixed. So, as an investor, I'm saying to myself, whoa, this is going to make A.I. data centers even more valuable, which is a space I've been investing in of late because we don't have enough power, we don't have enough A.I. data centers.
[16:40:03]
Future wars may not be fought with boots on the ground, this one doesn't have them yet, and I know we're debating it, but there's a lot of advanced technology here that can be done a lot cheaper. So I'm trying to think the next six months, what does it look like?
And the market has said, okay, let's be volatile in 2,025 percent volatility daily on oil. Until we know when the straight will be open. But that's not the number one concern post this war.
HUNT: What is the number one concern?
O'LEARY: That this erratic government stops doing what it's been doing. The number one concern is if you're going to go do this and disrupt the region and have all this happening, the outcome better be that this bad actor is eliminated. I mean, that's what the market wants because we don't want more of this.
I don't know how long these guys can take this pounding, and I don't like to see it happening. And I hate to see civilians affected. But there's a reason that this occurred.
They were doing a tremendous amount of disruption in the region and threatening -- this is before the Palestinian war -- shutting down the strait every nine months is not good for the global economy. That's basically what's happening.
HUNT: Right.
O'LEARY: Every once in a while, you would nuke a boat. And that's not -- that can't go on.
HUNT: So I want to bring the conversation back to the table for a second. And I want to show what some of these local papers across the country, David, are putting on their front pages. Okay, Green Bay, Detroit, "The Arizona Republic", all with oil prices soaring, because, of course, it ultimately means that its more expensive for Americans to get around.
As Kevin notes, it affects every sector of the economy. Is the president prepared for the fallout of that politically?
FAHRENTHOLD: I question that. I also question the U.S.-Israeli alliance because Israel is obviously a much more existential threat to them. The Israeli public may be willing to bear a lot more of the cost of this than they already are, than the American public is.
And so as our two countries go together, will there be a point when Israel wants to carry on in America for political reasons feels like we can't, like the public is not behind it. And I think that kind of thing, that oil prices soaring, gas prices going up in a world where they haven't really sold the American public on the benefits of this war could cause a rupturing of that alliance, I think relatively soon.
HUNT: Yeah, Congressman?
MEIJER: I just -- I take a certain privilege and seeing a lot of my Democratic colleagues now being passionate about making sure that oil prices are very low. Number one, you know, where oil is trading, were still about a third off the highs that we saw in 2022 post Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
But more so, I was in the House when the Democrats wanted to push through the Green New Deal. They wanted to force a carbon transition. They wanted to make oil and gas so expensive that we were shunted off into alternate courses for renewable alternatives.
So, seeing some of my colleagues right now complaining and saying oh my gosh, oil is at $3 or -- sorry, gas prices are at $3.50 a gallon. This is terrible. It's like -- okay.
HUNT: Well, they're the ones in a position to capitalize on it politically at this very moment in time. Maybe that explains it.
Kevin O'Leary, thank you. I really appreciate it. Always great to see you.
The rest of our panel is going to stand by.
Ahead here in THE ARENA, Republican Senator John Kennedy is here as Congress gets its first tab for how much the Iraq war is costing. And if the Pentagon will need more money from lawmakers.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): I'm never going to give anybody a blank check on a bill, but I support the concept. If we need additional money. We're not running out of money. We're not running out of ammunition.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:48:02]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REPORTER: Regarding the missile strike on the Iranian school, how long does the administration expect that investigation to take? And will the White House or the department of defense release its full report of its findings once the investigation is complete?
LEAVITT: The Department of War will do that. The investigation continues. And as the president said yesterday at his press conference, he will accept the conclusion of that investigation, whatever it may be.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: The White House today assuring the Pentagon will release its report into a strike on a girls' school in southern Iran on February 28th. An emerging body of evidence including CNN and expert analysis, indicates the United States was likely responsible for the strike, which killed at least 168 children and 14 teachers, according to Iranian state media.
Over the past week, though, the Trump administration has declined to confirm U.S. responsibility
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: The United States would not deliberately target a school.
REPORTER: Did the United States airstrike at girls' elementary school and kill 175 people?
LEAVITT: Not that we know of, Sean, and the Department of War is investigating this matter.
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No, in my opinion, based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran -- was done. We think it was done by Iran. They're very inaccurate, as you know, with their munitions. They have no accuracy whatsoever. It was done by Iran.
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We're still investigating, and that's where I'll leave it today.
TRUMP: Whether it's Iran or somebody else. The fact that a tomahawk, a tomahawk is very generic, it's sold to other countries. But that's being investigated.
REPORTER: Why are you the only person saying this?
TRUMP: Because I just don't know enough about it. I think it's something that I was told is under investigation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: All right. Joining me now, Republican senator from Louisiana, John Kennedy. He's also the author of the new book, "How to Test Negative for Stupid and Why Washington Never Will," which I understand is a bestseller. SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): Yeah.
HUNT: Quite -- quite the accomplishment for a sitting U.S. senator/politician.
I do want to start, though. You actually talked to NBC News last night about that strike on the girls' school, and you said it was terrible. We made a mistake. I'm just so sorry that it happened.
[16:50:03]
Why did you feel like it was important to say that?
KENNEDY: Because I think it's the truth. I mean, we're investigating, but I'm not going to hide behind that. I think -- I think it was a terrible, terrible mistake.
The investigation may prove me wrong. I hope so. The kids are still dead, but I think it was a horrible, horrible mistake. I wish it hadn't happened. I'm sorry it happened. I can assure you it wasn't intentional.
That's not -- that's the sort of thing Russia does. We don't do that. But, you know, I don't see any other possible explanation. And when you make a mistake, you ought to admit it most people understand the ones perfect.
But I don't think our men and women who are fighting for us did it intentionally. I'll never believe that.
HUNT: Fair enough. So, speaking of the men and women that are fighting for us, I want to play something that Lindsey Graham said about what it's like to go home and talk to people about this war. Let's watch what he said and I'll ask you about it on the other side. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I go back to South Carolina. I'm asking them to send their sons and daughters over to the Mideast. What I want you to do in the Mideast, to our friends in Saudi Arabia and other places, step forward and say, this is my fight, too. I join America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUNT: What do you say right now to your constituents in Louisiana, to men and women there? Are you asking them to go fight in the Middle East?
KENNEDY: Well, Lindsey is certainly entitled to his opinion, Kasie. I don't want to have to send our men and women anywhere. I don't. I don't want America to be the world's policeman. But sometimes there are -- some of the bad guys step up and try to be the world's policeman and America has to intervene. And that's what happened in Iran.
Our intelligence clearly showed that Iran had restarted its program to develop a nuclear warhead, that it had really increased its ballistic missile manufacturing. They were producing between 200 and 600 missiles a month.
Our intelligence showed that their game plan was to stockpile so many missiles that it would insulate their nuclear program. In other words, if we try to do something about their nuclear program, they would destroy the entire Middle East and fire into Turkey and every place, every place else.
So, the president decided to act, and our goal is very simple, it's to destroy Iran's navy, destroy the air force, destroy their missile production capability, destroy their drone capability.
HUNT: And if that takes boots on the ground?
KENNEDY: It will not take boots on the ground.
HUNT: It will not?
KENNEDY: We can do it -- in fact, we've already destroyed about 75 percent of their launchers. And I think you'll see the president finish that job, and then he'll get out. How long will it take? I don't know. I think it's a matter of weeks.
I do not believe the president will send boots or put boots on the ground. That's a whole different story. And as I said earlier this week, I don't think I'm wrong on that. But if he does, the thud you hear will be me face planting from surprise -- from fainting because I don't think he will.
HUNT: Fair enough.
I do want to make sure I follow up with you on what we saw with the Department of Homeland Security --
KENNEDY: Yeah.
HUNT: -- because you, of course, pressed Kristi Noem at that hearing, and then shortly thereafter, the president fired her from her job as secretary of homeland security.
Now, the topic that you pushed her on was the $220 million that she spent running TV ads. We pulled some of the numbers, some movies that cost less to produce than this ad campaign, include "Top Gun: Maverick", "Barbie", "Gladiator", "Frozen", "The Hunger Games," "Oppenheimer", "Iron Man", "Deadpool", "Jaws", "Jurassic World".
Do you think this is why the president fired her or was it more than that?
KENNEDY: I think -- I think it was sort of a straw, the final straw on the camel's back.
Look, I accept responsibility or blame or whatever you want to call it. Nobody put me up to it. Nobody knew I was going to do it. Nobody looked at my questions. I had about eight questions, eight issues. I wanted to talk to the secretary about.
I got to two of them. I was appalled at some of her answers. So was the president when he called me that night, I could tell he was going to replace her. Look, I don't bear her any ill will. I mean, she executed the president's policy on securing the southern border.
But when I see spending porn, a quarter of a billion dollars spent on what an effective political ads through a no bid contract to her friends, I'm going to call it out every single time.
[16:55:03]
I don't care who did it. And there were -- there are a lot of other problems over there as well. They were beginning, not beginning. They were distracting from Congress's agenda, from the president's agenda, from more important matters.
And it was -- I did what I did, and the president was, as I said, he was -- he was pretty worked up
HUNT: All right. Senator John Kennedy, thanks very much for joining us today. Always great to have you.
KENNEDY: Thanks, Kasie. Thank you.
HUNT: All right. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HUNT: All right. Thanks to my panel. Really appreciate you being here.
Thanks to you at home for watching as well. But of course, don't go anywhere because Jake Tapper is standing by for "THE LEAD".
Hi, Jake.
