Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Sirens Sounding In Israel Amid Warning Of New Wave Of Iran Missiles; Iran Says, Israel Faces Dark Night, Israel Says, More On The Way; Iran Threatens To Target Any Nation That Defends Israel; MAGA Is Divided As Trump's Support For Israel's Actions Against Iran Splitting His Own Base; June 14th Military Parade Costs $45 Million. Aired 10- 11p ET
Aired June 13, 2025 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[22:00:00]
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: Good evening. I'm Abby Philip in New York.
The breaking news tonight, Iran is declaring war against Israel, as the two nations attack each other with airstrikes. We've just gotten word that sirens are sounding in Northern Israel tonight as the IDF warns of a new wave of Iranian missiles. Tehran started its retaliation after Israel first hit nuclear and military facilities killing some of Iran's top leaders.
Now, two Israeli sources are telling CNN that the U.S. is helping Israel intercept some of those revenge missiles, but some of them have hit civilian areas. The first death in Israel was reported just moments ago. Iran is also warning of dark hours ahead and that it will also target regional bases of any nation that defends Israel.
We have reporters and witnesses standing by in the region, and, of course, a table of analysts joining me here in the studio.
But, first, CNN's Chief International Correspondent Clarissa Ward joins us now from Eilat, Israel. Clarissa, you just arrived there at tell us. What the scene is like tonight on the ground.
CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Abby, you can probably see behind me the sun is just starting to come up here. It's been quiet for the last couple of hours. Prior to that, we were seeing quite a lot of activity in the skies. We heard fighter jets as we were driving across the border with Egypt, because Israel's airspace is completely closed. We could see intercepts taking place.
And when you talk to Israelis and even just being here a few hours on the ground, you can see really a very clear difference, Abby, from other trips we have done here, from last year's tit-for-tat, back and forth between Israel and Iran. And when you look at those startling images of the enormous damage that was done by that Iranian ballistic missile on the outskirts of Tel Aviv, as you mentioned, one woman killed, and you saw this night sky lighting up over Tel Aviv, some of them being intercepted, those missiles, but some of them getting through. And the power of those missiles, the ferocity of the kind of roar, as they made impact, when you talk to people here, there's a real sense that this is a significant escalation, that this is leading to a new chapter, and that's something that is being echoed across the region.
This is a region tonight, or I should say this morning, Abby, really on a knife edge. We've heard Israel's defense minister, Israel Katz, basically vowing very hard punishment for those attacks that took place on civilian areas. Of course, Israeli missiles have also been falling on civilian areas inside Iran.
And now, of course, as well you have that threat that you mentioned from the Iranians that anyone who supports Israel in its defense, and this is a not so veiled threat towards the U.S. as well, is liable to be attacked their regional bases liable to be attacked. And that, of course, is part of the reason that we saw U.S. personnel pulled out of several embassies across the region.
So, definitely a sense that things are not getting quieter, that they are escalating, the dawn just breaking here. And we will see what this day brings, Abby.
PHILLIP: And, Clarissa, what is your sense of the targeting here of some of these ballistic missiles that are coming in from Iran? You know, when we saw those attacks a few months ago, this barrage of missiles coming in, very few of them actually made it into Israel in part due to the Iron Dome. I wonder if the sense is that Iran is deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure or is their aim just not what it should be if they're trying to get at some of the military infrastructure pieces that they might be after?
WARD: I mean, I think there's no question, Abby, that when we were here last summer, it was pretty clear what the targets were of these various missile attacks that were coming from Iran. The impression that we have here is that the gloves have effectively come off now, right? Because the sites that you're seeing in Tel Aviv and around Tel Aviv this evening in Central Israel, like this is not like anything that people here have seen before, and certainly that we have seen before.
[22:05:11]
And that's why you're seeing such a strong response from the defense minister accusing Iran of deliberately targeting civilians. Of course, we don't exactly know, what the intended target was.
But make no mistake, this is a new chapter. It's a dangerous chapter. It's a dramatic escalation. That's why you are seeing leaders across the world, particularly in the region, but also in Europe, desperately calling on all parties to kind of pull back from the brink before things get even worse than they already are.
But at the moment, Abby, no clear exit ramp in sight, and despite President Trump's urges for Iran to join those talks in Oman over the weekend, it's really looking rather unlikely that they would do that because it would be seen essentially as a capitulation of sorts. Abby? PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, I think, that becomes the biggest question is how does this end. And does it end at a negotiating table at all?
Clarissa, we're going to stay close with you, but stay safe tonight as you are now on the ground in Israel after a pretty lengthy journey to get there, given the closed airspace in the region.
And now, normally, you might see Scott Jennings at this table in the studio here, but he's actually on a planned trip to Israel and he joins us from there.
So, Scott, tell us what it has been like over the last, you know, 24 hours or so, as both -- you've watched Israel carry out these strikes and now are experiencing the retaliation from Iran.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, first of all, it's good to hear your voice, my friend, and thanks for having me. It's about 4:00 in the morning here in Israel. You can see over my shoulder. Now, this is the Sea of Galilee. I'm in the city of Tiberius. It's dawn here in Israel, and you open the show by saying that there were missile attacks in Northern Israel. You're right. As we were setting this up, we had air raid sirens here in Tiberius. We heard booms. I didn't see anything in the sky, just a few minutes ago, but certainly heard the impacts of the missile strikes.
A few hours ago, over my head, directly over my head in this hotel, over this balcony, I witnessed missiles coming in and also the interception of those missiles. And I was able to track them across the sky and watched the pieces fall out over some mountains and hillsides that are up here, just on the other side of the road from my hotel.
So, what it's been like is nothing like I've ever experienced before. I mean, for most Americans, military things, terrorism things, you know, things of this nature happen a long way away, and we watched them on our televisions. I was watching them from right underneath where it was happening. And you get a real sense of what the people of Israel live with on a daily basis.
I've been traveling here for a week. Earlier this week, I was having a dinner with some people in Jerusalem. There was an air raid, siren. There was a missile announcement. We all went down into a bomb shelter. We stayed there for a few minutes. We came back up afterwards. They live with this every day.
Now, this war with Iran is an escalation, certainly, and this is a higher level, I think, of anxiety. But for Israelis, this is part of daily life, being surrounded by people who effectively want to annihilate your country.
PHILLIP: I mean, do you get the sense that Israelis now are actually expressing that higher level of anxiety? I mean, do you get the sense that they feel like this moment is very different from what they've experienced before?
JENNINGS: Certainly. I mean, you get the feeling just talking to people here that, you know, this is different than the normal day-to- day anxieties of rocket attacks that come in from the north, like from Hezbollah or that come in from the Houthis in Yemen, although those certainly can lead to destruction, and certainly serious injuries. But now we're at war.
And you also sense resolve from the people that you talk to here. I mean, you know, the position they're in, especially since October the 7th, you know, they're living with terrorism in their own homes and their own neighborhoods, they're living where Iran shooting missiles over, they're living with Iran terror proxies that have the capability of shooting rockets into the country. So, they're surrounded and they see Iran and the leadership in Tehran is the head of the octopus.
And so what I have sensed in my conversations with people here is that this confrontation is 20, 25 years in the making. There is real resolve to finish the fight and that they're not going to live under this constant threat of being annihilated by Iran and its terror proxies anymore.
PHILLIP: All right. Scott Jennings, please stay safe where you are. We'll see you when you're back here.
With us at the table, in the meantime, let's come into the room here with our analysts and experts. this is going to be another few days of this clearly. By now, though. I mean, what is your sense, Jeremy, or what is the sense that you're hearing from your sources about what the Israelis think the Iranian response has been like?
[22:10:06]
Has it been what they expected or perhaps less than they expected?
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, they were certainly expecting that Iran would react in a more significant way than they have in the past, than they did in, you know, the attacks last October, for example. They also anticipated that had they not been as successful with their first round of strikes, that what we could be seeing right now would be far worse. Meaning that part of that attack that we saw Israel carry out was not just aimed at the nuclear facilities and taking out senior Iranian leadership. It was also aimed at blunting Iran's ability to carry out a significant retaliation.
And so from that standpoint, it's clear that Israel was successful, because what we would otherwise be seeing tonight and throughout the day would be hundreds of Iranian ballistic missiles at once. And instead, we've seen fewer than 200, it would seem, which is less significant than that Iranian attack in October, at least just from a numbers perspective.
But, look, the Iranians still have significant capabilities, and I think you are --
PHILLIP: And they know that this is going to have to go on for some time. DIAMOND: It's going to go on for days, could even go on for weeks. And the Iranians, as well as the Israelis certainly still have a lot of firepower that they can throw out there.
PHILLIP: What's your sense of it, Alex?
ALEX PLITSAS, SENIOR FELLOW, ATLANTIC COUNCIL: No, I think you're, you're entirely right in what you're saying here. I mean, the, the feeling that I got in speaking to Israeli officials is that this was something that was in the making as a result of intelligence that had come out recently. So, they struck last night over a dozen nuclear scientists. And the ones that were struck weren't random scientists. These were ones that were known to be working on military aspects of the program.
I was told by officials today that they were attempting to either acquire or design a trigger device. There was also activity for testing that was only known for military and weapons purposes, not for a civilian side of it. And a determination was made that not only did the infrastructure have to go, also the scientists that would've been involved to make sure the program couldn't be resurrected afterwards if they were to rebuild the tech.
So, it was an intel-driven operation that's been going on for a while. The U.S. was made aware along with some allies as to what took place and a decision was made to act. And speaking, earlier today with some friends on the ground in Tehran, the feeling there was basically like this was not going to happen, that -- even senior government officials, they thought the Israelis were bluffing, that the U.S. was never going to allow this to happen. And then all of a sudden, surprise, the attack hit.
And there's this general sense of fear and uncertainty. They're hoping President Trump is going to step in and sort of make this stop. I was actually quite shocked by some of the comments I heard. And simultaneously talking to friends in Tel Aviv and in Tehran, both in bunkers at the same time, both under missile fire.
PHILLIP: After all of this fear in Tehran from some of these people.
PLITSAS: Yes.
PHILLIP: Interesting. I mean, as you're saying that, I mean, Netanyahu earlier today, when he spoke, he had this very pointed message not necessarily to, you know, Americans or whatever, it was directed at the Iranian people. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Tonight, I wish to speak to you, the proud people of Iran. The time has come for you to unite around your flag and your historic legacy, by standing up for your freedom from an evil and oppressive regime. It has never been weaker. This is your opportunity to stand up and let your voices be heard.
(END VIDEO CLIP) PHILLIP: So, I guess my first question, Elise, is, is that right that Iran has never been weaker? And, I mean, obviously, I think we understand the appeal here, but I'm curious if you think that he really thinks that this is a regime change moment.
ELISE LABOTT, EDWARD R. MURROW PRESS FELLOW, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Oh, I mean, look, we've been debating this all day. I was at the Council of Foreign Relations where we're debating it all day. But we talked about this last night. And, I mean, I think Iran -- I think the Israelis see this as their moment. This is what happened in Hamas. This is what happened with Hezbollah. That message to the Iranian people couldn't have been any clearer. We've paved the way for you. We prepped the ground for you.
And while they didn't -- they're not going after the supreme leader, as we said last night, which would be very dangerous, they're not going after the president, they're making it so that the Iranian people can pick up the mantle and they can do what they've been wanting to do all along, but that the Iranian military would not allow them to do.
And I think, you know, there's an element of domestic politics for Netanyahu, but there's also an amount of, you know, kind of vindication in the international community. If you notice when Israel is always, you know, on the front foot when they're being successful about Hezbollah and Hamas, no one's criticizing Israel. We're hearing very muted reactions in the region. If this didn't go so well, there'd be a lot of condemnation.
And so I think right now he's trying to ride this and I think you're going to see a lot of messages. What I'm hearing in the region is nod, wink, and duck, because, nod and wink, we're all glad that you did it, but duck, because we don't know what the reaction is going to be.
RAVI AGRAWAL, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, FOREIGN POLICY: I want to double click on the duck because, you know, be careful what you wish for.
[22:15:00]
This could go any which way. I mean, you know, a lot of times when you attack a country, there's a rallying around the flag effect. And I think for the Iranian people who are very proud, have a rich, deep history, they're not going to take too kindly to being attacked, this could go the other way.
Let's say you have some sort of regime change, the alternative could be more hardliners, it could be worse for Israel --
LABOTT: It could be ISIS.
AGRAWAL: -- for the region, exactly. So, there are a lot of things here that could go a different direction.
Also, I just want to say, I think Iran's been holding back so far. They have 3,000 ballistic missiles. they could use more of them. They could use more of them in a coordinated fashion. This is not over. This is going to go on for several days. There are other things they could do. They could attack American installations in the region. They have not closed the Straits of Hormuz. They could attack oil tankers. They could lead to oil prices going up dramatically. There are many options still on the table for them that they don't want to take. They didn't want any of this to happen.
PHILLIP: They don't want to take now, you think, or they didn't want it, take those steps?
AGRAWAL: Well, I don't think they wanted this to happen. I think they were hoping the peace, the nuclear talks would work out in their favor. Now that last night has happened, I think they're waiting and watching. They're smarting. They've been humiliated. They're going to need to take some action at some point. We don't know when.
LABOTT: And just very quickly, I mean, when you hear in the region, again, everyone's like kind of, you know, happy that this is happening, that it's weakening Iran, but diplomats are saying, if you're going to go for it, you might as well go for the whole bit, because if Iran is still left standing, the reverberations from the region could be just deadly.
DIAMOND: You know, I will say this conversation though about, you know, what is Iran deciding to do, are they holding back? It reminds me a lot of the conversation we were happening after Israel went after Hezbollah. And that question then was, you know, is Hezbollah going to use the rest of its arsenal, et cetera, et cetera? It turned out Hezbollah wasn't able to do much more than they did.
I don't think it's the exact same situation with Iran, but I do think there is a question to be asked about how much more capability does Iran have. And is this, you know, them being strategically deliberative or is this being them being unable to carry out the kind of attack that they want to?
PHILLIP: Yes, very good questions there. Everyone stand by, much more ahead.
Next, Donald Trump is warning Iran to make a deal right now before nothing is left, as we learn more about what America's role is here and why they have two different tones on this from the White House. Stand by as we watch Israel's skies as dawn approaches.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: More on our breaking news tonight, sirens are sounding in Israel right now as the IDF warns of a new wave of Iranian missiles. President Trump and his administration is struggling to find a consistent message on all of this.
In an interview with CNN, he called Israel's attacks, quote, very successful and said that Iran should have listened when he gave them a 60-day warning. The president also warned that Iran should now come to the table to make a deal before it's too late. Trump has publicly discouraged Israel from launching a massive assault in recent days, and he pushed to secure a deal to curtail Iran's nuclear program.
CNN's Kristen Holmes is live in Washington. So, Kristen, U.S. talks with Iran are still planned, as far as we know, for this weekend. So, what is the thinking right now inside of the White House about where things will actually go from here?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean, the White House wants to have these talks. They want to have them as soon as Sunday. Now, they acknowledge they might not look the exact same way they were supposed to. They were going to be with the Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, meeting in Oman with Ian counterparts on Sunday. Some of those details might change. But if you talk to the White House, they think they might still be able to get there this weekend to have that six rounds of talks.
Now, if you talk to other outside administration officials or U.S. officials, there's a lot of doubt being cast on this. But Donald Trump himself, part of the reason that he believes that he can bring the Iranians to the table is, as you just mentioned, the fact that he thinks that he can kind of issue these loose threats to them to say, look, I gave you a chance and see what happens if you don't take me up on my deal. I mean, he's essentially saying, if you take me up on any kind of deal that we're offering, I could get this to stop. That's what we're seeing in reading between the lines here.
Now, the one thing that might complicate all of this is the fact that, one, we know the United States is now helping intercept missiles for Israel. They point to an official -- a U.S. official told me this is all about the fact that we have hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of American citizens in Israel. We also have U.S. military assets, we have to protect them, but they are still helping Israel.
Now, we've heard from the Iranian side of this saying that anyone who is helping Israel should consider themselves a target. Obviously, if Iran was to target any of these military assets within the region or bases, as we've talked about, we know that the non-essential personnel has already been moved out. But if they were to target them, that would end any kind of communication between the White House, the administration, and Iran.
So, they're threatening to do so, but, again, when you're talking to the White House, they still believe that it's possible to get to a deal and to have this next round of talks as early as Sunday.
PHILLIP: All right. Kristen Holmes, thank you very much for that.
Adam Kinzinger is with us at the table. So, is it possible, Adam, you think, to get Iran to the table this weekend?
ADAM KINZINGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, it depends what the ask is. If the ask is, hey, let's go back to JCPOA after they've been taking these missiles, you know, then, yes, probably they can get them back to the table because that'd be a really good deal for Iran.
[22:25:00]
I think from now, the answer has to be, okay, we're willing to negotiate again, but it will be that you have absolutely no nuclear program with no ability to enrich.
And I think that's kind of -- it's really -- you know, Iran tried to call the bluff on this. They've been stalling for however long this has been. And now, you know, they stalled for too long. And so I think the cost to them has to be, if you want to negotiate, you have no nuclear processing capability, whatsoever, because you can't go back to what we were discussing earlier.
PHILLIP: So, for those who don't know what JCPOA is, it's essentially the nuclear deal that was signed under President Obama that, by the way, Donald Trump campaigned vociferously against, and trying to pull United States out of it, but it's trying to renegotiate.
But, Elise, I mean, the question, which is a perennial question with Donald Trump is, he's now sort of saying, well, I knew this was going to happen, this is a natural consequence of the 60-day deadline I gave Iran. It's 61 days now. So, of course, there are military strikes. I mean, is this 3D chess here or is he kind of --
LABOTT: Well, I think he wants to make it look like 3D chess. The Israelis we're kind of masterful in gaming this. You know, the question is, did the Israelis take advantage of this, you know, opportunity? Was it a moment of opportunity for the Israelis to kind of use the diplomacy as a cover? If the U.S. knew about it, then they obviously participated in some way, even if they didn't say -- you know, even if they weren't in cahoots and said, all right, let's use this as a cover.
Certainly President Trump did not say no. He knew what was going to happen. He could have stopped it and he didn't say no. Now, he's saying they used American weapons. He used American weapons and they're great.
PHILLIP: But do you think he could have stopped it? I mean, I --
LABOTT: I don't think he could stop it now.
PHILLIP: Yes. I don't think -- I'm not sure he could have stopped it. I think that he could have -- he said publicly don't do it. So, I mean, I'm not sure what else --
LABOTT: That was two weeks ago, Abby.
PHILLIP: That was -- no, that was Monday. He said earlier this week in a podcast, don't do it.
So, I mean, I think I wonder --
LABOTT: I think he's playing both sides. PHILLIP: Look, the Israelis clearly understand that if you give Trump a win, he will take it, right? He's going to put his -- take what's in your open hand. But at the end of the day, they want to stop these negotiations. They do not want to get Iran to the table, at least not under the terms that I guess they believed that Trump was willing to take a deal.
PLITSAS: Yes. I mean, I think there's been evidence that surfaced and the Israelis have made comments that the intelligence indicated the Iranians were looking to figure out how they were going to subvert anything that got put in place. They were working clandestine in the background, again, on a weapons program. The IAEA came out with a report yesterday confirming that they were conducting activities like that. So, we knew we couldn't trust them to start with.
I think the president would've preferred a deal. He genuinely didn't want to be in a conflict, from what I'm hearing. The vice president did not either. He was asked to negotiate. Everything was leaked. It ended up in The New York Times, and then 60 days went by and this sort of happened.
And so with the Israelis having the capability to do this themselves, I think the president was probably looking at this as, okay, now this needs to happen. I'm seeing the intel. We gave negotiations a chance. They're giving us the runaround, and the Israelis can take care of this without us. So, you know what? You know, kind of hands off and, and sort of let this happen. That's at least what I'm hearing. I don't know if you're hearing something different.
DIAMOND: No. I also just think that like at the end of the day, President Trump right now is -- you know, he's not being critical of Netanyahu. He's not being critical of Israel's actions. He seems more or less happy to have seen this unfold in the way that it did. He's telling Iran, you know, I told you so, you should have done a deal with me. And he's trying to use this now as leverage going forward.
And at the end of the day, that is where things are critical now, is how President Trump uses this going forward, whether or not he can capitalize on this momentum, whether or not Iran feels, significantly weakened to the point that they do want to go for a deal here. You know, coming back to the question earlier with Elise, I do think it's hard to imagine Netanyahu going forward with this with a firm no from Donald Trump.
And so at a minimum, I think Donald Trump, you know --
LABOTT: Plausible deniability.
DIAMOND: Yes, plausible deniability. Said, listen, I don't want this. But I think it was more of a yellow light than a dark red.
PHILLIP: What now, right? Okay. David Ignatius in the Post suggests that Israel took an opening for the strike but closing the door is going to be much harder. So, how does this really end? Because, I mean, they, they've set this up as being the end of the Iran nuclear program. If that doesn't occur, then where exactly are we? We don't have a deal, and we also don't have the end of the negotiating of the nuclear program.
KINZINGER: This is where the American piece is going to be really important, because we can end the nuclear program. It's going to take --
PHILLIP: We would have to do it.
KINZINGER: It's going to take some American strikes.
But, I mean, look, I mean, the reality is Israel has made it very clear that Iran, to an extent, is a paper tiger. I agree. You guys were talking earlier segment about, well, is Iran holding back on some of their attacks? Maybe. But I also think it may have been so degraded right now that they're actually launching with their existing launchers as much as they can, because I don't think they have any reason right now to hold back.
[22:30:05]
They basically killed all the leadership.
PHILLIP: Okay. Alex, do you think that the U.S. would do what they need to do If those bunker busters -- to take out that nuclear facility that's embedded in a mountain, essentially, if it came to it, do you think The United States would be willing to do that?
PLITSAS: I think if the Iranians made a poor decision to attack U.S. assets in the region, then The U.S. gets involved. It makes a lot -- it's a logical choice at that point to go ahead and take out the stuff you want to do. Otherwise, the Israelis have demonstrated a capability to hit those targets, but the effects are different.
And much to Adam's point, they don't have the bunker buses. We're not using the B-2s to go in and deliver some of those weapons. They can still collapse the tunnel entrances. They can hit the air shafts. They can entomb what's in there, and it doesn't mean it's destroyed, but anybody trying to access it now, it's going to be that constant go for bopping having to hit somebody who's after it.
I don't think, personally, that -- that president -- that Prime Minister Netanyahu will stop right now, and here's why.
We said in Lebanon, oh, you know, slow down with the ground war. Let's pull out, you know, let's do this and that in Gaza. In reality, he went and did what he needed to do and for his own security, from his own perspective. If they open the door and they do this, stopping halfway before this is done is not in the Israeli's interest.
He will continue until the Israelis feel that the -- the nuclear program is no longer an existential threat to the state. When that's done, then he'll stop. That's my personal opinion. I don't know if you guys disagree.
PHILLIP: All right, everybody, buckle up because that's basically a recipe for a -- a very long journey here in this story. Coming up next, though, for us, as we watch the skies over Israel, MAGA stars are furious now with President Trump calling him complicit by endorsing Israel strikes. Stand by.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:36:13]
PHILLIP: Tonight, MAGA divided. Donald Trump's support for Israel's actions against Iran is splitting his own base, pitting Israel hawks against those who fear The United States is being pulled into an even bigger regional fight. But remember, when the president campaigned -- on this message.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I will stop the chaos in The Middle East and I will prevent World War three. I'm going to keep us out of World War three. We're not going to have World War three. I will prevent World War three.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Former Fox host Tucker Carlson sent Trump a stern warning this morning in his newsletter. Quote, "The United States should not, at any level, participate in a war with Iran. No funding, no American troops, no troops on the ground. Drop Israel. Let them fight their own wars." What happens next will define Donald Trump's presidency.
Ashley Allison and Pete Seat are back at the table. Ravi is also back with us, as well. So, Pete, this is an inevitable divide playing out in -- in MAGA world where Trump, you know, he told them he would end all the wars, and now he has not ended all the wars.
PETE SEAT, FORMER WH SPOKESMAN FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Well, it's inevitable because there is an element of the MAGA base that is divorced from reality, and that is the reality of leadership. They've never read an intelligence briefing. They've never sat in the situation room. Donald Trump has had the benefit of doing that.
The most consequential decision they've made is choosing Crest or Colgate. And so, they don't understand the importance of these decisions nor do they embrace the burden of American leadership and being the world's lone superpower power and having the largest economy. And it's just --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: ----argue that -- that also describes Donald -- I mean, what Donald Trump campaigned on. I mean, he campaigned on getting out of, you know, Iraq and or getting out of Afghanistan in his term, then Ukraine hasn't happened, then stopping the Gaza war hasn't happened. He -- he has been the one who has fed if it's a delusion, he's fed the delusion.
AGRAWAL: I -- I think he's very good at-- at sort of spotting the mood. And I'm a Crest man, by the way.
(LAUGHTER)
AGRAWAL: But I think, you know, in as much as there's a constituency on the left and the right that really does want to end all of these wars around the world. Trump wants to cater to that. He is also, I think, looking at this moment and saying, well, you know, Israel's taking out Iran's nukes.
This is actually quite popular in the region. It's popular in The United States. It's a win, as well for a wing of his party, so why not milk some of that? I think he's just looking at each faction and how they're reacting and seeing what he can get out of it.
KINZINGER: And I -- I think this is what's what we've been missing for so long as Republicans, is leadership. Like just Donald Trump's--
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Are you saying Donald Trump is -- is --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: -- leadership?
KINZINGER: I know. It's surprising.
PHILLIP: I just wanted for the record --
KINZINGER: He's just -- maybe needs to tell us what he thinks.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
KINZINGER: He keeps playing this both sides things or staying quiet. But it's interesting because, you know, where is he in the Russian- Ukraine conflict? He can't say Russia invaded Ukraine. You know, and nobody even knows where he really stands on that.
I remember a saying that I have memorized over and over, the short part of it, Ronald Reagan gave at the Goldwater Convention. He said, "We can have peace and we can have it tomorrow. Surrender." And there is a surrender caucus in the MAGA base that basically thinks peace at any cost, including at the reputation of The United States, is worth it. And I don't --
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think one thing though is that Donald Trump makes a lot of promises that he can't keep, and because they're empty promises. So, you say I'm going to end the war on -- in day one of my administration, many of us said that's not going to happen as long as --especially if you're not going to tell the truth about what happened when the-- for the war to start.
And there are people to your point in the Republican Party and MAGA who believe him everything he says even if he says the sky is green.
[22:40:01] They believe everything he says and they do not question it. I think what you're seeing now, though, with Tucker Carlson, even Steve Bannon, he was saying you go -- Israel has to go out of it alone --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Yeah. Can I play -- let me play that sound from Steve Bannon earlier today on the "War Room."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEVE BANNON, "WAR ROOM" HOST: Israel puts Israel as they should. I have no problem with that. But America's got to put America first. And, one thing I don't like seeing is all this cheerleading going on right now, because when you're in The Middle East and dealing with ancient civilizations that are over there, unexpected things happen. We know that from 20 years of war in Afghanistan, in Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ALLISON: Their -- their isolation is still. And so, it is for them. It's only about America. I will not --I'm -- I'm not going to be, like, be like Adam and give Donald Trump the leadership credibility stamp of approval tonight. Not that I think that's what you're doing, but --
KINZINGER: I give him the lack of it.
(LAUGHTER)
ALLISON: Okay. Right. But I think, he -- Donald Trump is not stupid, and he knows that what has happened -- what happened last night, which is why they put the statement out they did last night saying we did not support this move, and now is backtracking. Even that, saying last night one thing and then today flipping the script. It's whatever he thinks at the end of the day will suit him better. And I'm not even sure it's what will suit America better.
PHILLIP: Pete, what do you make of that last point that Bannon made, which is that our experience in this region has been, to put it mildly, terrible. We have gotten into essentially quagmires, by intervening And there is a fear, especially among some of the younger folks who lived through that, that, you know, this could be a very similar situation. And also, as we've been discussing earlier in the show, we don't know how this ends. It looks like bombs falling everywhere in Iran right now, but what's the end game?
SEAT: And those are legitimate fears, to the points you made and the points that Steve Bannon made, but we do have interests in The Middle East. That has not changed. But what I think is so interesting about this is these are the same people who keep saying, art of the deal, art of the deal. Don't take anything off the table. And here they are begging the President of The United States to take things off the table.
PHILLIP: I mean, maybe because there's been no deals. KINZINGER: Yeah. There's been no deals.
(LAUGHTER)
PHILLIP: I mean, I don't know. I'm sorry to say, but there's been no deals. No Ukraine deal, no Gaza deal.
KINZINGER: It's -- it's hard to see MAGA coalesce around anything when the President doesn't articulate his foreign policy goals. And I think it's just so important because you can't, you know, once when you're campaigning, you can do whatever you want, right? You can say whatever you want. When you're president, you're going to be faced with things like, hey, Israel's bombing Iran.
And I don't see how this stops now with Iran with a nuclear program intact. And honestly, The United States is going to have to make a statement either way on what's happening and more than just silently, I think, intercepting some missiles.
PHILLIP: All right. Next for us, a big military parade will be held in Washington D.C. tomorrow. The president wants everyone to come. Only a lot of Republican lawmakers are sending their regrets. We'll discuss. That's next.
[22:47:40]
PHILLIP: As Israel and Iran attack each other tonight, tomorrow, the President will host a military parade in Washington. And a majority of Americans believe it is a giant waste of money. The event marks the 250th anniversary of the army. It also happens to be his 79th birthday.
There also may be some attendance issues, as well. The majority of GOP lawmakers just won't be going. And while some are offering typical excuses for their absences, another prominent Republican has voiced the opposition. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): Never been a big fan of the goose-stepping soldiers and big tanks and missiles rolling down the street. So, if you ask me, I wouldn't have -- wouldn't have done it. And we were always different than, you know, the images you saw in The Soviet Union and North Korea. We were proud not to be that.
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): I wouldn't spend money if it were me. The United States of America is the most powerful country in all of human history. We're a lion, and a lion doesn't have to tell you it's a lion.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Tanks have now descended on the capital ahead of the celebration. Soldiers are in the streets rehearsing, and just seven of the 50 GOP lawmakers surveyed, told "Politico" that they actually plan to attend. This is $45 million in-- in expenses, seven million pounds of hardware, 7000 soldiers. Adam, what do you make of it?
KINZINGER: Well, look, as a military guy myself, I would have hated to have to march in this, okay? First stop. But then as a -- as a, you know, former politician, I just think it's a bad message. I mean, look, it's this is what as, you know, the -- the voices -- the voices you heard there said, this is what people like North Korea, Russia, you know, folks that have a very -- that have to show their power because they have -- they're -- they're concerned.
We don't do that. Everybody knows we're extremely powerful. I think, you know, the last time we really had a parade like this was at the end of Desert Storm. I think we should save parades for things like Desert Storm.
PHILLIP: When we are in a war and we win the war.
KINZINGER: Yeah. World War two.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And it's not controversial at all to celebrate the people who won the war.
[22:50:00]
KINZINGER: And the problem is this on the heels of L.A., on the heels of the thing that really disturbed me honestly and actually more than anything was watching the soldiers cheering and booing at his speech the other day.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
KINZINGER: That was a failure of command. And watching all that politicizes the military.
PHILLIP: Speaking of that, a very alarming headline, frankly, from military.com, basically saying that the soldiers were asked about their political affiliation. The troops ultimately selected to be behind Trump invisible, but to the cameras were almost exclusively male. One unit level message bluntly said, "no fat soldiers."
"If soldiers have political views that are in opposition to the current administration and they don't want to be in the audience and they need to speak with their leadership and get swapped out," another note to troops said. Wow, Pete. I mean, we're screening troops for their political views?
SEAT: Yeah. So, I don't know what to say to that, so I'm going to pivot to the poll because --
(LAUGHTER)
SEAT: -- this is -- this is what -- because I do think --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: You know what? I'm going to give you points for honesty because you definitely could have tried to spin it, but you didn't.
(CROSSTALK)
SEAT: Which I do think is you can't spin everything, Abby.
(LAUGHTER)
SEAT: I mean, so that poll is interesting because the way you asked the question makes a huge difference. And the question didn't include even how much it was costing. It just said, do you agree that this is a good use of government funds? And, yeah, it's going to be a high percentage because most people think the only good use of government funds is when it's spent on them.
The other question that was asked though was do you approve or disapprove of Donald Trump's decision to hold a military parade in D.C .on June 14th to honor the 250th anniversary of the U.S. army? That was 40 percent approved to 29 percent disapproved. I think a lot of those approved just heard 250th anniversary. Yeah. Who wouldn't want to celebrate service and honor sacrifice? The others heard Donald Trump and were like anything he does is bad. I hate it.
ALLISON: I think one thing that should just be very clear and I'm sure everyone at the table would agree, we want to support our troops. We want to support our veterans. So, honoring the people who serve our country, I am eternally grateful and they deserve to be honored.
But I think there's a different way you can actually honor them and it's by not cutting benefits to the V.A. and not firing people from the jobs. And making sure local V.A. hospitals, and making sure the people that are serving, the military families that take the -- the biggest brunt when people are deployed are actually cared for.
And I haven't always seen especially in this current bill, the budget bill that is coming, there are actual cuts to veterans in that. So, rather than spending $45 million on this parade, why don't we actually support our troops and give them the real support they need for protecting and serving our country?
PHILLIP: So, tomorrow could be super interesting, Ravi, because there's also a planned "No Kings" --
AGRAWAL: Yes.
PHILLIP: -- demonstrations all across the country, not in D.C., notably. It's also going to be raining in D.C., so we'll see what the parade looks like. But, I mean, there is this pushback happening.
AGRAWAL: Yeah.
PHILLIP: And the pushback could be actually much more significant than the parade itself.
AGRAWAL: Oh, absolutely. In terms of numbers, for sure. But, you know, if you are Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping, you are looking at these visuals of the protests on the one hand, of the parade on the other, and you're rubbing your hands in glee. I mean, you are saying, you're looking at the politicization of the military. You are looking at America being less effective as a democracy. America giving up many of the things that made it America, its soft power around the world.
And these images, as they're broadcast around the world, they're going to lose American friends and position America more in the camp of authoritarian states. And what that does longer term is again, a set of things that you can't easily remedy, if there's another election, another leader.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
AGRAWAL: Once you go down that road, once you politicize the military, it's very hard to come back.
PHILLIP: And it's hard to separate that from, as you were saying, what's happening in L.A. where they --they have --Trump just wants them on the ground just to make a point that he can do it, it seems.
KINZINGER: And they're federal, so this is like --
AGRAWAL: Which is illegal.
KINZINGER: Yeah. The -- the National Guard is not National Guard, they're federal U.S. soldiers because they're under Title 10. I can say that as a guardsman. I know that. But the most dangerous thing we can do in this country, you can destabilize people's trust in the Supreme Court even, Congress.
But you cannot destabilize the country's trust in the military, or have the country think the military is partisan. I, honest to God, and I mean this. I don't know how our democracy survives, losing trust in every institution and The United States of America.
PHILLIP: It is a very scary thought, honestly. Everyone, thank you very much for all of that. Up next, we're getting word of new explosions in Jerusalem as Israel and Iran continue to attack one another tonight. Stand by for the breaking news.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:59:14]
PHILLIP: We just discussed that military parade in D.C. tomorrow to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the army's founding, and those anti-Trump protests expected across the country for what's being called "No Kings Day." CNN will be covering all of this live tomorrow. Don't miss it. And thank you very much for watching "NewsNight". CNN's coverage of breaking news out of The Middle East continues right now with "Laura Coates Live."
UNKNOWN (voice-over): This is CNN breaking news.
LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, I'm Laura Coates. The sun is now rising over Israel after multiple waves of missile counter attacks from Iran. Just moments ago, explosions were heard over Jerusalem. And this was the sky above Tel Aviv overnight. Israel's air defense system intercepted many of the missiles fired in retaliation for yesterday's attack on Iran, but some got through.
