Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Iranian Clerics Say Supreme Leader Chosen, No Name Given; Israel Military Vows To Go After Khamenei's Successor; Gulf Nations Report New Strikes After Iran's Apology; Israel Targets Iranian Oil Storage Sites; IDF Says New Wave Of Strikes Launched Against Iran; Trump Doesn't Rule Out Sending U.S. Ground Troops To Iran; Congress Hesitant To Call Actions In Iran A War. China Warns "Flames of War" Spreading from Iran Conflict; Gas Prices Soar to Highest Point of Either Trump Presidency. Aired 7-8a ET

Aired March 08, 2026 - 07:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:00:34]

VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: And welcome to CNN This Morning. It is Sunday, March 8th. I'm Victor Blackwell. Thank you for joining us.

Just in to CNN, several Iranian clerics say that they have chosen their new supreme leader, but they have given no name of the man who will replace Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. President Donald Trump was asked last night aboard Air Force One if he wanted to be involved in the new leader selection. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You said you want to be involved in the selection of the next leader of Iran.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you talk to me about that?

TRUMP: Well, because I don't want to just come back every 10 years. And mostly you'll have presidents, mostly, that won't do that because they don't get it. But we don't want to come back every five years or every 10 years and do this. So we want to pick a president that's not going to be leading their country into a war.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: The Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran says that Iran would not accept involvement and that President Trump must pay the price.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALI LARIJANI, SECRETARY, SUPREME NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL OF IRAN (through translation): What is Mr. Trump saying now after the assassination of the leader of Iran and his martyrdom? He says, I must give my opinion on the future leader. I think he is a very backward person. He doesn't know. No country would accept this, especially Iranians.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: Overnight, Israel launched new attacks on Iran that targeted Tehran's energy resources like this gas storage facility. A CNN team there reported blackened rainwater fell this morning after the hits. And despite the Iranian president's promise to stop attacking neighbors, several reported strikes, Two Kuwaiti border security members were killed today.

A team of reporters covering this story from across the region, Paula Hancocks is standing by. We start, though, with CNN's Chief International Security Correspondent Nick Paton Walsh in Tel Aviv. Nick, Israel is warning it'll go after the replacement for Ayatollah Khamenei, even those who chose the successor. What are you hearing?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, a pivotal moment here, really, in this war, increasing signs that a new supreme leader has been chosen, a reminder we've been hearing for days now that this process is coming to a conclusion, but a cryptic suggestion from one of the clerics involved in this that the name of the person may be somebody already spoken of by, quote, "the great Satan."

Now, that may be a reference to any American official, frankly, in the last decade, or it may be a reference to President Trump's earlier suggestions that he would be unhappy with the next supreme leader being Ali Khamenei's son, Mojtaba, who has been a front-runner, really, for some time.

As I say that, just a reminder how odd it is to imagine the hardline clerics of Iran agreeing to any kind of U.S. input in choosing their next leader, but that's where we ultimately are, where the beginning formulation, perhaps, of a political resolution here from President Trump has ultimately been him suggesting he needs someone to be in charge who he's comfortable with.

Now, a reminder again, yes, that Israel again today reiterated its threat that it will kill any successor to the supreme leader. Israel's war goals here, as it's iterated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, really hoping for a democracy inside of Iran, a sea (ph) change -- regime change in the most ideological kind of ways. That's a very distant potential goal, but we're in a complex moment here where potentially the next supreme leader could be not President Trump's liking.

That will prolong this conflict for sure and may also be killed in the hours or days ahead by Israeli airstrikes. That pinpointedly killed Ayatollah Khamenei, despite the efforts he'd clearly taken to defend himself. So that utterly key.

At the same time, we have the Israelis escalating their airstrikes, the damage done to oil storage facilities yesterday that the Israeli military spoke about, now evident in the sky. My colleague Fred Pleitgen in Tehran posting a video of how rain is capturing oil, dropping that on the city. We've seen in the past in this region the enormous ecological and health damage that oil fires can indeed do.

So that will be an urgent matter for Iranians to deal with, who are already, it seems, being told to try and be careful about their gasoline consumption in an oil rich country like Iran. That's quite a big statement. Also Israel saying that it has destroyed a number of Iranian F-14 jets from their past associations with the United States at the Isfahan airbase there. So an awful lot moving so far today.

[07:05:06]

PATON WALSH: Just one final thought, though, President Trump yesterday continually evoking the concept of surrender here. He's been saying he'll define it his own way. He said, maybe they'll come and cry uncle to me. Maybe there'll be nobody left to declare surrender.

But I think if Iran puts forward a supreme leader who Trump has already said he doesn't want, that is them saying they wish this fight to continue.

BLACKWELL: Nick Paton Walsh reporting there from Tel Aviv. Thank you.

Iran's neighbors, they're continuing to report new strikes despite Iran's president saying that they would not hit those countries unless those countries originated attacks on Iran first. Now, in Kuwait, officials say that they've been fighting off drones and missiles. One strike set fire to a high rise government building this morning.

Take a look at this. You can see smoke rising as firefighters work to get it under control. We're also hearing more reports of strikes in the UAE, specifically Dubai, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia as well.

Let's go now to CNN's Paula Hancocks in Dubai. And you gave us last hour just the remarkable number of strikes since the start of this conflict on the UAE.

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Victor, the UAE really has been singled out as having the most retaliation from Iran. We have seen over 1,500 missiles and drones that have been fired towards the UAE, which is remarkable. We know that the vast majority of them have been intercepted by the military here. We know well over 90 percent have been intercepted. But, of course, interceptions themselves bring their own risks.

We know that debris falls from those intercepted projectiles in the air. In fact, just last night, Saturday night, there was a Pakistani driver here in Dubai who was killed by debris from an interception falling on his car. So that brings the death toll here to four. We know over 100 people have been injured, although authorities say many of them are minor injuries.

So there's been no letup whatsoever in the attacks against Gulf nations, despite what President Pezeshkian had said about not targeting Gulf nations anymore. It was walked back as soon as he said it. And certainly there was some suspicion in the Gulf as to whether or not that was going to change anything.

The fact is, it didn't. We saw Saudi Arabia, for example, having almost two dozen drone strikes overnight, and also Bahrain with a water desalination plant being targeted. Victor?

BLACKWELL: Paula Hancocks, thank you.

Let's discuss now with Retired U.S. Army Major General Dana Pittard. He's also the author of the book, "Hunting the Caliphate: America's War on ISIS and the Dawn of the Strike Cell."

General, good to have you. I first want to start here where we left off with Paula Hancocks and what we heard from the Iranian President Pezeshkian saying that there will be no strikes on our Arab Gulf neighbors unless strikes on Iran originate there. And then you have Ali Larijani saying something far more aggressive. The Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council there in Iran.

What do you make of this contradiction between the words and actions there from Iran?

MAJ. GENERAL DANA PITTARD, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Well, good morning, Victor. Obviously, between President Pezeshkian and the IRGC and others, the hardliners in Iran, there's a disconnect. To understand with an extent, they have command and control problems. They've decentralized much of their command structure overall.

And what he was trying to do is put out an olive branch, at least to the Gulf nations. But that backfired with the hardliners back in Iran. What it shows, though, is he's not in control overall of what's going on in Iran.

BLACKWELL: Israel says that it hit oil storage sites in Tehran. Our Fred Pleitgen reported on the black clouds and the oily rain that's falling over Tehran. This is the start of the next phase, they say, of the war. What do you make of that strategy being next to hit the oil storages and the infrastructure?

PITTARD: Well, it's natural as far as military targets to do that, to escalate to those type of targets. But let's talk about the strategy overall. If you look at the elements of power, political, diplomatic, information, military, economic, if you take each of those, political, the Trump administration has not really done a good job of making sure the American people through Congress understand why we are going to war.

If you take diplomatic, unlike the other two Gulf Wars in 1991 and 2003, we did not get our allies on board, even let them know what was going on.

[07:10:06]

Informational, da messaging has really been inconsistent, where you've got President Trump saying regime change and saying unconditional surrender. So it's been inconsistent. So people just don't understand. And then certainly the economic side of it, not understanding what the consequences of our actions would be.

And I'll say militarily, the military is doing what they've been asked to do. They're reducing the Iranian Navy, hitting the ballistic missile sites, trying to reduce the nuclear capability and things like that. But, overall, from a strategic standpoint, it almost appears like amateur hour right now.

BLACKWELL: Multiple sources tell CNN that Russia is assisting Iran with intel about locations of American troops, ships and aircraft.

I want you to listen to an interview that's going to air in full on 60 Minutes on CBS. This is Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth with the reporter there, Major Garrett.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Our commanders are aware of everything. We have the best intelligence in the world. We're aware of who's talking to who, why they're talking to him, how accurate that information might be, how we factor that into our battle plans, our CENTCOM commander. So we know what's going on. And the President has an incredible knack at knowing how to mitigate those risks.

MAJOR GARRETT, REPORTER: The American people could therefore expect conversations with the Russians to stop this?

HEGSETH: Well, President Trump, as people have seen, has a unique relationship with a lot of world leaders, where he can get things done that other presidents, certainly Joe Biden, never could have. And through direct conversations or indirect through him, one-to-one or through his cabinet, messages definitely can be delivered.

GARRETT: Does this put U.S. personnel in any more danger than they otherwise would be?

HEGSETH: Well --

GARRETT: The Russian involvement?

HEGSETH: No one's putting us in danger. We're putting the other guys in danger. That's our job. So we're not concerned about that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: The Secretary says he's not concerned about it. Let me put that same question to you. Does the Russian involvement put U.S. personnel in greater danger than they otherwise would be?

PITTARD: Well, it does. And I would imagine that they are, in fact, concerned about it. And they're downplaying that. It's really obvious from the targeting that the Iranians are doing, the precision of the targeting and where they're actually targeting, that they were getting information from somewhere or intelligence from somewhere, whether it's Russia or China. They have -- both of them have that capability.

I had suspected it was China, but apparently it's Russia. And we should make sure we do something about that in talking to the Russian and or Chinese leaders who are behind that. But that does put our soldiers, our bases, our infrastructure at risk to the Iranian attacks.

BLACKWELL: Retired U.S. Army Major General Dana Pittard, thank you, sir.

Tonight on The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper, Sara Sidner delves into the decision to strike Iran and weighs the fallout. What happens next? The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper tonight at 10:00 p.m. Eastern and next day on the CNN app.

Still ahead, Republicans have blocked efforts to curb President Trump's power to fight in the Middle East and will not even call what's happening a war. What's the thinking on Capitol Hill?

Also, President Trump is blaming Iran for the deadly strike on a school in southern Iran. What experts say and why they say this just is not true.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:18:24]

BLACKWELL: We're now entering day nine of the war with Iran. President Donald Trump is promising more escalation in the attacks. As Israel says, it's targeting Tehran's energy resources.

Joining me now, Political Analyst and Author of the "Below the Stack" newsletter on Substack, Charles Blow, Washington Bureau Chief for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Tia Mitchell, and candidate for Georgia Secretary of State, Kelvin King. Welcome to you all.

Tia, let me start with you on this. The President was asking about the potential, the possibility of sending U.S. ground troops into Iran. This is what he said on Air Force One yesterday

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What are the circumstances where you'd send in ground troops? How are you thinking that? . TRUMP: I don't even what to talk about it now. It's -- I don't think it's an appropriate question. You know, I'm not going to answer it. Could there be? Possibly, for a very good reason. Have to be a very good reason. And I would say if we ever did that, there would be so decimated that they would be able to fight at the ground level.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: Most Republicans on the Hill support the President's actions in Iran. How would that likely change if he were to send U.S. ground troops in?

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: Well, I think quite frankly, Republicans on the Hill would try their best to stay aligned with President Trump, even if he decides to send ground troops. But what they know is that an already unpopular war would become even more unpopular if ground troops get involved.

[07:20:01]

And so that's the risk for Republicans is they know that staying aligned with Trump, if ground troops get activated, makes that even a less popular stance to be in. And could that affect his support? Yes. But I quite frankly believe that most Republicans in Congress, even with ground troops, may not immediately turn on Trump.

BLACKWELL: Well, Kelvin, let's talk about the American people. Latest NPR, PBS, Marist polls find that most Americans oppose the U.S. military action in Iran, 56 percent over 44 percent who support it. More relevant, though, to the ground troops question is the majority who think that Iran is at most a minor threat to the United States, 55 percent.

How does the President make the case to American people who already don't support this, that they should send their sons and daughters into Iran when most of them don't even think this is a major threat to the U.S.?

KEVIN KING, CANDIDATE FOR GEORGIA : Yes, I think a lot of Americans may not be aware of all the activities that Iranian has been doing, particularly to America. As you stated, there's a lot of Americans who don't think that this is a worthwhile engagement. But I think that's because -- they're not connected, they're not engaged.

This is definitely a worthwhile engagement, and I agree with President Trump. I mean, the question about ground troops, I think it's too soon. I think it's just more of a left-wing messaging thing to try to get Americans to not support this engagement. But this engagement is necessary and required.

And it was a mutual engagement with us and Israel and supporters from other European countries. So this was more of a coalition that went into Iran and attacked Iran and made sure that that killing machine, that administration that they had that was murderers were taken out.

BLACKWELL: Charles, is that how you see it? It's just the American people don't know the threat to the United States, and that's why they don't see this as a major threat and don't support this war.

CHARLES BLOW, POLITICAL ANALYST: No, it's the opposite of that. I think it is -- the administration has given a carousel of reasons, sometimes contradictory reasons, for why they got into it so people don't try to figure out what is the truth of it. In addition to that, you know, unlike something like Libya, which I've heard some conservatives try to compare this to, that was a NATO-led operation meant to protect a U.N. mandate. This is not that.

This is us. This is kind of more analogous to a Putin invasion of Ukraine, where he won't call it a war, says that they started it, not us. I mean, all the things don't line up with where Americans, I think, want to be. And also, they keep trying to tell Americans that this was an imminent threat. An ambient threat is not the same as an imminent threat. The -- Iran has been an ambient threat for a very long time, more to people in its neighborhood than to Americans.

Trying to convince Americans that there was an imminent, within weeks, either ballistic or nuclear threat, there is no evidence that that was true. And so I think we're trying to convince Americans to be more gullible than they actually are on this issue.

BLACKWELL: I see you silently responding here.

KING: Yes, I mean, I completely disagree. What's going on right now is, do we want a nuclear Iran or do we not want a nuclear Iran? I think the world would emphatically say that we -- that the world does not want Iran with nuclear weapons. And over the course of years and decades, they've been inching closer and closer and closer into that position. And we finally found, we finally elected a president that has the guts and courage to stop it and end it.

BLACKWELL: This is also a president who said he obliterated the --

KING: Exactly.

BLACKWELL: -- nuclear threat last year. But Tia, you want to get in?

MITCHELL: Yes, I want to get in because I think, to Kelvin's point, if stopping Iran from having nuclear weapons was the goal, then I think President Trump and his administration need to state that plainly for the people and explain how that aligns with the previous strike that, again, he said obliterated his -- that -- their ability to ever have nuclear weapons.

Did that change? What -- you know, where is the consistent messaging, to Charles's point, especially if now that messaging is to help Americans understand why troops may be put at risk by being sent on the ground? It needs to be clear and consistent, and that is not what's happened.

BLACKWELL: Kelvin, let me ask you a question on messaging and clarity and consistency. Is the U.S. at war with Iran?

KING: I mean, technically, no. Of course not. I mean, only Congress can declare war, but the President can have military engagements, especially when it's to protect our interests.

BLACKWELL: Was the --

KING: That's exactly what happened in this case.

[07:25:10]

BLACKWELL: Was the U.S. at war with Iraq? And we supported Israel during this engagement. The President calls it a war. The Secretary of Defense calls it a war. Mike Johnson can't bring himself to say it. Actually, let's play some of the inconsistency between the administration and Congress.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: This is very important, and we're doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly, I would say.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: We are not at war. We have no intention of being at war.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: And so why can't they get on the same page on if this is a war or not? I think most Americans believe it's a war. The families of those six fallen service members likely believe it's a war. I'm not in the place to speak for them. But why can't Congress, or at least Mike Johnson, acknowledge that this is war?

KING: Yes, I mean, I'm not real sure what Mike Johnson's messaging is, but what we do know is that only Congress can declare war. So that's not debatable. But if you want to use a term or not, I mean, I think -- I don't know how important that is, specifically when it comes to our interests. Right now, we are engaged with -- in a military action with Iran.

BLACKWELL: Yes.

KING: And it's a required, it's necessary, and it's in our best interest. And I look forward to us making sure that we, quote unquote, "cut the head off of this snake."

BLACKWELL: Charles, is it just rhetorical?

BLOW: Is Russia at war in Ukraine? Because Putin won't call it a war.

BLACKWELL: Yes, it's a special military operation.

BLOW: So is it -- is a war only a war when an official power who's engaged in that war calls it that? Or does a war have a definition, aside from whether or not the officials will call it that?

BLOW: I think a war has a definition. If it is a military engagement, as we -- we are --

BLACKWELL: Yes.

KING: We and Israel are bombing Iran into obliteration. That's a war. Whether or not somebody wants to call it that, declare it that or not, it's a war is a war.

BLACKWELL: All right.

KING: That's part of what Americans are afraid or confused about.

BLACKWELL: We got to pause it here, but everybody stay with us.

Much more to talk about coming up. China has largely remained on the sidelines as Iran has -- this war has unfolded. What the country's top diplomat says could happen if the fighting drags on.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:30:00]

BLACKWELL: China's top diplomat is expressing concern over the war with Iran. This comes ahead of a planned summit in Beijing later this month between China's leader Xi Jinping and President Trump. CNN's bureau chief in Beijing, Steven Zhang, is live there. Steven, tell us more.

STEVEN JIANG, CNN BEIJING BUREAU CHIEF: Yes, Victor. You know, China's message to the U.S. since the war broke out has been quite consistent. That is, they want an immediate ceasefire to avoid, as the foreign minister put it today, the spread of the flames of war. But if you're the Tehran regime, though, the support you've been getting from Beijing has been diplomatic, rhetorical, and moral. Not much in terms of concrete commitments, let alone any direct military assistance. That is quite sobering, considering China has been describing Iran as a strategic partner for quite some time. But its response so far has been described as very calculated. China, of course, is the biggest buyer of Iranian oil exports.

But remember, China has larger, more extensive investments and economic interests in other nations and regions outside of Iran. It wants the safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz for its ships carrying energy products and chemicals from other Gulf nations. So that's perhaps why, at the end of the day, despite its growing clouds and ambitions in the Middle East, China's focus right now is to protect its existing economic interests and assets, instead of getting involved in providing security guarantees to any partners, including Iran. Not to mention, there's always that line of thinking that anytime the U.S. strategic focus or military assets are tied down in a region outside of China's backyard, that's a plus for Beijing.

So, ultimately, the Iran issue just doesn't seem to rank high enough on Chinese leader Xi Jinping's priority list, which does include stabilizing ties with Washington. So that's why I asked the Chinese foreign minister about the potential impact of this U.S. war with Iran on the upcoming high-stakes visit by President Trump to Beijing later this month. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WANG YI, CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): This year is indeed a big year for China-U.S. relations. The agenda for high-level exchanges with the U.S. is on the table. What is required is for both sides to make thorough preparations to create a conducive environment to manage existing differences and to remove unnecessary disruptions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIANG: So, even though he did not address my question directly, the underlying message, Victor, according to most analysts, is Xi Jinping still welcomes and anticipates President Trump's visit to Beijing later this month, which of course is very important, given how tumultuous things have become between the two countries since Trump's return to the White House, now, of course, with this added dimension of the Iran war. Victor? The world will be watching.

BLACKWELL: Steven Jiang, thank you. President Trump is blaming Iran for a strike on an Iranian school that killed more than 180 students and teachers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did the United States bomb a girls' elementary school in southern Iran on the first day of the war and kill 175 people?

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: No, in my opinion, and based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran.

[07:35:00]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is that true, Mr. Hegseth, that it was Iran who did that?

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: We're still investigating it. The only side that targets civilians is Iran.

TRUMP: We think it was done by Iran. Because they're very inaccurate, as you know, with their munitions. They have no accuracy whatsoever was done by Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLACKWELL: Now, the president's claim contradicts analysis from CNN, other media outlets and experts that suggest that the U.S. military was likely responsible. CNN previously reported the strike happened around the same time that American forces likely carried out a strike on a neighboring Iranian naval base.

Still ahead, a delayed tribute to those heroes from the January 6th Capitol riot. Why visitors will not be able to see it. The panel weighs in on that next.

And if you're heading out, remember that you can watch the show from anywhere in the U.S. right now on the CNN app. You can also go to CNN.com/watch.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:40:00]

BLACKWELL: You have no doubt noticed that gas prices are ticking up, and that is thanks in part to the war in Iran. Back with me now, Charles Blow, Tia Mitchell, and Kelvin King.

Tia, let me start with you. Average price for a gallon of regular, according to AAA, was $2.98 on the day that the war started. Today, it's $3.45. Oil surged above $90 a barrel. The president told Reuters about gas prices, quote, "if they rise, they rise." He's not on the ballot. Congressional Republicans are. I imagine they are not as indifferent about the increase.

TIA MITCHELL, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION: Yes, and I think President Trump is not as indifferent as he may portray because when he was trying to talk up the successes of his administration on the economy and affordability, gas prices were one of the measurements that he pointed to most often. So, the fact that gas prices are going up takes away a talking point the president himself has used repeatedly. That being said, he also understands that his decision to link up with Israel and bomb Iran is leading to an increase in gas prices, and now he is downplaying the effects of that, not just on the economy, but politically.

But as you mentioned, there are plenty of Republicans who are on the ballot who, for them, this is just yet another Trump policy that they know may weigh them down even as they continue to stick beside Trump. They do not want, for most of them, do not want to part with him publicly, and so it continues to put Republicans in a very tough spot.

BLACKWELL: Kelvin, you're on the ballot. I mean, is this the line you follow? Hey, if they rise, they rise.

KELVIN KING, CANDIDATE FOR GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATE AND CHAIRMAN, "LET'S WIN FOR AMERICAN ACTION" PAC: Yes, I definitely follow the economy. I definitely follow oil prices and gas prices, and it does hurt. I just -- I have a diesel pickup truck, and I just filled up for $4.99 a gallon. That was the highest I've ever spent, and it didn't feel good.

But I think you have to step back and look at what's going on from a much broader perspective. Anytime you have an engagement, a military engagement, let's just say Venezuela, Iran, all those big oil- producing countries, it's going to create a little bit of destabilization in the oil markets, right, just like anything, and it takes time to settle down. And I expect that that should happen once this military engagement comes down, once our trade routes reopen, once our tankers are safe going through the Strait of Hormuz. It's just a period of high anxiety right now, and it's reflective in the economic markets.

And I just hope that we have the patience as Americans to see this through, because hopefully it shouldn't last for a very long time, but it's not unusual for there to be spikes in markets when there's instability in the economy.

BLACKWELL: Charles?

CHARLES BLOW, AUTHOR OF "THE BLOW STACK" NEWSLETTER: Yes, Americans have patience with a lot of things. Gas prices is not one of them. If the president can get the country out of this engagement quickly, I think that we won't remember this. If we can't, however, it's a problem. And we've had a very bad track record of getting engaged in Middle Eastern conflicts and getting out quickly. It doesn't work that way. You know, Bush tried to declare the end to, you know, large-scale military actions six weeks in. We were there for nine years. 4,400 American soldiers were killed. I mean, it's --

KING: This is not Bush.

BLOW: What you say?

KING: This is not Bush. We're not under a Bush --

BLOW: I actually wish it was Bush. At least he could articulate a rationale to America that wasn't flopping every five days, and mission creep wasn't happening, as he just suggested on that airplane, that he was now willing to send in ground troops when his own administration, including Karoline Leavitt, said that he would absolutely never do that. So yes, at this point, I don't look back on Bush as the worst president as I once did, I now wish that we had Bush.

KING: Well, there's no extended wars under President Trump. I think he's shown the complete opposite. I think that he's not a president that wants extended wars. He wants to get in, kill whoever we need to kill, and get out.

BLOW: What he wants. What he wants has nothing to do with what's going to happen.

KING: But we've shown that in Venezuela. We went in. We took what we needed, and we got out.

BLOW: The idea that you would ever compare Venezuela to Iran is insane.

MITCHELL: Can I make a point?

[07:45:00]

BLOW: No. Wait, wait. I have to make this point. The idea of comparing Venezuela to Iran is insane. First of all, Iran is three times as large. Iran has basically a theocratic government, very much more complicated than this kind of mafia-run thing that Maduro was doing in Venezuela that was also, even if you adhere to the three realms of influence concept, which I don't, but that was in our realm of influence. That was the Western Hemisphere. So, you would have Russia have one, and China would have one.

We're not creeping back into the Middle East where we have not had a good track record, and we have a war we won't call a war, and we have a mission creep. It's all problematic.

KING: Let's think about it strategically, from a high-level perspective, right? America's interests are influenced globally, and we influence globally. And in this case, we know our biggest adversaries are China, Russia, Iran, and oil feeds all of that. So, I think we were very strategic in what we've done in Venezuela, very strategic in what we've done in Iran, because now --

BLOW: (INAUDIBLE) thing about it now.

KING: -- those oil flows are reduced to our enemies.

BLOW: I heard the exact -- KING: So, it's -- no, just take a long view.

BLACKWELL: Tia?

MITCHELL: But I think that the people who are watching at home, who most of us are not foreign policy experts, we care about our families, and our children, and what's in our pockets. And I think what's missing in these conversations, and it needs to come from the White House, it needs to come from the people who are carrying out, whether it's Venezuela, whether it's Iran, whether there's talks of Cuba, is helping American people understand what are we doing here and why, and how it's going to affect them positively or negatively.

I think there are still plenty of Americans who don't understand why we needed to bomb ships outside of Venezuela and then remove Venezuela's leader. And now they don't understand why we needed to partner with Israel, if this is Israel's thing with Iran, why did we need to partner with Israel? What is our business in Iran? And now that gas prices are going up, tell me why I should endure this temporary pain for whatever long-term benefit you think should be gained. The American people are not being brought along. It's not being explained to them.

BLACKWELL: This was supposed to be an economic segment, but you can't have the economic conversation, especially about gas prices, without veering back into the war with Iran. One thing I teased throughout the show that I want you to talk about is this plaque that's finally up that honors the law enforcement who defended the Capitol five years ago, January 6, 2021. It is not where the law suggested it should be. It is several years beyond when it legally was supposed to go up. Why is it up now?

MITCHELL: Yes, it's up now because the Senate and, quite frankly, a bipartisan, I would say a unanimous Senate, said, let's go ahead and put it up on our side of the Capitol because the House, which is controlled by Republicans, Republicans who want to remain aligned with Donald Trump, and therefore, Republicans who at least stand by when Trump continues to spread falsehoods about the 2020 election. And therefore, they have resisted putting up the plaque that honors the officers who defended the Capitol on January 6.

Again, this is in context of Trump pardoning the people who attacked those officers on January 6. So, and I think it's you know, I'm someone who works at the Capitol every day and I'm struggling to where exactly is this? Because I'm told it's not in the most visible place of the Capitol. It's not what was intended when the law for the plaque was passed.

BLACKWELL: Yes, the law suggests it's supposed to be on the West Front of the building. It is just inside the entrance, which is not open to the public. So, for you at home, that picture you just saw is the way you will see this plaque unless you go to the Capitol and you see replicas that are posted outside of some members offices. But you can't just go on the tour and see this plaque to honor law enforcement who protect the Capitol that day.

Tia, Charles, Kelvin, thank you all. We'll take a break. We'll be back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:50:00]

BLACKWELL: Live foggy pictures of New York City this morning. A lot of people remember this winter for the storms, the blizzards, the snow, the ice. Consider this though 2026 will go down as one of the warmest winters on record.

CNN Meteorologist Derek Van Dam joins me now. Make it make sense.

DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Yes. Nobody in New York City is going to believe me this morning when they had to live through and endure this winter. The snowcrete that locked in your cars on the side of the street as these nor'easters came through. Well, get this, this is actually, according to data, the second warmest winter on record across the lower 48.

You think, hey, this weatherman's out to lunch. But the data really backs it up. And let me show you why, because a large part of the western U.S., all those red dots that you see there, they recorded the warmest winter on record. Remember, meteorological winter starts 1st of December, ends at the end of February. So, we've completed it now. But the large population density across the northeast where a lot of people live, well, that's where we had some of the coldest weather. But you average it all out and the lower 48 saw its second warmest winter on record.

[07:55:00]

So, this had major implications, especially over the west. A lot of ski resorts, they're running around 50 to 60 percent of average snowfall to date. We know that winter is the fastest warming season of the four seasons. In fact, on average since 1970, we've seen an increase in the mercury in the thermometer by, get this, 3.9 degrees Fahrenheit. And a lot of that's focused across the northern tier of our country.

So, the warming winters, they're a thing. And so, as we go forward here just this week, remember there's a difference between climate and weather. We have several areas over the eastern two-thirds of the country that will break or tie record high temperatures. And there really isn't much relief in sight for the foreseeable future. With El Nino building in, we've got more than likely a very warm summer ahead of us.

BLACKWELL: All right. We'll look forward to that. I like a nice warm summer.

VAN DAM: Me too.

BLACKWELL: Derek Van Dam, thank you very much. Hey, listen, thank you for joining us for CNN This Morning Weekend. A lot happening across the world, covering it all here. Inside Politics Sunday with Manu Raju is up next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:00:00]