Return to Transcripts main page
CNN NewsNight with Abby Phillip
Trump on Verge of Presidency-Defining Decision Over Iran; U.S. to Move Largest, Most Advanced Carrier Toward Conflict; Iran Vows Not to Surrender After Trump's Demand. Tucker Carlson Accuses Sen. Ted Cruz of Knowing Nothing About the U.S.; Minnesota Police Investigate a Break-in Where Hortman Couple Was Murdered. Aired 10-11p ET
Aired June 18, 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 ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Abby Philip in New York.
Will he or won't he? Tonight, the world is watching and waiting for President Trump to make the single most consequential decision of his time in office so far, whether he will allow the United States to get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran.
Now, just a short time ago, CNN learned that Trump has reviewed potential attack plans for Iran, but he has not approved them. He's holding off to see if Tehran steps back from its nuclear program.
Meanwhile, Trump met with his national security team in the Situation Room to discuss the options for U.S. military involvement, and we're told that top officials are now discussing how the U.S. can strike Iran without becoming embroiled in a full scale war.
Meanwhile, Israel and Iran continue to trade strikes, and the relentless barrage enters its seventh day.
So, here is what Iran is saying.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MAJID TAKHT-RAVANCHI, IRANIAN DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER: If the United States decides to join Israel's attacks, if the Americans decide to get involved militarily, we have no choice but to retaliate wherever we find the targets necessary to be acted upon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: CNN Anchor Anderson Cooper is live now in Tel Aviv. Anderson, now that you are on the ground in Israel, what is it like there? Do you get the sense of anticipation for what Trump's decision is going to be and what that might mean for Israel in the region?
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: There's certainly a lot of anticipation here. Just in the last hour, Iran's Revolutionary Guard has said that air defenses have been activated in Tehran. Now, the IDF has also, in the last hour, put out a warning to Iranians in two areas around Tehran to evacuate because of strikes that they are going to be conducting. There's no word yet on what the latest targets might be from Israel.
Earlier today, the Israeli Air Force said that 25 fighter jets had hit more than 40 targets in Western Iran. They're talking about missile storage sites, military personnel, missile launchers as well. Israel continues, Abby, as you know, to dominate the skies over Western Iran and seems able to take their time, selecting out new targets, searching for new targets and hitting those at will.
Now, at the same time, Iran's ability to launch missiles here into Tel Aviv and elsewhere into Israel seems to be greatly reduced today. There have only been two warnings that have gone out to residents here in Tel Aviv to seek shelter. We've gone down to the shelters twice today. That's a lot less than it in prior days. No reports of any fatalities as a result of those attempts by Iran.
It is just past 5:00 A.M. here. Dawn is just starting to break. And, once again, residents here are going to be waking up wondering what this next phase of the conflict will bring and what will President Trump decide to do.
PHILLIP: Yes, the entire world waits. And I know, Anderson, you've only been on the ground for a short time now, but what is life like in Tel Aviv? I mean, are people able to go about their lives? I mean, we've seen a lot of our correspondents and anchors having to go into stairwells and bomb shelters as these sirens have gone on. But are people able to do other things?
COOPER: Yes. You know, life, in many ways, has slowly gotten back, I'm going to say to normal here. There's certainly a lot of concern about what lies ahead how long this may go on for, what the impact of it is going to be and whether or not the U.S. is going to get involved. But in Tel Aviv, I mean, Tel Aviv is often referred to as a bubble. You know, there were people swimming in the ocean today. There were people watching the sunset. There were coffee shops that are open. Life has not returned completely to normal.
But I think the fear that we saw over the weekend with so many strikes coming from Iran, the 24 people died here, many others who were injured, others have been left homeless because of the destruction of property. I think the stress levels have reduced. It's become a little bit more normal. And the two times that we went down to bomb shelters today, there wasn't a lot of fear from people.
There was concern, of course, and nobody likes to, to do that. Some people were in their bathrobes, they'd just gotten out of the shower when the air raid warnings went off, they had 10 minutes to get down to the bomb shelter. And then shortly after it got the all clear. So, while there's a lot of concern and a lot of stress.
[22:05:00]
And there's a lot of people who would like to leave, and more Israelis who would like to come back. The commercial airspace is still closed. Life is slowly getting back to some semblance of normal. You know, fully -- restaurants aren't fully open. The life of the city is not continuing, but it's certainly better than it has been in the last several days.
PHILLIP: Anderson, thank you very much for all of that, Anderson Cooper in Tel Aviv.
It's been an interesting day, to say the least, for President Trump, as he's weighing this potentially presidency defining decision. He was actually on the White House lawn this morning overseeing a construction project. But while he was there, the president had this extraordinary warning for Iran.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Unconditional surrender. That means I've had it, okay? I've had it, I give up, no more. Then we go blow up all the -- you know, all the nuclear stuff that's all over the place there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: It's quite the thing at a moment when people are wondering, is the United States going to get involved in a war? Is there going to be a nuclear component to this? But Trump seems to be sort of openly weighing his decisions, musing about it in public, just as he is deliberating in private. The stakes, Alex, though, could not be higher in this moment. I mean, what do you think are the real consequences of a decision potentially to move forward with strikes, which, frankly, he seems inclined to do at this point?
ALEX PLITSAS, SENIOR FELLOW, ATLANTIC COUNCIL: Yes. I mean, his inclination seems to be leaning towards that, as you mentioned, in terms of actually striking, where it probably wasn't there even going back 96 hours ago. But you don't go this far along in the pattern and the Iranians with their behavior in terms of not really wanting to negotiate. They've been stalling for quite some time.
The IAEA report made it clear they were engaging in clandestine nuclear activity, and the president said today he's just had enough. He's not going to listen anymore of the nonsense and pushing it along. And so if they're not going to cooperate at that point, which he said now I believe is, you know, total capitulation, then strikes are likely on the table.
PHILLIP: I mean, what do you make today, Ashley, of just how he's been talking about this to the country? I mean, I think a lot of people, frankly, are worried here in the United States. They're worried about what this could mean for them, what this could mean for their loved ones who are at these bases that are in the region, and could be at risk.
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, one, I saw earlier today, our Kaitlan Collins asked him a question, and I think it was when he was like I won't know until the very decision. And actually that was somewhat encouraging because I hope he hasn't already made his decision. I hope that he does really weigh every option because that is what a president and a leader actually needs to do.
But I'm also not surprised that he says Iran is not going to unconditionally surrender. Like that is not the way they move. That is not what they are going to do. And so if that's the negotiating space that he is in, then that makes me very concerned.
I also don't find it surprising though that it sometimes he does just pontificate on air and say what is on his mind, because that is what he has done with when we think about Ukraine and Russia. That is what he has done with the tariffs. That is how he governs.
This though is so high stakes. This is why so many people were concerned about the way he leads. Because in a moment where they could potentially have a nuclear weapon, our family members, our loved ones, our fellow Americans, could be going into war. If we attack Iran, we know that we also will be on the defense. And I really don't think a Republican or Democrat really want that in this moment.
PHILLIP: And let me just play for you, Congresswoman, what your colleague in the Senate, Tim Kaine, said about the decision that President Trump is facing and really why a lot of prior presidents haven't made it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TIM KAINE (D-VA): Why have Congresses of both parties frankly abdicated this? It's because they're afraid of war votes. These are very tough votes. They're very consequential.
And so over many, many years, under presidents and Congresses of both parties, Congress has decided to kind of hide in the tall grass. Let the president make the call, and then we'll criticize him if it works out badly, or say something good about him or her if it works out well, but that's not what the Constitution says. The Constitution says we declare war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: I mean, should Congress be using their constitutional responsibility and weighing in here before such a consequential moment for the country?
REP. NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS (R-NY): This is such a critical and significant moment in our history and really one of the most important decisions that the president or any member of Congress would make. It is within Congress' constitutional authority to be the ones that do declare war. The president has limited powers here. He can do an isolated or targeted to strike. He can send troops to a region as a deterrent. There are certain things that he can do, and that's what he's weighing.
And obviously the members of Congress we have not yet received in an intelligence classified briefing.
[22:10:00] So, we are dealing with limited information than what the president is right now. We don't have the full picture just yet. And, obviously, before any vote of that magnitude, we would need all the information.
PHILLIP: I mean, that's very telling though that you guys haven't been even briefed.
MALLIOTAKIS: Which I think is disturbing.
PHILLIP: Yes.
MALLIOTAKIS: I think it's actually very disturbing that the speaker has not called us back to be briefed, or at least given us, even if it was a non-classified briefing, over the last couple of days.
PHILLIP: So, the president could make a decision. Because this is the way I think it seems to a lot of people, the president can make a decision that maybe is limited at the beginning, but it becomes much less limited down the road, and Congress hasn't even been briefed? I mean, that's -- it's extraordinary.
MALLIOTAKIS: I agree with you. I'm actually asking those very same questions. Why we're not receiving this information?
Now, Senator Schumer said that the full Senate will be briefed next week. I assume we'll be receiving that same information from the speaker any day now. But the reality is that something can happen at any moment, right? This is what we're dealing with.
And when you talk about these -- a nuclear weapon that the president today said was in weeks of being accessible and be able to be used by Iran, that is critically dangerous. And Iran is obviously not just a threat to our ally Israel. It's a threat to the entire region. It's a threat to the entire world.
And so the president needs to make a decision here on what is -- if there is an immediate threat to the United States, would you be okay --
PHILLIP: And what action can he take if he did decide to strike with that before you guys even had a briefing?
MALLIOTAKIS: It really depends on the information that he has, and he's basing that decision on. If it is a targeted for an immediate threat against the United States, that's within his authority to do that, but certainly not to engage and enter us into a war without Congress taking a vote.
PHILLIP: It's interesting because, I mean, Americans, when you look at the polling on this asked about support for airstrikes against Iran, that's like the lowest support that there is, just 48 percent. 83 percent support diplomatic efforts. They're also divided on whether the United States should attack Iran's nuclear facilities as well.
So, I mean, look, Democrats and Republicans, lots of MAGA people, very on the fence about this. SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes. I think a lot of people are on the fence, Abby, because the concern is if Iran follows through on their threats, that if we get directly involved and engaged in this conflict, that they will potentially attack American soldiers and bases in the surrounding area or use some of their proxy groups to do so and they kill American soldiers, we really won't have a choice but to respond and react. And that would, and for all intents and purposes, get us involved in what could be a prolonged conflict in the Middle East once again.
And so I think most Americans are looking at this saying, we don't want that. We certainly don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon because then you don't want an arms race in the Middle East, which even Saudi Arabians have stated, if Iran gets a nuclear bomb, then they want to expedite their process to have a nuclear bomb to protect themselves.
So, these are some very complicated, nuanced issues. I'm glad the president is taking his time. I do not want a rushed decision on this. And I agree with the congresswoman. Congress needs to know what the intelligence says before the president makes an ultimate decision.
PHILLIP: Yes. Okay.
JENNIFER WELCH, PODCAST CO-HOST, I'VE HAD IT: Just the veracity that when you look at Benjamin Netanyahu for 30 years has said the exact same talking points, we're days away, we're weeks away, we're a month away, and you can go back, CNN, you all did a montage of that.
PHILLIP: And we played it on the show last week.
WELCH: And so as an American who has seen troops go over and die, and our taxpayer money and the debt added, and all of the instability that it brings, to think about us going in when we don't have a credible messenger to believe in Benjamin Netanyahu because he has wanted to do this for 30 years. It's like Dick Cheney on meth. Benjamin Netanyahu is. I mean, he is a maniac and he is a total war hawk. And I think we all need to be really measured.
And to the speaker, I mean the speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, he's a rapture prepper. This guy's waiting for the rapture, just like Ted Cruz is. So, you have this whole sect of MAGA that they support Israel because they want the Jews to be in Israel so that Jesus can come back for the rapture. And that's a very real thing that's in Congress. And that's not foreign policy. That's magical thinking.
PHILLIP: So, Alex, what do you think about this --
SINGLETON: Can I just -- I mean, I support Israel for religious purposes. But I also don't believe the United States should be in a prolonged conflict. There are a lot of Christians in this country who support Israel who would say, let's be judicious.
WELCH: Well, there's the separation of church and state.
SINGLETON: I understand that. But the point I'm making here -- WELCH: That shouldn't be a foreign policy.
SINGLETON: But a lot of people can separate their religious views from foreign policy decisions. And so I wouldn't, you know, castigate a negative against people who have religious views is all I'm saying.
ALLISON: So, look, I think that's not the point that was being made. Believe it or not, Tucker Carlson actually made that point with --
PHILLIP: Which we'll discuss later in the show.
ALLISON: But can I -- the one thing that is -- so I was sitting on this show when the first strike -- when Israel did the first attack. And the United States didn't even know that or said in that moment that we didn't even know it was happening.
[22:15:00]
And we aren't even a week from that day. And we are about to potentially enter into a conflict that will have cataclysmic, generational impact for something we didn't even know that our ally was going to actually do well, which is, and ---
PHILLIP: I'm not sure. We didn't know, but, I mean --
ALLISON: We didn't agree with it. We distanced ourselves from it.
PHILLIP: Yes. I think that the idea there was we weren't involved. But, I mean, you raised this -- you raised the prospect of almost like a tail wagging the dog kind of situation here, which frankly is kind of what it seems like is happening that Israel decided to go forward on its own, hoping that the United States would have no choice but to join in. Similarly, you take the strike, right, you do it. Then it becomes a broader war. Congress then maybe has no choice but to say, here's your declaration of war.
So, I mean, is that -- is it fair for people, Alex, to think that maybe this is kind of pre-ordained in that way?
PLITSAS: I mean, it certainly to appears so to folks who are watching, right? So, this -- I mean, there's a lot of history that goes into this. The JCPOA or the original Iran deal allowed them to keep the technology that allowed them to enrich uranium. And the technology is largely the same, minus some extra arrays and some tech to go from a research to weapons grade. And they were caught cheating on it recently.
And the IAEA made it clear they found trace of nuclear material at places that they weren't supposed to be, that they had no explanation for, trying to attempt to acquire a trigger device, radiological testing, which has no other purpose besides weapons grade. The Israelis took out 15 nuclear scientists or attempted to the first night because they made a decision that they needed to take out the scientists with their knowledge in addition to the text that the program couldn't be resurrected afterwards. The president said, you know, I want to negotiate. He said, I gave you 60 days, 61st day, which also happened to be Friday the 13th. The Israelis decided to unload afterwards and they decided that they were going to start doing that.
Now, what's interesting is they haven't hit Fordow yet, the last facility, which is largely what we're talking about. It signals to me two things. One, either the option they have available to them is too risky or it's not going to be as good as what the U.S. has, which is something we'll discuss in terms of B-2 bomber and some of the bunker- busting bombs to really destroy the facility. It could be a temporary fix.
They've largely suppressed the air defense. So, that's why, as Anderson was mentioning, or there was, prior to that in the opening, a video of the, you know, Iranian officials saying that, you know, the air defenses had been activated, whatever. They've largely been suppressed. The Israelis have air superiority and air dominance basically from Israel across Syria, Iraq, all the way across into Western Iran, to Tehran. If they want to do this, they can. They're waiting for a reason.
And so I think it was to see if the Iranians would strike back at the U.S. after the opening salvos, the Iranians were smart enough not to do it, to draw the U.S. in. Now, it's this question of is the U.S. going to do it? The most effective option is for the U.S to be the one to deliver that final blow to the facility, to put a real -- try to put a cap on it and set it back as far as you can.
The Israelis had 200 aircraft the first night, paramilitary operations and sabotage. It's clear this was well-planned. They've got something in the works for Fordow. What that is beyond conventional bombing is yet to be seen, but that's where we're at.
PHILLIP: All right, to be continued.
Coming up next for us here, the three military options that President Trump is likely considering and why one of them may put the U.S. into a global war.
Plus, new video tonight shows the MAGA divide over all of this, and also scrutiny of Israel's actions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): That's in the Bible. As a Christian, I believe that.
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST, THE TUCKER CARLSON SHOW: Where is that?
CRUZ: I can find it. I don't have the scripture off the tip of my -- you pull out the phone and use Google.
CRUZ: It's in Genesis.
(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:20:00]
PHILLIP: More now on our breaking news. Nearing sunrise in Iran and Israel, a source tells CNN that the president has reviewed Iran attack plans, but he's holding off to see if the country is going to step back from its nuclear program.
Alex is back with us here to talk through the president's potential options here. And as you see it, there are three main scenarios that could play out here. The first one is essentially that Israel decides to go it alone.
PLITSAS: Correct. So, if Israel -- if the president decides to let the Israelis do it by themselves, if he's comfortable, he thinks they have the capabilities to do enough damage, that he's comfortable with the after-effects of it, this is what it would look like.
So, in terms of Fordow, you really have two options. The Israelis previously launched a raid into Syria, about 200 kilometers north into a chemical weapons facility. So, they put commandos on the ground before. That's an extreme option with a lot of risk, obviously putting people on. But as you can see, the tunnel entrance is here. So we got them here, right here and here, right? So, if you're going to send folks inside into the mountain, into a deep buried facility as a render safe mission, kind of difficult.
PHILLIP: Yes. I mean, how defended is this area though? I mean, are there, you know, Iranians on the ground?
PLITSAS: Sure.
PHILLIP: What else is there?
PLITSAS: So, I mean, there's plenty of defenses that are here. This was specifically built as a deep buried facility to withstand conventional attacks, either from a ground or an air raid.
PHILLIP: Yes.
PLITSAS: So -- and you also have what we call fatal funnels or choke points, because if there's any guns inside, those are the only entrance points and that's where they're pointing. So, it's a very difficult mission set for anybody performing it.
PHILLIP: Yes.
PLTISAS: No.
PHILLIP: So, the option -- the second option is that the United States does a limited attack. And it sounds like from our reporting that that is what the United States is trying to figure out. What is the limited option here.
PLITSAS: Right. So, if it's limited option, so if it wasn't the ground raid in the Israelis, those same tunnels, if they don't bomb them to collapse the tunnels in the air shaft so they can't get inside requiring constant suppression, then it becomes the U.S. option, right?
There's really only one aircraft that's capable of carrying the 30,000-pound bunker-busting bombs required to do the mission, and it's the B-2 stealth bombers that you see here. So, round trip in the United States with refueling provided that nothing for deployed, probably multiple sorties involved, but that's realistically what we're looking at in order to do enough damage to set the program back.
PHILLIP: Yes. And the B-22, Israel doesn't have them.
PLTISAS: They don't have them. And that's why it requires the U.S. and they can't deliver as big of a blow from the air.
[22:25:00]
PHILLIP: Yes. So, talk us through option three. This is essentially looking at the region and saying, not just this one facility, but let's take it all out. Like what are we talking about in terms of that?
PLITSAS: Sure. I think this is the least likely option to start with. If the president makes a decision to hit Fordow, his political base doesn't support, you know, a war, he certainly doesn't want to collapse the government there and deal with nation and state building, which what we saw in Iraq and Afghanistan. But if we did go in and decide to strike, right, what do the targets look like outside of that?
You can see the nuclear facilities here with the nuclear symbols, and then you've got regime targets, and then you've got oil refineries along there, which is really far expanded at that point, it's more likely that would be. But that would realistically probably only happen if they decide to go after U.S. forces in the region.
So, we have between Qatar, the UAE, we've got major air bases. U.S. Central Command has a forward headquarters at Al Udeid, Air Force base in Doha. We've got major bases in Kuwait. But what's probably the most likely would be the U.S. bases here, so Baghdad up north in Kurdistan and then here in Syria along the border, which is what everybody's predicting they would try to hit.
So, the US has been surging assets. And F-22 squadron came in today into the U.K., all kinds of fighter assets and air defense systems to protect U.S. forces that are there. Ships were moved out of the harbors and aircraft that were not in hardened bunkers have already been moved out. It is very clear the U.S. is preparing for a potential option to strike at this point.
PHILLIP: Yes, a potential option to strike, but they do not, it seems like, want a scenario where all of this is at play with Iran.
PLITSAS: It's certainly not. No, I think that's what they're trying to avoid. And everything today from CENTCOM has largely been defensive in nature to protect forces that are there. And there's a lot of dual citizens. People don't realize that there are millions of citizens that are potentially traveling through the region, through Europe and those that are dual citizens of Israel and other countries.
PHILLIP: Yes. Alex, thank you very much for joining us and for giving us all that information.
Next for us, a MAGA star confronts a MAGA senator about why the U.S. should bomb Iran, and the debate gets pretty heated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CRUZ: You're not talking about the Brits. You're not talking about the French. The question, what about the Jews? What about the Jews?
CARLSON: Oh, I'm an anti-Semite now? Senator --
CRUZ: You're asking the questions, Tucker.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:30:00]
PHILLIP: Tonight, MAGA is going at it over Trump's potential involvement in Iran. Last night, we showed you a glimpse of the contentious interview between former Fox host Tucker Carlson and Senator Ted Cruz. But today, Carlson released the full interview, and it turns out that accusing Cruz of knowing nothing about the country he sought to topple was just the tip of the iceberg.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TUCKER CARLSON, "THE TUCKER CARLSON SHOW" HOST: I like Trump. I campaigned for Trump. I know Trump. I talked to him last night. Not against Trump and you know that. I think --
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): But you're against this foreign policy?
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: I think that we should be very careful about entering into more foreign wars that don't help us when our country is dying.
CRUZ: Look, yes, focus on our country. I'm all for it. But -- but the -- naivete --
CARLSON: You don't even know how much money this costs. You don't know anything about the country whose government you want to throw -- overthrow. And you're calling me reckless.
CRUZ: I want to stop a lunatic who wants to murder us from getting nuclear weapons --
CARLSON: Fair. CRUZ: -- that could kill millions of Americans.
CARLSON: Fair.
CRUZ: You say I can't see how that benefits America in any way. That is bizarre. And by the way --
(CROSSTALK)
CARSLON: It's not bizarre. It's --
(CROSSTALK)
CRUZ: Isolationism. Your foreign policy is the foreign policy of Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama.
CARLSON: Oh, absolutely.
CRUZ: And it doesn't work.
CARLSON: Yeah. I'm a big leftist.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: Well, this is actually not parody, believe it or not, despite the two of them sort of acting like caricatures of themselves. But, Jennifer, I mean, you were talking about this a little bit earlier. I -- I mean, Ted Cruz is, you know, trying to make the case to the MAGA right that Trump should be involved in another conflict in the Middle East. And it is interesting to see this play out except it's on the right, not left and right.
JENNIFER WELCH, "I'VE HAD IT" PODCAST CO-HOST: It's delicious and interesting, but you have a Russian propagandist with a man, Ted Cruz, that is a rapture prepper. And in the -- what's lost in all of this is the American public. How does this serve The United States Of America?
Everybody in Israel has health care. Nobody goes bankrupt because they have cancer. But in The United States, we don't, yet we send them aid. And so, what's lost in this entire message is all of this just gets -- propaganda just gets pushed into the news cycle, is how does this benefit a country that is breaking every single day?
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I thought it was interesting Tucker Carlson said America is dying, so it doesn't feel like a lot of America pride right there. It also is fascinating that Ted Cruz is saying that when, correct me if I'm wrong, Congresswoman, but it doesn't sound like he's been briefed either on this war, and so, he's making a lot of determinations with minimal information.
But I think this is important. This is an issue that I think will transcend parties, honestly. I think there will be some Democrats that think, to your point, we should support Israel's approach on this with any cause, and there will be some Republicans. But I think the majority of Americans will want us to take a beat. And I am in agreement, not completely with Tucker Carlson, but I think
what he was saying to Ted Cruz is you're on talking points about people's lives and that is dangerous and you're an elected official. You know what? He can kind of -- Tucker can kind of do that because he's a TV personality. Ted Cruz is elected. He represents people. He has taken an oath to our constitution. He needs to be better.
REP. NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS (R-NY): Look, 80 percent of the country, Republican and Democrat, agree with President Trump that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
[22:35:03]
The question is how do we stop them from having a nuclear weapon and using one with the least intervention possible, right? We don't want to go into a forever war. We don't want to risk young men and women, Americans' lives. The money is a real issue, $37 trillion debt, we cannot afford it. These are all valid.
The question is how do we deter? How do we stop? And I think President Trump is doing what he can at this moment by making these projections to try to get Iran to the table, to try to get some type of diplomatic resolution to this.
Any -- any action he takes, it needs to be in the interest of The United States of America. It needs to be because we are under threat, and we know based on history that Iran has made various threats to The United States. They've said they would kill people on our own soil. They've threatened the president. They have chanted death to America in their own government. They have made significant threats, calling The United States "big Satan".
PHILLIP: Yeah.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: And that has been going on for so --
(CROSSTALK)
MALLIOTAKIS: Israel is "little Satan". So, we -- we -- exactly. We wouldn't know there's an exact phrase.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I think Americans say hear that and they're like, well, okay. Iran's been making these threats for a long time and they've carried out those threats and yet The United States hasn't taken this particular step. I actually want to just play one more piece. This is -- this is an exchange in which, essentially Ted Cruz accuses Tucker Carlson of being anti-Semitic because, in Ted Cruz's view, he keeps talking about Israel. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: What you're now describing in a very defensive way, I will say, is foreign influence over our politics. You've said that you are sincerely for Israel. I believe you. I don't think you have some weird agenda. You seem to be sincere.
CRUZ: By the way, by the way, Tucker, it's a very weird thing. The obsession with Israel, when we're talking about foreign countries--
CARLSON: It's hardly an obsession.
CRUZ: You're not talking about Chinese. You're not talking about Japanese. You're not talking about the Brits. You're not talking about the French. The question is, what about the Jews? What about the Jews?
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Oh, I'm an anti-Semite now. Senator --
CRUZ: You're asking the questions, Tucker.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: -- you just told me - you just told me --
CRUZ: You're asking why are the Jews controlling our foreign policy?
(CROSSTALK)
CARSLON: Senator --
CRUZ: That's what you just asked.
CARLSON: Hardly saying that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: It's an interesting debate because, basically, I mean, Tucker's position is that the -- Israel has, it seems the ability to say we're going to do this and then we're going to pressure The United States to come in after us and help. Ted Cruz says, well, you're just obsessed with -- with Israel.
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah.
PHILLIP: I mean --
SINGLETON: I -- I disagree with the premise and framing of the position articulated by the senator. I'm not sure why he was bringing up other countries. We're -- we're dealing with an issue in The Middle East that does involve Israel, and the implications are -- are wide and for the most part unknown for The United States in our interest.
I am in support of Israel and being able to defend itself and us being able to defend Israel indirectly. Again, the biggest concern here, if we do take this strike, as I've stated, and I-- I don't think we're considering this enough, and Iran responds.
And -- and they activate these groups that they have in the region, whether it's in Iraq or the Houthis, and they kill American soldiers or -- or wound American soldiers. We have to get involved at that point, Abby. Now, once we're involved, what is the finish line?
ALLISON: Right.
SINGLETON: Where does that actually end? And no one seems to know this.
PHILLIP: Yeah.
SINGLETON: So, Tucker is correct. We absolutely must be judicious and know all the information before we make a determination that we should be the individuals being directly involved versus supporting our friends and ally that get --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Exactly the debate that a lot of people on the left have been asking for, which is to say, why can't we talk about the degree to which, The United States foreign policy is driven by the decisions of another nation state? That, I mean, that I think people on the left have been asking that question for a long time. But now that Tucker Carlson's asking it, I guess, you know, Ted Cruz has to answer.
WELCH: Yeah. And I just think as The United States moves forward, at one point during the Iraq War, we were the propagandists. Colin Powell went to the United Nations, and he used propaganda to start a war in Iraq. And George W. Bush reduced taxes during a wartime, and that's a big chunk of the deficit. And American voters care very much about that.
The next big chunk of the deficit is while Donald Trump is doing all of this stuff, his billionaire friends are not paying taxes, and that's why people can file medical bankruptcy in the richest country in the world. So, with Trump, we go from all of these things. We went to his big break-up with Elon Musk to his lackluster turnout to his birthday party.
Now, we're on this, and it's just crisis after crisis. And this man, I have no faith in at all because he acts like a guy who got a day pass from the memory wing of a nursing home.
UNKNOWN: Neil --
WELCH: And when you see him on TV, he's slurring. He's not competent. It is just terrifying when you see the chyron that says, Trump is reviewing war plans. And as we're all sitting here, do we think that man is competent enough to review war plans when Pete Hegseth --
[22:40:00]
ALLISON: Right.
WELCH: -- is his, D-O -- you know --
ALLISON: Right. WELCH: I mean, it's just --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: I think to your point, there also is a massive budget bill that is being negotiated right now on The Hill that would have devastating consequences to Democrats and Republicans, and it is moving, and it will move this summer. And people -- there's a hard -- it's hard sometimes to pay attention to everything, but there's a lot of stuff happening domestically that we need to be paying attention to.
The one thing no one has said at this table is, why are we here? Early -- to your point, Abby, Iran has been saying this for many, many years. We were in the JCPOA and they were slowing down their preparations for a nuclear. And Donald Trump in his first term pulled out of it. So, perhaps they would not have been three weeks away from a nuclear weapon if he hadn't made the mistake in the first place. Now, we're in the situation where he could make -- I don't know. I -- I would --
MALLIOTAKIS: First of all, they were not adhering to the terms of the agreement. That's number one. That's why he pulled out. But the reason why -- look, President Trump actually economically crippled Iran. It wasn't until the Biden administration came in -- they issued waivers. They lifted sanctions. They helped Iran be enriched again, and that was what funded the Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah.
That's why October 7th happened, because they had the resources, because of all the actions that gave them the resources that the Biden administration took. That -- that is reality of what happened here.
ALLISON: No, that's not what happened.
(CROSSTALK)
MALLIOTAKIS: They were enriched. They were enriched.
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: The reason why October 7th happened was because of Joe Biden?
MALLIOTAKIS: Well, no.
ALLISON: Okay.
MALLIOTAKIS: What I said was -- what I'm -- no. What I'm saying is he enriched Iran once again by lifting sanctions, issuing waivers, so they can continue to work on the nuclear program. They did not --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: And the American people spoke.
MALLIOTAKIS: And they had those resources and that is why Hamas was well-funded and well-equipped to take out on that attack on October 7th.
ALLISON: Okay. I don't want to -- I don't want to get off the point of, like, the actual issue that we're talking about now. And I just -- I do think that if you -- if your assertion is that Iran was not following and trustworthy of the agreement we were in, what then happened to prevent Iran from getting three weeks away from a nuclear weapon from Donald Trump pulling out and -- from that deal? And I think that that action had collateral consequences that we are still living with today.
(CROSSTALK)
MALLIOTAKIS: Well, it was four years of --
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: I -- I'm not saying that I'm not saying that Biden --
(CROSSTALK)
SINGLETON: The -- one, we do need to see intelligence to see why that that expedited process has occurred. And number two, the President should absolutely review potential strike plans if there is credible evidence that we should take this attack because U.S. soldiers or a 100 plus thousand American citizens who also live in Israel may be in jeopardy. So, I -- I would disagree a little bit.
WELCH: The President should review that.
SINGLETON: Oh, absolutely.
WELCH: I just don't have faith in that man as being competent and having the mindset of approaching this in a tempered way that an American president should. This man tweets at 2 A.M., caps lock, about his poll numbers. Crazy stuff. This is not a stable --
(CROSSTALK)
MALLIOTAKIS: - the Abraham Accord --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: We got to leave it there.
MALLIOTAKIS: -- which really brought a tremendous amount of peace and prosperity in that region with the countries that were involved. We have the ability to expand on that. Look, again, we wouldn't --October 7th would have never happened if it were not for some of the things that the Biden administration chose to do that helped enrich Iran.
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: Hold on. Let's -- let's leave it there for now. Coming up next, a warning from former President Obama about the state of democracy in America. Is he right about that? We'll debate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:48:07]
PHILLIP: As one of his successors is considering striking Iran, Barack Obama is now back in the spotlight. During a rare public appearance, the former president had this warning about the state of American democracy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: Democracy is not self-executing. It-- it requires people, judges and people in the Justice Department, and you know, people throughout the government who take an oath to uphold the constitution.
When that isn't happening, we start drifting into something that is not consistent with American democracy. It is consistent with autocracies. We're not there yet completely, but -- but I think that we are -- we are dangerously close to normalizing behavior like that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHILLIP: These comments come after a string of arrests and detentions of democratic elected officials across the country by immigration officers. Those incidents alarming Democrats who are now, like Obama, warning about a slide into autocracy. Ashley?
ALLISON: He's not wrong. And I said this before November 5th, I -- which was the election, I still believe that now, the way authoritarian regimes work is they try and normalize it. They take one step. It doesn't happen in one fell swoop of the night. It takes about twelve to eighteen months to do a consolidation of power, and that consolidation of power also starts with discrediting institutions with -- this president has done for a very long time.
[22:50:03]
And then it goes by pressing the bounds. It goes by taking, questioning the 14th Amendment on citizen -- birthright citizenship, something that most people agree is already established law. But let's test it. And then, testing whether or not you can, prevent federally elected individuals to go into federal buildings and ask questions or, visit people who have been detained and then when -- and detain them and see what happens.
And the thing that stops to what President Obama was saying, the thing that stops authoritarianism is the will of the people. It is the people who must say, not on my watch. I don't have -- I can really support you as a leader, but I believe in this democracy more than I believe in any president, and so it must be stopped.
MALLIOTAKIS: Let's remember it was the Democrat Party that weaponized the justice system against President Trump -- that weaponized the justice system against political opponents.
(CROSSTALK) MALLIOTAKIS: And you're right, the American people did rise up. They did rise up and they chose to say that they were not going to tolerate this, you know, in in this weaponization of our justice system here in The United States, and they elected President Trump resoundedly.
With regards to the individuals being arrested, they're not following the rules. They're not following the they're -- they're actually -- and it -- it just strikes me that Democrats still have learned nothing from the election that they lost so badly, that they continue to go out of their way to protect people that are in this country illegally.
Often times, they're -- they're criminals. In New York City, 16,000 crimes were committed here in New York City by 4000 individuals that were placed in these shelters at our expense. And yet the Democrats here in New York City, including the city control the other day, go out of their way to try to defend these individuals, and they go so far as to attack ICE agents --
PHILLIP: Well, to be fair --
MALLIOTAKIS: -- and to call for the abolishment of our laws. It's a --
(CROSSTALK)
PHILLIP: I mean, just, just to be fair and to be clear --
MALLIOTAKIS: Yes.
PHILLIP: There is a difference between people who are violent criminals and people who are not. People who are going into a hearing because they are actually following the rules that they were told to come to a hearing. So, I mean, that distinction is important and it's one of the reasons --
MALLIOTAKIS: I agree with you.
PHILLIP: But it's one of the reasons why we've seen, I think, a shift in the polling, right? Just in the last month, this new -- this recent Reuters Ipsos poll shows more people -- more Americans disapproving now, more than, approving of Trump on immigration.
That is following all these stories, all these raids, people who are in their hearings, which is now a practice for ICE, they're going to their hearings, they've been called, they're -- they're following the process that's been laid out, and then they walk out and they're arrested and detained.
SINGLETON: Yeah. So --so I think if you look at how some of the data suggests that there's a shift in moods -- mood among most Americans, it's because of the tactics, not necessarily around the framing of do you believe we should remove people who are in the country illegally more broadly. Those numbers are still, for the most part, still strong for the President.
As a political strategist, I would probably be a little bit weary of the optics. Midterms are coming up. I would want Republicans to be strong on this particular issue. I would shift the optics. I wouldn't want to unnecessarily give Democrats an electoral advantage and their ability to articulate this next year, particularly to Independents.
That's what I'm really sort of worried about Independents. Republicans are going to be with the President. Democrats got to figure out their issues. It's the Independents that could waver one way or the other.
PHILLIP: So, the raids, you mean, like, you're -- you're concerned that that's damaging?
SINGLETON: Yeah. I -- I think it gives the Democrats an opportunity on the messaging point to frame this in -- in a way that I think would be disadvantageous, particularly to Republicans in more purple districts. And that's what I would be worried about.
PHILLIP: But what about this idea that, I-- I mean, you know, Trump and actually the Democrats, as well, are warning that the -- the normalizing of arresting elected officials, Alex Padilla, at a press conference in a federal building in his own state, is part of a slide to autocracy.
WELCH: We're in the normalization stage, and you're worried about the optics. I'm worried about the human beings. You have men in black masks going and separating families. And you want to know why Democrats care about that? Because we're not monsters. The majority of these people that Trump has rounded up, we don't know if they have a criminal record or not. We don't know if they're legal or not because they're being denied due process, and we care about that because we're not monsters.
So, I think you see a lot of Americans that see that, and they say, no. That -- that's -- not okay.
ALLISON: And, also, and also this is not the first place authoritarian regimes have taken over. And when you look at what has happened in other countries where that has happened, they use certain issues to actually try -- immigration is one. Trans issues is another one.
And what has this administration really focused on? Immigration, trans issues. And they use it because they think it's an issue that they can get public opinion on them. But the way -- but it's back firing right now, I would say, on this administration.
This authoritarianism is bigger than an immigration policy. It is about the consolidation of power and giving -- not having free and fair elections in the future, not being able -- not letting the judiciary actually have -- be a -- equal branch of the -- the public.
[22:55:06]
Not briefing congress people before we're about to take a massive strike and maybe send people into war.
(CROSSTALK) PHILLIP: Yeah, we got to leave it there, everyone.
(CROSSTALK)
ALLISON: That is what authoritarianism looks like.
PHILLIP: Everybody, we got to leave it there.
(CROSSTALK)
SINGLETON: Times can be changed.
PHILLIP: Everyone, thank you very much. More on our breaking news. Source tells CNN that President Trump has reviewed those U.S. strike plans against Iran. Stay with us. We'll have more in a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:00:02]
PHILLIP: Just in tonight, Minnesota police are investigating an apparent break in where a state lawmaker was murdered in cold blood just days before. Police say that someone appears to have broken in and searched through the home of State Representative Melissa Hortman.
She and her husband, Mark Hortman, were shot and killed there on Saturday by a suspect apparently targeting Democrats. We're told that all evidence related to the shooting has been removed from the house. And thank you very much for watching "NewsNight". "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.
