Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Iran Targeting Middle Eastern Countries like Qatar; Senate Republicans Reject War Powers Resolution; Kristi Noem Faces Capitol Hill Grilling. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired March 05, 2026 - 06:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

[06:00:34]

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking news today, a fresh barrage of strikes on Iran in just the past few hours. I'm Audie Cornish. It's day six of this widening war with Iran. There's a lot going on right now.

I'm going to start with explosions in Tehran. Another wave of Israeli strikes underway. New video showing smoke rising over the skyline.

Now, Israel is saying that they've taken out dozens of Iranian missile arrays.

And Iran hitting back. The IDF says Iran launched missiles towards Israel. Iran also targeted three Amazon data centers in Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.

Here at home, the U.S. Senate rejected a resolution to force the president to end the Iran strikes. Today, we're going to find out where each representative stands on that.

And we are learning the identities of the two remaining service members killed in the early days of this war. They include a loving husband and father and a blue-eyed, blond farm kid.

And we have live team coverage across the region, here at home. But we're going to begin with CNN's Bijan Hosseini in Doha, which of course, has been facing many missile attacks just this morning. Can you talk about how this is breaking out?

BIJAN HOSSEINI, CNN SENIOR PRODUCER: Hi, Audie.

Just a little more than an hour ago, the team here witnessing and seeing interceptions taking place directly above us. These were very loud. It lasted probably 20, 30 minutes.

We've been live from this location every day for the past six days. I think today I can say this was the loudest and the longest kind of series of interceptions that took place, at least from our perspective.

We're calling it a missile attack, and we're saying that because that's what Qatar's Ministry of Defense just said a little more than an hour ago. They came out and said that they were being attacked by Iran, calling it a missile attack.

And this also comes after the Ministry of Interior last night, around 2 a.m. in the morning, ordered evacuations of residents near the U.S. embassy in Doha.

One of our CNN staff members getting caught up in that. They received a knock on their door at about 3 a.m. in the morning from police here, asking them to evacuate. They later returned to their home. That was about two hours after they had to evacuate.

Police there saying that they were safely outside of that security perimeter. They live around four kilometers away from the U.S. Embassy there that last night was a safety precaution, and the people around that embassy, no -- no witnesses hearing or seeing any interceptions taking place last night. But clearly, a different story taking place today and this morning.

CORNISH: OK, that was -- that is Bijan Hosseini. Thank you for that latest reporting.

And now, I want to bring in retired Army Brigadier General Steve Anderson. You've been following this all very closely. Can I just ask you about the current strikes? I was curious about why Iran would go after Amazon data centers.

BRIG. GEN. STEVE ANDERSON (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Well, what they're trying to do, Audie, is they're trying to expand the war as best they possibly can.

They want to expand the war to all of the GCC. They want to make it painful for them to be able to participate and support the United States and their bases in -- in the region.

So, what we've got going on right now, Audie, is really a war of attrition, the ability of Iran to continue to launch strikes against the regional threats and -- in the GCC --

CORNISH: Yes.

ANDERSON: -- versus the United States' ability to take down those threats, to use the munitions and use the air coverage, the air superiority they enjoy right now, to be able to take down -- you've got a war of attrition. How long can this last? I think that --

CORNISH: Well, then -- hold on one second.

ANDERSON: Sure.

CORNISH: Because General Dan Caine, U.S. joint chiefs of staff chairman, he was talking on Wednesday about the next step. And I think this is going to follow on what you're saying. So, I'd like to get your response. Here he is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. DAN CAINE, U.S. JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF CHAIRMAN: We will now begin to expand inland, striking progressively deeper into Iranian territory, and creating additional freedom of maneuver for U.S. forces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: So, we're moving in into another phase here. And you're saying it's a war of attrition. So, does that mean they feel like they have the air dominance? They have the ability to continue?

ANDERSON: Without a doubt, they have air superiority. They've had it. And that's never been a question.

CORNISH: OK.

ANDERSON: But I remind you, Iran and -- and Afghanistan -- excuse me -- Iraq and Afghanistan, same thing. We had total air superiority.

The ability to overfly and now to use directed weapons is going to be a powerful thing and maybe might take it to a new level.

[06:05:03]

But I remind you, the center of gravity is still the IRGC, and they've adopted a decentralized mosaic strategy. They're hunkering down. They're going inland. They're not relying upon centralized command and control anymore. And they're just going to try to wait out the Americans.

So, yes, we're going to have air superiority. We'll be able to hit them and hit them hard. But they're going to be able to hunker down and stay out of -- and they're going to try to outlast us as best they possibly can.

CORNISH: OK, so to that point, thinking about who is on the ground that can take on Iranian forces, CNN reporting on Wednesday the potential for the CIA wanting to arm Iranian Kurds to help sow a rebellion.

For people who may not remember about the Kurds population in Iraq, they were a fighting faction. They are community of people in the Middle East that have long wanted independence. If you arm them, does that change the calculus in Iran?

ANDERSON: Yes, it does. And I think, though, that it would be a bad calculus.

I mean, don't get me wrong. I've been to Kurdistan several times. These are great, resourceful people. Even during the war that we had in Iraq, they were -- it was like going to a Mediterranean country with all the security and safety they had up there. They're great people. But giving them arms and then expecting them to

go in, with all the competing factions that are within Iran. I mean, we're talking about 92 million people there. I mean, that's the size of Texas, New York, and California combined. And it's two and a half times in terms of geographic area larger than Texas.

I mean, they're not going to be able to achieve those kind of -- I think it's a mistake to give them arms. We need to generate internal change within Iran. That's the only way that we're going to have effective political change.

CORNISH: One last thing I want to ask you about, because Defense Secretary Hegseth has been coming on TV in the mornings to talk about the war.

He had this moment where he basically accused the media of focusing on the deaths of soldiers, rather than the success of the operation. I wanted to get your reaction to that.

ANDERSON: It's ridiculous, his reaction. I mean, you know, our job, the media's job is to report the truth as they see it. And the report, the coverage of how the administration addresses the deaths of American soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, is imperative that the American people know that.

And so, for them to -- to -- to make that kind of accusation was ridiculous. And I think it -- what you saw there, this is what happens when you kick out all the real media. And you have, you know, people within that press conference yesterday, like, from Lindell TV, you know?

I mean, you don't have the kind of professionals that we need to be in there to ask the tough questions. They don't want the tough questions. And unfortunately, I think his reaction was completely unjustified and irrational.

CORNISH: OK. Brigadier General Steve Anderson, thank you so much for being here. I'm sure you will be back.

Coming up on CNN THIS MORNING, you know, lawmakers, they're going to have a chance to go on the record about this war with Iran. So, are they going to choose to rein in the president?

Plus, we're learning new details about the U.S. soldiers killed after that Iranian strike. We're going to hear how the president plans to honor them.

And CNN is now in Iran. We have the first report from inside the country since this war began.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:13:07]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

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

SEN. JOHN THUNE (R-SD): No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Senate Republicans showing no appetite for checking President Trump's war powers.

On Wednesday, they went on the record in support of the war in Iran by rejecting a bipartisan war powers resolution. The vote was 53 to 47.

Kentucky's Rand Paul is the only Republican who voted with Democrats to rein in the president. Now, one Democrat, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted with Republicans.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN FETTERMAN (D-PA): I'm open to a better opportunity for more -- more peace and prosperity for the Iranian people, for more security that Israel deserves. So, that's a point. And you know, this was not an illegal war based on terms of what the War Powers Act is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Today representatives in the House get to go on the record when they vote on the war powers measure.

Joining me now in the group chat, Aaron Blake, CNN senior political reporter; Mike Dubke, former Trump White House communications director; and David Sanger, CNN political and national security analyst.

Gentlemen, I wanted to talk about this, because we don't necessarily think these votes were going to pass; suddenly in the middle of strikes, lawmakers would say, actually, you went too far.

However, when I look back at the vote, 2001 for Afghanistan, one no vote. 2002, 23 no votes in the Senate. People, these records get remembered of where you were in a moment. That is a big decision for the country. So, what's at stake for lawmakers?

AARON BLAKE, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, and I'd also point out that we had similar votes on the military action in Venezuela. And we actually -- actually saw more crossover, where Republicans were more willing to check the president's war powers in that case.

[06:15:03]

I think when you're talking about Iran, this is an issue where the party is much more hawkish. They're much more on the president's side.

But I don't necessarily think that that means the party is sanguine about where this is headed right now. And you saw that in some of the comments from members who wound up voting against this measure. The moderates, like Susan Collins, Todd Young from Indiana, they

basically said, I don't want to check the president on this right now, but that doesn't mean they don't have concerns about where this could be headed.

CORNISH: And it's probably because some of the polling. When I look at the poll that we did earlier this week, the opinion of the U.S. airstrikes against Iran among U.S. adults right now, its 59 percent disapprove.

Also, when we break that down by sort of Republicans, independents, Democrats, as always, I tend to look at the independents number, and I see that disapproval number at 68 percent. So, they do have to answer to constituents soon.

MIKE DUBKE, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: They do and this vote was really more about November of 2026, I think, than it was about what has been happening over the last week.

So, this was a messaging vote. I think the Democrats really were desperate to get Republicans and others on the record, so that they can use this in the -- in the next midterm elections. But that's --

CORNISH: Yes. I have an example of that, actually. Let me just play one. It'll help your point. Democratic Senator John Hickenlooper of Colorado, him talking about Trump's motivations.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN HICKENLOOPER (D-CO): Every strike, every military escalation, every headline is a distraction. It pulls our attention overseas from the urgent economic struggles that Americans face at home.

It distracts from the hard, less glamorous work it takes to make life more affordable for the American people. Iran is only the latest in a long line of distractions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Following up on this, because I heard a similar argument from Andrew Schul z on his podcast. So, there's kind of, like, a range of people who look at this and say, what is the U.S. voter getting out of this?

DUBKE: In terms of message discipline, I will give this to Democrats right now. They keep coming back to affordability. Whatever the president does, they keep coming back to affordability. So, somebody must have gotten the memo from the DNC that that's our pathway forward.

But specifically on this War Powers Act and this vote, this is being set up. If -- if this action in Iran goes terribly wrong for the president, it is going -- they're going to get off affordability, and they're going to talk about the unchecked powers of the White House.

CORNISH: OK.

DUBKE: So that's where we're headed with this one.

CORNISH: I want to play for you, David, the Israeli president, Herzog, who was on CBS. And he was asked about making the case. And -- and I believe the anchor said, because this is not a popular war. And let's -- let's see if we have that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ISAAC HERZOG, ISRAELI PRESIDENT: I understand it's not a popular war in America because, you know, usually, people do not know the intricacies of the war. And they also compare it to previous and other wars. This is a unique war.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, all wars are unique wars, but if we just pull the politics out of this for a moment, which I realize is virtually impossible in Washington or any place else.

What was the War Powers Act enacted to do? It came out in 1973. And the concern was that we had gotten into a whole series of wars after World War Two, including Korea and Vietnam, without Congress exercising the constitutional duty of a declaration of war or not.

It set a category of moments where the president could act by himself or herself if the U.S. was attacked. No -- no answer then that -- no, no problem there. And that explains, for example, why presidents have unilateral capacity to deal with nuclear weapons, right, if we're under attack.

But in a case like this, essentially a war of choice, the president didn't need to go at this particular moment, the War Powers Act is pretty clear that Congress has got to act.

And it has in the past. It acted in the Persian Gulf War. Iraq and Afghanistan wasn't a formal declaration of war, but it was an authorization to use military force.

With this vote, everybody who votes no on this, separate from the politics, is basically saying we are willing to go cede that congressional power. And that strikes me as a little bit strange, because it's not something in the Senate they usually want to do --

CORNISH: Right.

SANGER: -- which is give up their own capacity and power. That is their one lever here.

CORNISH: Although if people look at the last couple of months, whether it's tariffs, whether it's a variety of things, it does not seem this is a Congress that is interested in taking back its power.

[06:20:00] I want you guys to stay with us. We have more breaking news. We're going to follow up this morning on what we are seeing in the Middle East, because trapped overseas, you've got the first charted flight bringing Americans home. Many people still have no way out.

Plus --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JAMES TALARICO, TEXAS STATE LEGISLATURE: We're about to take back Texas.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Ever hopeful, Democrats want to turn Texas blue, but who does James Talarico have a better chance to run against?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CORNISH: An affair, an ad campaign, accusations of aggressive tactics. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem got a grilling on Capitol Hill.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): What we've seen is a disaster under your leadership, Ms. Noem.

[06:25:02]

REP. JOE NEGUSE (D-CO): Where is Safe American Media headquartered?

KRISTI NOEM, SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: I don't know.

NEGUSE: I don't know either, Madam Secretary. We can't find it. We can't find a website.

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Based on what you know, today, were Renee Good and Alex Pretti domestic terrorists?

NOEM: There's ongoing investigations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: OK. Democratic strategist -- strategist Chuck Rocha joins the group chat for a couple of reasons, because we also want to talk about the race in Texas. Because all of these conversations lead back to how will voters respond in the fall.

So, Kristi Noem had to be on the Hill. And I was honestly -- it was a wild mix of things she got asked about.

I like to follow the money. And we heard a clip there where she was asked about this no-bid contract for $143 million that went to a company that has never done federal work and came into existence, like, multiple days just before the contract was launched. Can you talk about this? just because ICE, homeland security, they

have been -- a massive amount of money is going to them. And Congress seemed to be asking, are we verging into slush fund territory?

BLAKE: Yes, and the shocking thing here was that a lot of it came from Republicans. You know, we played the clip from the House hearing yesterday. But on Tuesday, we had Senate Republicans, in some cases, going after her pretty hard including on this issue, Senator John Kennedy from Louisiana was really forceful on this.

Basically, said that he did not agree, or he did not think that the answers that she was giving were adding up.

So, I think that signals that they are going to make this an issue moving forward. This is a bipartisan issue to some degree.

CORNISH: Yes.

BLAKE: John Kennedy, I think, really sent a message that, to the extent that the Homeland Security Department is going to continue with Kristi Noem as its leader, it's going to be painful. I think some of these members want her out --

CORNISH: Right.

BLAKE: -- because they believe they believe it's a problem.

CORNISH: Thom Tillis went after her about FEMA money, because his state, North Carolina, had been gotten -- hadn't gotten it. And lo and behold on Wednesday, money released. So clearly, DHS is feeling it.

DUBKE: It's funny how Washington works that way.

CORNISH: We don't want it to work that way.

DUBKE: But Thom Tillis is retiring. So, I mean, I -- to your point about Kennedy, I think that one is a little bit more telling, because he's going to stick around past November.

CORNISH: Yes.

DUBKE: But with Thom Tillis retiring and with the situation with FEMA in North Carolina, that made some sense going after -- after Secretary Noem.

You know, this is -- this is really -- we're starting to see a bit if you want to talk about cracks in, like, Republican support of the administration, you know, this is where it's starting to form.

CORNISH: Or Americans. "Guardian" headline: half of Americans back abolishing ICE and Trump crackdown. That was in a YouGov poll. This -- this used to be an untouchable phrase. And now here I am looking at a headline with it.

ROCHA: And I think this is why you're seeing what you're seeing. So, this was the one issue that they could ride high on, which was immigration, law and order. Everybody can agree on that.

Kristi Noem is making that difficult for Donald Trump. If Donald Trump just comes in and closes the border and goes sit in the White House and eats McDonald's, his approval ratings will go through the roof.

But because of this agency and what we've seen on our TVs in America, she's going to be the fall woman for this administration. Because as you can see, lots of folks are fed up with what they're seeing.

CORNISH: Let me stick with you for a second, because border security, this is all about border security. As you said, this should be a winning issue.

ROCHA: Right.

CORNISH: And in Texas, Democrats are feeling themselves including you, because you, of course, were part of the Talarico campaign.

One of the things I want to ask is, in going after what white and Latino voters, there are black voters who feel like, are we about to be alienated? Is the search to bring Latinos back to Democrats going to mean we're left in the cold?

ROCHA: I think "respect" is the word we're all looking for here. And if you watch what James Talarico said last night at 7 p.m. in Austin, Texas, the first thing he did was honor Jasmine Crockett.

The second thing he did is say, I know I wasn't your first choice with black voters across Texas, but he said, I'm looking forward to earning your support. And that starts with respect and understanding what this campaign is about. And that's bringing us together to beat -- to beat a common enemy.

CORNISH: Meanwhile, Mike, you were raining on my thesis on Republicans, who have a major grudge match with a runoff with John Cornyn and Paxton. And that race has gotten very nasty, which you, as a consultant, says it's the way things are.

DUBKE: Well, it's very --

CORNISH: However --

DUBKE: OK.

CORNISH: My thesis is if the border is secure, which it is.

DUBKE: Yes.

CORNISH: Are you just left fighting each other on other things? Because there isn't actually a meaningful difference in your policies?

DUBKE: That's kind of what primaries are generally all about. This is my -- my argument with your thesis is that there are these grand issues that we need to talk about on the public policy front.

Except within party primaries, whether they be Democrat or Republican, a lot of times this goes down to personalities and personal issues, because you are already agreeing on 90 percent of the issues.

So, I'm not surprised this went personal. And I'm also not surprised, given all of the indiscretions, infidelities, and whatnot with -- with Ken Paxton, that that is what is -- the Cornyn team felt was going to get them across the finish line. And they finished up one point. So, it must have done some good work.