Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Average Gas Price Surges To $4.30, Highest In Nearly Four Years; Secretary Hegseth Testifies To Senate Armed Services Committee; Pentagon Official Says Iran War Has Cost $25 Billion; Hegseth, Joint Chiefs Chmn Caine Testify On Capitol Hill; Mills Drops Out Of Maine Senate Race, Setting Up Platner vs. Collins; GOP Groups Use Old Platner Reddit Posts In Attacks Ads. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired April 30, 2026 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Welcome to Inside Politics. I'm Dana Bash in Washington. And we're following Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The secretary is now fielding questions, including about the war in Iran.

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: As I said yesterday, and I'll say it again today, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans. Defeatists from the cheap seats who two months in, seek to undermine the incredible efforts that have been undertaken and the historic nature of taking on a 47-year threat with the courage no other president has had to great success and great opportunity for preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon.

BASH: Hegseth criticism for lawmakers comes as the war continues to hurt Americans at the gas pump. The average price of gas jumped $0.07 last night to $4.30, that's the highest price since July of 2022. Now that's after the roller coaster the price of oil went on last night, at one point, oil jumped to $1.26 a barrel. That's the highest price in four years. Now, sources are telling CNN that President Trump sees extending the Strait of Hormuz blockade as the best option for forcing Iran back to the negotiating table.

I'm joined by a terrific group of reporters here at the table, and we are monitoring this hearing. We will dip in when we see and hear things that we, of course, want to bring you, and I'm sure that will happen.

In the meantime, just before coming on air, the top Democrat on the committee, Jack Reed, talked to the defense secretary about several things, including the fact that he fired the army secretary, and asked questions about that -- the army chief of staff, I should say, didn't really give much of a different answer than yesterday about firing, which is kind of a non-answer. But then Reed went into the questions about the way that Hegseth conducts himself and the way he leads the Pentagon vis-a-vis Christian nationalism. SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): I think that direction from your behavior is an intense interest in Christianity, in nationalism and in not recognizing the talents of women and non-white gentlemen, and that's the wrong direction.

HEGSETH: I don't know what you're insinuating, Senator, but I am not ashamed of my faith in Jesus Christ.

REED: Well, I'm -- you shouldn't be.

HEGSETH: And if you want to shame me for it, go ahead.

REED: I'm not shaming you, but are you critical of other faith?

HEGSETH: I am a believer. I'm quite open in that, and our department allows for a multitude of faith. So, I don't know what you're suggesting. I've heard the likes of things that people like you suggest, to try to smear my character and I won't give into it. No.

REED: I'm sorry, Mr. Secretary, but broadcasting before the National Religious Broadcasters stressing the need for more Christianity and the military forces doesn't seem like a neutral position in which you tolerate and accept all religions.

BASH: Nia?

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, BLOOMBERG POLITICAL & POLICY COLUMNIST AND CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah. Listen, I mean, Pete Hegseth during his confirmation hearings, was very, very clear about who he was. That he was a culture warrior, that he thought there were sort of lax standards in the military, mainly because of women. He essentially insinuated that was a big point of contention when he was trying to get confirmation.

So, it is no surprise, in some ways, that he is who we thought he would be, right? He has talked openly about his faith. He has spoken about this war in very sort of Christian crusade terms, likening, you know, when they rescued that soldier, likening that to sort of the resurrection and Easter Sunday.

So, yeah. I mean, I think a lot of people have a problem with that. The president clearly doesn't have a problem with that. He himself is likened himself to Jesus Christ. So, this is something that we haven't seen in America in terms of the military, of this close association with a singular faith, even though, obviously, this is a Judeo- Christian nation, but this kind of almost proselytizing and wrapping a war in Christian language is very odd.

[12:05:00]

It's very offensive to some people, particularly the pope, for instance. But this is very much where we are, and you saw him not backing down. And Jack Reed obviously, questioning him in a lot -- in a way that everybody is wondering what this is about.

BASH: Jeff? JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Look, I think Senator Reed, I mean, his tone is so serious, as he is obviously a longtime leader on this committee and an elder statesman of the Senate, quite frankly. So, so much more serious than the -- and weighty than the conversations we heard Secretary Hegseth said before the House Committee on Wednesday.

But I just think the bottom line is to this, even though the president holds those of beliefs, I'm not sure what the president thinks of the secretary's performance on the Hill. And I think that is something kind of long-term to watch on this. I mean, we saw Pam Bondi responding so aggressively in that hearing a few months ago. The president often sort of makes decisions based on news coverage and his impressions from television. I'm not sure that after a of couple days straight on the Hill that Secretary Hegseth, the deep defense and robust responses is something that the White House is pleased with.

BASH: Yeah. I mean, there's a theory that one of the reasons why the theory that Pete Hegseth and the chair of the joint chiefs do their press conferences at 8 am is because that's prime television watching hour for the president. Again, just a theory. Let's talk about more about this war as we continue to monitor this, this hearing. The average price of gas right now, today, Seung Min is $4.30, a week ago was just a little over $4 about the same a month ago, and then again, before the war, $2.98.

SEUNG MIN KIM, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, AP & CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: And the important part, besides those high numbers is that we don't see any relief, any coming anytime soon, because you have officials projecting high prices for some time, even if the president either says, it's a worthwhile cost in terms -- in terms of defeating Iran in this war, or disputes the fact that prices would stay high for some time.

But regardless, it still remains a major political problem for this White House, who really had been touting their work to lower prices over the first year of the president's term and -- second term in office in terms of, you know, egg prices or other consumer goods. Now, I think what we're all watching is what the White House is going to do ahead of tomorrow, which is really that 60-day timeline under the War Powers Resolution, where you basically have to either -- where the president basically has to either stop the fighting or ask Congress for approval.

Now they can extend it by 30 days. I think we kind of like that's kind -- that's kind of where things are trending right now. But tomorrow, you know, it's going to be a very serious, symbolic marker for a lot of Republicans on the Hill, who are, you know, supportive of the president for now, but saying, no, we need a plan. We need our say, and this has gone on too long.

BASH: And then there's the cost because a big thing, Congress has oversight in terms of a lot of things, the power of the purse still is Congress. And the defense secretary said yesterday, I believe he probably said it again today, that the estimated cost of the war is $25 billion. Our colleagues here at CNN are told that the real cost estimate is closer to between 40 and $50 billion when you account for the cost of rebuilding U.S. military installations and replacing the destroyed assets.

HENDERSON: Listen, I think, to Americans struggling with the price of gas, with the price of healthcare, with the price of housing. The idea that this is an administration that came into office suggesting that they would get America out of war, certainly not start any new ones. I do that they're spending $50 billion for what, I think a lot of Americans are asking.

BASH: Let's go back to the hearing. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand from New York is questioning the secretary.

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D-NY): Secretary Hegseth, here's a few more. Let's talk about how you're prosecuting the war. What is your response to targeting that has resulted in the destruction of schools, hospitals, civilian places. Why did you cut by 90 percent the division that's supposed to help you not target civilians? And do you know the impact of a strategic failure at a war when you have so many civilian casualties? You may have tactically completed a mission well, but strategically, is not meeting your goals because of the harms to civilians. What is the cost of that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's leave time for an answer.

[12:10:00]

HEGSETH: No military. No country works harder at every echelon to ensure they protect civilian lives than the United States military, and that is a ironclad commitment that we make. No matter how, no matter what system we use.

GILLIBRAND: Then why did you cut the department by 90 percent?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Senator Gillibrand. There will be other rounds of questions. Senator Rounds, you are now recognized.

SEN. MIKE ROUNDS (R-SD): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, thank you to all of you for your service to our country. Let me just allow you to finish the answer a little bit with regard to the senator from New York. Does the United States military ever target a civilian center?

HEGSETH: Well, thank you, Senator. Unlike our adversaries, unlike radical Islamists, unlike those that target civilians or use civilians as shields, the United States military never target civilians and puts constructs in place to ensure that the maximum extent possible. We do not harm or hit civilians. Is war is more difficult place with a lot of complexities? Absolutely right, but no country does more, and no department does more than our department.

ROUNDS: Do you still have all of the resources necessary to assure that every opportunity to eliminate that as a threat? In terms of that happening. Do we still have the resources available in the department to make sure that we do the best we can never to hit a civilian target? HEGSETH: Every resource necessary at every echelon is available, legal intel and otherwise, to ensure that we minimize at every extent possible civilian casualties. And the suggestion was made that somehow AI might be used without a human in the loop, which is a classic anthropic talking point, which is half of what we talked about previously. There is a human in the loop on decisions that are made. And the suggestion otherwise is to suggest that somehow AI is running targeting.

ROUNDS: Thank you. Right now, part of what we're also talking about is not just are we engaged right now in terms of trying to eliminate the threat from Iran in terms of being a nuclear armed country, but we've also got staring with us as well. The fact that we have an ongoing principal threat with regard to a pacing threat with China.

The dual capable B-21 Raider will be a critical part of both our conventional and our nuclear deterrence against China and Russia. As you know, the air force's Program of Record includes plans to procure 100 B-21s. But many national security experts and leaders, including STRATCOM Commander Admiral Correll and INDOPACOM Commander Admiral Paparo are calling for a greater number of B-21s. Admiral Paparo testified here last week that he would favor buying 200 B-21s.

Secretary Hegseth and Chairman Caine, could you speak to the progress and the importance of the B-21 program? And if you agree with the growing sentiment that the U.S. needs to revisit the B-21 program of record and assess the requirement for at least 200 B-21s to match the global threat. Would you -- would you speak just to exactly what that would mean and what the probability of that is?

BASH: OK, we're going to continue to monitor this hearing. Jeff Zeleny, we definitely heard the beginnings of the way that the Democrats are going to push him, somewhat similar to some of what we heard yesterday in the House. But I think we'll -- as the panel kind of gets less and less senior, meaning we'll get more and more down the bench, down the dais. On the Democratic side, we'll hear different things. But what did you make of the line of questioning from Senator Gillibrand?

ZELENY: Look, I think the heart of all of this is that the cost of goods and the pain that Americans are feeling still hasn't necessarily been explained for why this is happening. I mean, the price tag on the entire operation, I mean, from $25 billion, in our reporting is saying it's nearly twice that. I mean, that's extraordinary.

And yes, Congress controls the power of the purse. But even before this, there are big questions of if -- if this pentagon is even appropriately spending appropriated money from Ukraine and other things. So, I think we are beginning to see the cracks in the questions and the defensiveness of which we've heard the defense secretary yesterday talking about, you know, the biggest, essentially, weak points, or the biggest problems are democratic critics of the war and some Republicans.

He said, it's kind of outrageous when you think about the oversight committee, but the point of the costs of this that is something that this administration is deeply, deeply concerned about. And it's not a gotcha question, it's something that is a real matter, and it's a political challenge for this administration as well and they know it.

KIM: Right, right. I think especially Senator Gillibrand's questioning about the civilian impact, I thought that was really important. And you saw how Senator Rounds, who's the Republican, kind of gave Secretary Hegseth, you know, a chance to clean up his answers and just kind of project what the administration's public -- position is on that matter.

[12:15:00]

But that is -- I mean, that is kind of the collateral damage of war. And while Secretary Hegseth really did emphasize that the U.S. does not target civilians, you know, sometimes, you know, things happen in war. There are -- you know, there are things that have happened and that -- and you will continue to see Democrats really -- and frankly, other lawmakers really press the administration for answers on what exactly, how they're targeting targets, what they are exactly doing in Iran.

HENDERSON: Yeah. Listen, the White House finds itself in a very difficult position in an election that's going to be about affordability and the cost of living, here they are talking about a war that is $50 billion.

BASH: All right, coming up. There is a major shakeup in a really important Senate race. We have new reporting on why Maine Governor, Janet Mills, is ending her Senate campaign. Plus, we're monitoring the defense secretary's testimony, and we'll bring you any developments as they happen. Including, I alluded to this before, questions from Senator Mark Kelly, the same senator the secretary censored.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: Now to a major shakeup in a race that could determine control of the U.S. Senate. Maine's Democratic Governor, Janet Mills, is suspending her Senate campaign. Clearing the way for progressive Graham Platner to take on incumbent Republican Senator Susan Collins in November.

Governor Mills, who was personally recruited by the Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, released a statement saying in part, quote, while I have drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else, the fight to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that campaigns unfortunately require today, the financial resources. Moments ago, Graham Platner weighed in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM PLATNER, (D) MAINE SENATE CANDIDATE: Governor Mills has dedicated her career to this beautiful state. We're all eternally grateful for her service to the state of Maine as governor, and her lifelong career, serving Mainers. We both got into this race because we knew how critical it is to defeat Susan Collins. And her decision today reflects a commitment to that project. I look forward to working closely with her between now and November to do just that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Extremely gracious statement there from Graham Platner, also very tactical. He wants the -- anybody who was supporting Janet Mills to go and support him against Susan Collins in the fall. So, one of the things you heard in that statement from Janet Mills about why she was pulling out was about money. You know, sometimes there's more to it than that. I'm told, in this case, it's about money.

This is a quote from a Democrat affiliated with the Mills' campaign. I spoke with this morning. She really was just out of money. She couldn't be up on the air competing, and couldn't pay her staff because the money wasn't coming in. Graham Platner was dwarfing her on the amount they were spending.

And let's just put some money up there to show you. Platner right now, $4.1 million, Janet Mills, $2.7 million, and the issue wasn't just the war chest. The issue was she couldn't raise the money, which she thought she could being a popular sitting governor and the choice of the Democratic leader in the Senate, who knows how to raise money. It didn't happen.

ZELENY: It didn't happen. Everything in that statement from the governor was true, but missing one thing, enthusiasm and excitement for her candidacy --

BASH: But they're also connected.

ZELENY: And of course, that -- absolutely that brings money in. But that is, what is the first sort of point of this is Senator Schumer in recruiting Governor Mills. And initially she was somewhat reluctant to come in, recruiting her, he misread the moment that this party is in and we'll remember.

I mean, she is the governor who stood up to President Trump in the East Room of the White House at the governor's meeting just a little over a year ago, and that was going to be her sort of central calling card here, that she could stand up to the Trump administration. That is not what the mood of the electorate was looking. And so, I think that is perhaps a telling point here.

You need something more than just standing up to Donald Trump. But I think the excitement and enthusiasm, obviously, is something that was a challenge for her. She's been around a very long time in a variety of offices, up and down the ballot here. But Graham Platner also said this morning, he said, we are trying to build a broad coalition of working-class power in the state of Maine. He is trying to tap into something that is far more than the Democratic primary electorate here, and that is what worries Senator Susan Collins.

She has been extraordinary in terms of winning again and again in Maine during some very difficult reelection races. But this is one that actually concerns them because she's not simply running against someone who's just a Democrat. He's trying to sort of reshape the electorate there, and that is going to be fascinating over the next six months.

BASH: Yeah. Tap into some he hopes former Trump populist kinds of voters.

[12:25:00]

ZELENY: The Bernie Sanders kind --

BASH: Exactly.

ZELENY: -- where that concentric circle sort of gets between those two men.

BASH: That's exactly right. Manu Raju caught up with Susan Collins, because of course, he did. And I want you to listen to what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): She has devoted her life to public service in the state of Maine, in many different capacities. She has served the people of our state, and I'm sure this was a hard decision for her.

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Will Platner be easier to beat in your view?

COLLINS: I'm not going to get into the November election at this point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Well, it's happened.

KIM: Yeah, it's happening.

BASH: It is definitely happening.

KIM: Right, right. Well, I again, you know, Senator Collins' gracious like Graham Platner was with paying her -- paying due to Governor Mills and her service to the state. The weather Platner is easier to be is going to be a really interesting question for both campaigns until November.

I'm told by -- I'm told that within the Susan Collins' campaign, they've asked voters, basically, they've read a bunch of statements about Janet Mills, and tell voters, it doesn't really move the needle, because people know Janet Mills, their vote, their opinions about -- their opinions about Mills are kind of baked in because they've known her for so long.

But if you ask voters in their internal polling about Graham Platner and then read a lot of the controversial statements that I, we know have been out there. During this primary campaign, their views changed dramatically. That is what Republicans are counting on. You can see their message already forming against Graham Platner, that he's too extreme for Maine. But I will also point out just the progressive energy is a really real factor and a real, you know, X, you know, wild card in this race, because it's been building for some time.

Obviously, Bernie Sanders did well in Maine against Hillary Clinton. 2016 got more delegates there. Sara Gideon in 2020 also had a progressive challenger. She beat him, but that left progressive activist in Maine a little salty against Chuck Schumer and the establishment Democrats. So how much that, you know, movement that energy rises and impacts the general election. I think it'll be really interesting to watch.

BASH: So, Senator Collins says she doesn't want to talk about November yet, but people who are backing her aren't just talking about it. They're putting up ads.

KIM: Right.

BASH: So, I want to play one from my pro Susan Collins super PAC, and then it's going to be followed by a Platner ad from March.

(PLAYING VIDEO)

BASH: And I just want to say, as you come in here for the record that Platner apologized for comments that he made. This is a reference to the rape, what was written on Reddit, saying that he said this after he left the army in 2012 that he had PTSD and that he was depressed and didn't reflect. How if reflects to that?

HENDERSON: And listen, you had Janet Mills, throw everything at this guy with the money she did have going up on the air with ads, highlighting some of the terrible things he has said. And it didn't work. I mean, one of the things you saw in the sort of contrast between those two ads. We all laughed at Platner's ad because it was clever. It was a whole sort of vibe.

And the other ad, it just seemed like something we'd seen before, and that is exactly how Platner is going to run against Susan Collins. She's something that everybody has seen before. It's the -- it's the campaign that he already ran against Mills. You're the establishment, Janet Mills, had she won the general. She would be the oldest freshman senator in the history of the Senate --

BASH: 78.

HENDERSON: -- 78 and that's going to matter too to Susan Collins. This guy is a whole vibe. He's got the earrings, he's got --

BASH: He's 41. He's a totally different one.

HENDERSON: Yeah. And people, he seems authentic. He seems like a real person who's talking to you. And that's why I think people are able to sort of understand, if not totally, you know, forgive him for some of the comments he made. They're sort of in the context of his whole story. And then he tells a whole story about what he's going to do and how he's going to be different out in the establishment.

BASH: I just want to talk for one second about Susan Collins, because everyone kind of maybe overlooks this or doesn't perhaps give her and the campaign enough credit, because when she came into the Senate, there were purple areas in New England, and they're not there anymore. I mean, it is a blue region.

And when you look at sort of statewide, if you look at 1996, this is when she won. She won by little more than five percentage points. And if you look down the list, 2002, 16, 2008, 23, 2014, 37. She didn't have like a very strong candidate. And then 2020, you were mentioning, she had a pretty tough race, but she still won by almost nine percentage points.

[12:30:00]