Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Will Israel Escalate Attacks?; Interview With Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH); Approval For Trump Ballroom Delayed. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired March 05, 2026 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And we also backed that up manually with our team of reporters.

And we found that, among all of those comments, 97 percent of them were negative, speaking out in opposition to Trump's planned ballroom project, and tapping into extreme worry about the size, the scope, the cost, the destruction of the history, of course, the East Wing coming down first, and then Trump moving to get the plans approved later.

But, interestingly enough, we found the concern over the aesthetics, the style that Trump has brought to this project, being real interesting, themes being people worried about the Trumpification of the ballroom, in one person's word, feeling that there was a replica of his gold-plated lifestyle, one comparing his aesthetic to a brothel Las Vegas casino, harsh terms here, someone calling it gaudy, garish, ostentatious, glitzy, obscene, hideous, disgusting, vulgar, cheap, another person calling it a soulless hotel conference space.

That's just giving the surface of many of these comments that came in. And a lot of the comments went deeper too, noting that this really is far cry from what the founders had planned for a more modest, humble White House, saying that this certainly goes against those -- original plan of the founders.

Now, we asked the White House for comment, given the breadth of this opposition. And Karoline Leavitt said that she called this Trump deranged liberals having no style or taste.

And, as you noted at the top, the meeting that is ongoing right now, they had anticipated to vote final approval for this project today, but they said at the top of the meeting this morning, they said, given the large amount of public input over this project, they are delaying that final vote until next month.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: So, for all practical purposes, Sunlen, what's next?

SERFATY: What's next is that this period of public comment will continue for a short time. I expect that at the April meeting that they will address it in some way again.

But Trump has really stacked this commission with his allies and people who have worked for him, people who have worked projects with him. So the expectation is that this will go through, even though there is this fierce public comment.

BLITZER: Let's see what happens. Sunlen Serfaty, thank you very, very much -- Pamela.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: All right, just ahead, we're going to talk to Republican Congressman Mike Turner about his support for the war with Iran and why it was important to strike the country now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:36:48]

BROWN: A CNN exclusive.

Two sources briefed on the operation in Iran tell CNN that Iranian bombers came within minutes of striking the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East located southwest of Doha, Qatar. Qatari fighter jets ultimately intercepted those bombers. A lot going on there.

Joining us now to discuss is Republican Congressman Mike Turner of Ohio. He serves on the House Armed Services Committee and is the former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

So, thank you for coming on, Congressman. We appreciate it.

You support the Trump administration's actions against Iran because you say it marked an opportunity to -- quote -- "eliminate an imminent threat."

What exactly was that imminent threat?

REP. MIKE TURNER (R-OH): Well, first off, this conflict was inevitable.

I mean, when you look at from the Obama administration and their negotiations for the nuclear enrichment program that Iran was continuing, you had the -- Obama's program was basically a wait-and- see. We're going to watch, we're going to monitor as this program was evolving both on the missile capability, their increased inventory and also their nuclear enrichment program.

And then what you saw here, as the Trump administration has described, you had the intersection of both the threat as it was increasing, but also then the opportunity, because you can't wait until that line, that intersection moves to where you can't eliminate the threat.

And in this instance, you had, just as we were coming off of the Trump administration having taken that decisive action to bomb the nuclear enrichment sites previously in June, you had Iran indicating they were not going to negotiate on nuclear enrichment, that their intention was to return to nuclear enrichment.

And they were continuing in their missile production and their threats to the United States, Israel and our allies. BROWN: And imminent threat matters in this context, because Article

II does give the president the powers to repel an imminent invasion, right?

But some Republicans have even questioned this, and they believe Congress should have been involved. They don't see the imminent threat. I hear what you're saying about the nuclear ambitions, but that's been a longstanding problems.

I want to watch what your fellow Ohio Republican Warren Davidson told me about the issue of an imminent threat just last hour.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. WARREN DAVIDSON (R-OH): The president is the commander in chief. He executes any war that is declared. And he has a clear path to act in defense of the United States.

So if it was to repel an imminent threat, of course, he should be able to do that. And that's where you get Senator Tom Cotton trying to say, well, it's been imminent for 47 years. And I don't think that's what those words mean.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So, him and others have said, I haven't seen anything to show there was an imminent threat. Pentagon briefers told congressional staff there was no imminent threat to service members overseas. And the intelligence assessment is that it would take around 10 years if Tehran wanted to, to build an ICBM for a missile to reach the U.S.

So I'm wondering why you believe it was OK for the president to take this action without congressional authorization, which, as we know, the House is voting on today.

TURNER: Well, first off, on the ICBM threat, it's not necessarily accurate.

[11:40:01]

You remember the aspect of just after we had taken the action in June on their nuclear enrichment programs, they once again launched a space vehicle. I mean, they once again launched a satellite into space. So they were continuing in their space program.

And the aspect...

BROWN: We're talking to reach the United States, an ICBM...

(CROSSTALK)

TURNER: Right.

But the leap between having a space launch and being able to reach the United States is a much closer leap than many people give credit. When they're launching space vehicles, that is the gap to be able to get to an ICBM.

But the issue of...

BROWN: But why right now? Yes.

TURNER: The issue really of the threat -- and we see that here, as the president is saying, as Marco Rubio is saying.

And, remember, Tom Cotton's chairman of the Intelligence Committee for the Senate. So he's seeing all of the intelligence now, not just the 47 years of the rising threat. The issue of the intersection here is the opportunity to take out that threat.

You don't say the imminence being when it's too late. As I have said before previously in interviews, you don't wait until their...

BROWN: I understand that, but why not get congressional involvement.

TURNER: You don't want until their hand is on the button.

Also, the issue with respect to imminence and the president being able to take action, for congressional action, you also lose the ability to take that imminent surprise, the ability for the president to be able to eliminate that threat.

BROWN: I understand the argument. What about the war in Iraq? There was a vote and...

(CROSSTALK)

TURNER: But, again, this is not a war. This is a military intervention and action to be able to eliminate their military capability.

BROWN: So you say this isn't a war. President Trump has called it a war. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called it a war. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has called it a war.

And we're noticing just since yesterday Republicans in Congress are saying this isn't a war. Explain that divide.

TURNER: Well, there's a difference between using the term of the aspect of during the conflict of the environment of war versus it being a war-war.

This is a military conflict. The president had laid out the objectives. The objectives were to take out their military capability, that and the threat that was there. He did not lay out the objectives of that this was going to war. This was eliminating the military capabilities that represented the threat.

BROWN: Really quick, I'm just hearing in my ear there's some breaking news.

President Trump just told Axios in an interview that he needs to be personally involved in selecting Iran's next leader, just as he was in Venezuela. He has made these comparisons time and time again. What is your reaction to that? And is this a regime change war? You're just talking about this was a specific, directed objective to take out military sites. He's saying he wants to be involved with who the regime is.

TURNER: Well, again, he did not call that for the United States was undertaking regime change. That was not the goals and objectives.

Now, certainly, as we go through this, the issue of negotiations and what Iran should do and certainly the rhetoric of what the president is going to be saying as Iran has decisions to make are not going to be reflective of what the goals and objectives were that the president set out from the beginning.

This obviously is an adversary, and this is going to be a military conflict to address the issues of their military capabilities that remain a threat.

BROWN: Right. But the president had said initially that he wanted the Iranians to rise up.

TURNER: Absolutely.

BROWN: Now, you could argue that's one of the objectives. Pete Hegseth made it clear this isn't about regime change. President Trump, though, said that. And now he's saying he wants to be personally involved in who the next leader is.

Do you see this as similar to Venezuela? Do you see the U.S. having -- do you see this as apples to apples?

TURNER: Of course not. This is...

BROWN: OK, so tell me the differences.

TURNER: Well, the issue as we go forward here is that this is a threat to the United States and a threat specifically to our allies and to Israel.

This is a country where they have chanted "Death to America" and where you can -- in any Internet search, you can get list after list after list of the aggressions that have occurred from Iran to the United States and to the United States allies and our interests. That is the threat. That is the threat that had to be addressed.

BROWN: Do you think the president is being naive then, thinking he can do the same thing in Iran as Venezuela?

TURNER: I think the president is in negotiation phase here. And I think this is important.

The president is going to be making statements that are going to be offers and entreating both Iran and the Iranian people and the Iranian leadership to come to the table. And I think those are going to be important statements to make. That's not necessarily different than what the goals and objectives are of the military conflict itself. BROWN: All right, Congressman Mike Turner, always really nice to have

you on. Thank you for coming in the studio.

TURNER: Great seeing you. Thanks for having me.

BROWN: I know how busy you are.

BLITZER: Thanks from me as well.

We're just getting word that Israel is ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, is answering reporters' questions right now in New York.

[11:45:00]

Let's listen in.

QUESTION: Also, you said Iran is already reducing its ballistic missiles and attacks and losing its basically power in the war. You think that's a tactic or it's really the Islamic Republic not having enough missiles to fire anymore?

DANNY DANON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: Well, I will start with the second part.

It's not a tactic. It's reality. The hundreds of attacks against the missile launchers, against the infrastructure of terror, we see the results. So if you saw at the beginning of the war around 100 missiles landing in Israel, today, you're talking about maybe 20. So I'm sure we will see that going to that direction, not because they decided to do, because they don't have the ability to do that.

Regarding the name you mentioned, we will find and hunt down whoever is plotting against Israel. I don't care what will be his name, who was his father. We will hunt them down. And I think they know it in the leadership in Iran today.

QUESTION: Mr. Ambassador, so this morning, Israel told the people of the Dahiyeh in Beirut to leave the section. And so what's the -- what's the object there?

Secondly, at the same time, another Iranian proxy, the Houthis, are sitting quiet. How do you make -- what do you think of the difference there?

DANON: Well, first, I addressed the issue of Lebanon yesterday.

And we said very clearly to the Lebanese government that they have to take action against Hezbollah. I have to give the credit for what they are saying. They have issued very strong, bold statements. But they have to take action against Hezbollah.

And I think our message is very clear. We will find the operatives of Hezbollah and the Iranian regime representatives in Lebanon, and we will eliminate them. We are trying to minimize civilian casualties. That's why we give the heads-up to civilians to move away from the facilities of Hezbollah in the region.

Regarding your second question, we have no conflict with many of the countries or militias in the region. But if Israel will be attacked, we will use all of our power to defend ourselves.

QUESTION: Mr. Ambassador, what case would you make to the American people who are skeptical of this war that it's beneficial to America in the long term?

I know Trump was almost assassinated by the Iranian regime. What other argument would you make to the American people why it's worth us intervening?

DANON: I think they should look at the actions of the regime in the last 47 years and analyze it, what they said, what they did, the attacks against the U.S. military compound in Lebanon, the attacks against President Trump that you mentioned, and understand that it has nothing to do with what the U.S. will do or will not do.

It's pure hate. There is no border between the U.S. and Iran. There is no conflict. But still you would see the Iranian regime chanting against the American people. It's radicalism and hate. You have to confront it. You can delay it, but at the end of the day it will come to your shores.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have time for just two questions.

(OFF-MIKE)

QUESTION: Ambassador, Linda Fasulo, NPR.

My question has to do with Hamas as a proxy. Are there any indications that Hamas plans anything or getting involved? And, secondly, have any of the Gulf states been in touch with Israel about the war?

DANON: So, regarding the second question, I will not elaborate, but we share our know-how and intelligence with whoever wants to support.

And, today, when you see what's happened in the streets of Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, Manama, and other cities in the Gulf, very similar to what we are facing in Israel. So we share the same enemy as we speak.

Your first question was?

QUESTION: About Hamas.

DANON: About Hamas.

I don't think Hamas has the capabilities today to attack Israel. So -- and we fought for two years. We degraded the capabilities. It would be a great mistake to start something with Israel today. I think they know it. But even if they will try to, the capabilities are minimized.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. Edith Lederer from the Associated Press.

[11:50:00]

This war has now involved at least 10 other countries, and calls have been escalating for an end to the conflict and diplomatic negotiations to resume to end it. Does Israel support diplomatic efforts to bring this war to an end?

DANON: I think diplomacy will come into action. Not yet. Not yet. We have to finish the job. We have to dismantle the machine of terror that they built for so many years.

It will not last forever. It will not be months. It will be weeks or days. But we need to continue. We need to continue to hammer, to dismantle the capabilities, and then to use diplomacy to ensure that they are not doing the same, because if the regime will continue, it's only a matter of years until we're going to be in the same place talking about another attack against the regime.

So we have to build a stronger mechanism. We are all familiar with the JCPOA, which failed, and with the negotiations. So we're going to have to install real effective mechanisms that will prevent Iran from becoming a threat.

Thank you very much. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Final question.

QUESTION: Ambassador, Adla Massoud, The National.

With regards to Lebanon, is Israel planning a ground offensive like in 1982?

DANON: So we have no desire to engage in any military operation. But when we see that Hezbollah is sending rockets into Israel from Lebanon, saying they want to avenge the deaths of Ayatollah Khamenei, and the Lebanese government is not capable of blocking them, then we have to step in.

So we will do whatever is necessary from the air, from the ground, from the sea. But we have no desire to do that. And I think it's still not too late. I think the Lebanese government can still stop the escalation, put more pressure on Hezbollah, and tell them, don't drag Lebanon into it.

If you want to go fight against Israel, don't use Lebanon as a launching pad against Israel. So it's not late -- too late. But we are. We also saw the signs of Hezbollah preparing for escalation. So we put more troops on the border to prevent any invasion, especially after October 7.

So, yes, we have more presence on the northern border today. And we take positions in order to make sure that we will not be caught by surprise. Thank you very much.

BLITZER: All right, there is the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, answering reporters' questions at the U.N., Pamela. And it looks like this war is expanding in several different areas,

including in Lebanon, of course, because of the Israeli threat that's coming in from Hezbollah, Lebanese Hezbollah in Lebanon, the proxy group of Iran.

BROWN: No, absolutely.

And that was a big moment in this war, right, when the U.S. and Israelis struck Iran, and then Hezbollah got involved striking Israel, it widened this conflict, and then, of course, all of these Gulf countries that are now involved as well. You have heard the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, say that this is going to continue to escalate, that the worst is yet to come.

And yet, Wolf, on the political front of this, you just heard the discussion I had with Congressman Turner. Some members of Congress, Republicans, don't want to call this a war.

BLITZER: They want to call it a police action or something like that to avoid the requirements under the Constitution for the Congress to get involved and authorize the War Powers Act if, in fact, it is a real war.

BROWN: Right. And there's a vote in the House today on that War Powers Act. It did not pass in the Senate.

But it is notable because there are members of the Trump administration, including the president himself, who said this is war, and this could take many weeks or longer. And they're not ruling out boots on the ground at this point. And that's something that we have been asking members of Congress on the show as well.

Another concern, as we just heard from Representative Jim Himes, a Democrat on the Intelligence Committee in the House, another concern is potential retaliation from Iran and Iran's proxies here at home and abroad and the sleeper cells. And you don't want to be an alarmist, but that is certainly what those in the national security realm, members of Congress, what they're really focused on right now. What is the threat to Americans with this?

BLITZER: And it's a real threat. If you listen to intelligence that's coming in, there's an enormous fear that there could be sleeper cells in the United States and elsewhere around the world that would target the United States, U.S. citizens, and others.

So there's a lot of concern right now. And it's clear that, even if the U.S. decides to hold back a bit, based on what we just heard from the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, and from other Israeli officials in Israel, Israel is moving ahead with its military options against Iran irrespective.

[11:55:06]

BROWN: Yes, absolutely. Israel is clearly moving ahead. We just heard it there.

And we will continue to cover this. This does not seem to be ending any time soon, Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes, it's going to continue. And it could escalate big time in the coming days as well.

BROWN: It certainly could.

BLITZER: I have been hearing that from the very beginning, but it looks like it could as well.

BROWN: Yes.

BLITZER: And, to our viewers, first of all, we want to thank all of you for joining us for our special coverage of this war here in THE SITUATION ROOM this morning.

BROWN: "INSIDE POLITICS" with our friend and colleague Dana Bash starts after a quick break.