Morning Joe - Allies reject Trump’s call for Strait of Hormuz escorts

Episode Date: March 17, 2026

Allies reject Trump’s call for Strait of Hormuz escorts To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

If Iran, as you said, totally obliterated, got the missiles, got the first two rounds of leadership, Air Force gone, Navy gone, can we wrap this war up this week? Yeah, sure. Will we? I don't think so, but it'll be said. Won't be alone. And we're going to have a much safer world when it's wrapped up. It'll be wrapped up soon. We're going to have a much safer world.

President Trump yesterday admitting that he could end the war with Iran, he's, just not ready to do so. It comes as the president continues to call out NATO allies for not helping to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, but also claiming the U.S. doesn't need their assistance. Meanwhile, here at home, the partial government shutdown has DHS employees going without paychecks, forcing some to pick up second jobs, all while travelers and spring breakers are now going through long security lines at airports. And the Democrats have proposed repeatedly to refund TSA, to refund the Coast Guard,

to refund FEMA, and every one of those efforts over the past week or so have been killed by Republicans on the Senate floor. Every one of those proposals, they could have had unanimous conditions. consent and it's Republicans that are killing unanimous consent. So you'll see the showdown with John Cornyn and the congressman. Well, you know, with all due respect to Senator Cornyn, all he has to do is get his Republicans to say yes and TSA will be funded and the Coast Guard will be funded and FEMA will be funded. But they don't want to do that if that means that there have to be any reforms with ICE. So that's where we are right now because they are so dedicated to ICE continuing operations as is

that they are making TSA lines horrible. They're not paying TSA. Get this right. Republicans are not paying TSA. It's ridiculous. And that is where we start on this Tuesday, March 17th, St. Patrick's Day. With us, we have the co-host of our 9 a.m. hour staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, co-host of the Rest is Politics podcast, the BBC's Caddy Kay.

MS now National Affairs analyst, John Heilman, he's partner and chief political calmness at Puck, and Politics Bureau Chief and Senior Political Calmness at Politico, Jonathan Martin. A lot to get to this morning. A lot to get to. I've got to say, something called my eye, Jonathan Lemire, this morning, and it caught my eye. Ben Smith actually pointed this out. We're going to be talking a lot of chaos going on. across the Middle East, a lot of chaos going on in international markets. But Ben Smith said,

actually, there's one person who believes that this war is actually going well for the United States, and it's actually a writer for Al Jazeera. Let me just read the first couple of paragraphs. Fascinating. Two weeks in Operation Epic Fury, the dominant narrative is settled into a comfortable groove. The United States and Israel stumbled into a war without a plan. Iran's retaliating across, across the region. Oil prices are surging and the world is facing another Middle Eastern quagmire. The U.S. senators have called it a blunder. Cable News has telling the crises commentators have warned of a long war. The course is loud in some respects understandable. But this narrative is wrong, not because the costs are imaginary, but because the critics

are measuring the wrong things. They are cataloging the price of the campaign while ignoring the strategic ledger. When you look at what's actually, happened to Iran's principal instruments of power. It's ballistic missile arsenal. It's nuclear infrastructure. It's air defenses. It's Navy and proxy command architecture. The picture is not one of U.S. failure. It is one of systematic phased degradation of a threat that previous administrations allowed to grow for four decades. Why do I wind up with that very long pitch? Because everything he says is right. Militarily, there's been extraordinarily, extraordinary success. But as with Vietnam, as with Iraq, and now, well, as with Afghanistan, here we are in Iran. And again,

militarily nearly perfect. It's extraordinary what our men and women in uniform are doing and what their leaders are doing. And yet here we find ourselves and get in a situation where we could actually win every single battle and still lose the war. And that, Jonathan, is what the White House is grappling with. We're going to talk about a lot of chaos in the region.

It's important to keep it in perspective, though. We are doing extraordinarily well, hitting a lot of military targets. And yet, Iran doesn't have to fight us on level plan grounds. Asymmetric attacks, which we've all been saying from the very beginning, could actually win this war, despite the fact our military is doing an extraordinary job. What's so interesting about this take, this piece in Al Jazeera? And when I woke up this morning, I also saw Ben Smith's tweet.

I started looking at it. And then was struck by that same article was then posted by, President Trump on true social in the last hour, which I think is probably the first time Trump has ever posted something. Yeah, first time he's probably ever posted something from Al Jazeera. But more than that, I think there is a compelling argument he made. This is one of those classic, Joe, and we do this all the time. Two things can be true at once, because you're right. And the article med does a good job explaining how Iran as a sort of a state, that government has really been weakened. Its ability to wage war and threaten its neighbors long term has been weakened.

Yes, of course. It's still firing off rockets. Yes, of course, we're seeing some of the damage to its Gulf states, and they have the drone supply. But their ballistic missile capability, their military, all badly degraded. The U.S. and Israel's military are checking off, just going down the list, like wiping out targets to the point where they're going to run out of targets at some point. That's a success. At the same time, as you just rightly point out, Iran has other ways to hit back. It's asymmetric warfare. they can close the Strait of Hormuz, they can drive up oil prices. There is, of course, the lingering fear of a terror attack somewhere in the West. Those are cards Iran still has to play. And we don't know what the regime will look like in its future. But this is a complicated moment where there's an overwhelming military success, Joe and Mika, but it's unclear what the day after looks like and whether Iran might even in a diminished capacity be just as dangerous.

And what we're going to see now is that as we go through the news, attacks in Iraq, attacks in Dubai, attacks all across the region, Mika, again, asymmetric warfare that the Iranians know, just like Iraqi leaders knew back in the early 2000s. Even if they lose to the United States overwhelming military force, there's a possibility they can win the war politically. It's what the Vietnamese said all the way back in the 60s and early 70s. So a lot of moving parts here, a lot of potentials, but let's get you up to date in what has happened. Attacks continue across the Middle East this morning, now 18 days into the war with Iran. Rockets and drones were launched at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad early today with Iraqi security sources, describing the strikes to Reuters as the most intense since the start of the conflict. A witness telling the paper, an explosion was heard in the Iraqi capital.

as fire and smoke can be seen rising from the area. Iraq's interior ministry also said earlier a drone hit a hotel in the green zone, which houses government and buildings and the U.S. embassy. No injuries were reported. The UAE, meanwhile briefly shut down its airspace this morning as its military said it was responding to missile and drone threats from Iran. flights later resumed, but shortly after, authorities sent a missile warning alert to the people in Dubai as explosions were heard in the city. In Israel, the military says it launched new attacks across Tehran in addition to expanding its ground operation in Lebanon.

Israel also claims to have killed two top Iranian leaders. In a post on social media, the Israeli military said it killed the commander of the Basij unit, the country's most powerful. security militia that's part of the Revolutionary Guard. Israel also claimed to have killed Iran's top security official in an overnight strike. Ali Larajani has emerged as a leading figure in the regime since the Ayatollah's death late last month. Meanwhile, President Trump is angry at U.S. allies who have refused his call to help escorts ships through the Strait of Ormuz, Germany, Japan, Italy and Australia all say they will not send naval forces while others have stopped short of committing. Germany's defense minister saying bluntly, quote, this is not our war. Meanwhile, Britain says it

wants to avoid a wider conflict. Trump, who did not consult allies before last month's strikes over Iran, is framing their response as a test of loyalty. Numerous countries have told me they're on the way. Some are very enthusiastic about it, and some are. And some are countries that we've helped for many, many years. We've protected them from horrible outside sources, and they weren't that enthusiastic. And the level of enthusiasm matters to me. We have some countries where we have 45,000 soldiers, great soldiers protecting them from harm's way. and we have done a great job

and we want to know do you have any minesweepers well would rather not get involved sir I said for you mean for 40 years we're protecting you and you don't want to get involved in something that is very minor my attitude is we don't need anybody

we're the strongest nation in the world we have the strongest military by far in the world we don't need them But it's interesting. I'm almost doing it in some cases, not because we need them, but because I want to find out how they react. Because I've been saying for years that if we ever did need them, they won't be there. So the Wall Street Journal editorial board has a new piece about the battle for the Strait of Hormoons,

which reads in part, quote, Mr. Trump is rallying a coalition. And allies can help reopen the strait with anti-mine vessels and more. Good thing the president hasn't antagonized allies. with tariffs or threats to invade Greenland. This is a reminder that treating allies well is wise, so they are more likely to help you when you really need them. This is no easy mission,

and militarily manageable risk won't be comforting to Americans or energy markets if this goes sideways. But Iran doesn't hold all the cards. Its actions in Hormuz could force Mr. Trump to see the war through. which is bad news for the regime. Imagine how the regime would blackmail the world and get away with it if it were left to amass twice

or three times the missiles or nuclear weapons. Jonathan O'Meer, it continues. It just, again, the insulting of allies and it just doesn't work. Yeah, we're seeing the consequences here. We're seeing it is both the trade war that President Trump has launched against America's friends, threatening to back out of NATO repeatedly, and of course, the Greenland expedition from earlier

this year, which really alienated Europe. And Cady Kay, that I feel like was a crystallizing moment for many on that continent who felt that, you know, yes, Trump had sort of spent a year insulting them and mocking them and raising trade their tariffs. But that was the moment we're like, well, we can't even count on the U.S. frankly, they might even be an aggressor. And I think we're seeing here, should the chickens come home to roost, is that now when President Trump, and look, over the weekend, the tone of those posts asking for help from the allies

was striking. And as people, Republicans on the Hill sort of noted to me almost desperate. And I know he walked away from it yesterday and sort of blustered through it and said, hey, we don't actually need them. It's more of a loyalty test. I'm not sure that's true. And I think right now he's seeing occasionally you do need friends. Jonathan, I remember when I was at the World Economic Forum in Davos, speaking to you about

when would the moment come where America actually found out it needed its allies. We all thought maybe it would be around China and something to do with Chinese trade or Chinese competition. It turns out to have come much sooner than we thought, and this is the test that we're seeing right now. At the beginning of this war, it was interesting. You actually had quite a lot of splits. We spoke about this a couple of weeks ago. You had splits amongst the Europeans, with some, Germany, for example, being much more supportive of the military action against Iran than, say, Spain. But now that we see the allies being asked to help with the Straits of Hormuz, even the Germans are saying, well, actually, this is not our war. I mean, much more of a blank statement,

you can't get them that. This is America's war. This is not Germany's war. And one of the things, I think, that has really irritated the Europeans was Donald Trump lifting sanctions on Russian oil so that they could sell their oil to India. The Europeans see Ukraine as the existential fight. They don't see Iran as the existential fight. And there's still a lot of criticism amongst European nations about why are the Americans doing this anyway and fears when they see the planning of this

or the lack of planning of this, that this may not have been the best sort-out strategy when it comes to dealing with Iran. But you are so right, especially, Cady, when it comes to Germany. You, of course, had Donald Trump lecturing the Germans for years. about being too dependent on Russian oil and helping the Russians out too much. And here, of course, you have the Trump administration lifting sanctions on Russian oil, which, of course, they know will help out Vladimir Putin at a critical time in negotiations going on between Ukraine and the Russians.

But Jonathan Martin, the contrast between how Europe responded to the first goal for and the second goal for, even though two Bushes were running both wars, comes down to the different presidents. Bush 41 obsessed over building alliances. He knew how to build alliances. He had spent his entire life building alliances across a variety of jobs. Bush 43 did not. And we saw very quickly, you had on one side, you had the largest coalition that had been put together by 41 since World War II. And we fought the Iraq War with both the leaders of Germany

and France, basically pushing back against us from the very start. And it made a difference. Just like this is making a difference. Right. There's no Bush 41 and James A. Baker, the third riding to the rescue here, Joe, these days. The whole point of having allies is not so you have, you know, nice tea parties and, you know, bilateral sessions in which you talk about shared interest and, you know, the rules-based order and nice things like that. It's because you need friends when you have difficult moments like this. When you're trying to find a force multiplier at a critical moment when you're, you know, gambling with a war that wasn't terribly thought through and you're hitting

a bit of a rough patch and you got to rely on your friends and allies and you call and they don't pick up the phone all right. They're sending Trump straight to voicemail. They're screening his calls. It's just that is the challenge right now and he can say yesterday guys

well actually I'm just testing them to see if they'd be there for us. We don't actually need them. Everybody knows that's not the case because of what he was saying over the weekend because of what all of us know about what's happening in the straight. So this is the chickens coming home to roost for somebody who's never invested time in building these relationships. And frankly, has always treated strong men better than he's treated

our democratic allies. Absolutely. And again, talk about friendship and trust and allies. What is NATO for? What was the premise it was built upon? I don't think it was built for Trump to decide where he wants to go and blow things up. It's not as simple as that. You need. You need, major allies, but it's also defending each other. Well, and we all remember just a couple of months ago, the president going to Europe and telling everybody, I believe it was Europe, telling everybody he didn't need him. And talking about tariffs and mocking and ridiculing Macron and belittling him and belittling him for a couple of minutes straight and you're doing the same thing on Greenland. And it was just, again,

it was the president mocking and ridiculing every one of these allies saying that none of them would be successful without the United States of America. So alliances make a huge, huge difference. But let's go from issues with Europe with issues here in America politically. and John Heilman, the Iranians are in a position that Vietnamese were in the 60s and 70s, that the Iraqis were in from 2003 to 2010. They understood they were going to lose on the battlefield. They understood they were going to lose just about every single firefight they had with U.S. troops, but they also understood that they could win politically.

with the Vietnamese, it was people in the streets protesting. With the Iraqis, it was George W. Bush's approval ratings just collapsing, Democrats taking control of Congress in 06. Here, it's oil. Here it's a struggling middle class falling further and further behind on affordability issues. And then you have the straits. You have this crisis. And the Iranians understand there's, there's,

there's a limited timeline for us to achieve our military objectives and our political objectives before we have to come home so oil doesn't stay over 100 for the next six months. I mean, just talk about those realities and really how it requires the Trump administration to thread the needle and figure out all the political and all the military tasks they have to perform over the next three four weeks. Right. You know, Joe, when you're talking before about the holding two things in your mind at the same time, it made me think about the Vietnam analogy, partly because of the fact that, you

know, the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong lost that war, and the United States also lost that war, even though they were adversaries in the war, because that war dragged out over the course of more than a decade. In a classic example of, there's this political scientist at University of Chicago talks about, horizontal escalation, right, where it's about widening the war and extending its duration. And that we talk about the widening war a lot, but that duration piece is so important. And if there's one piece of evidence that tells you how little planning and how little the president and his team anticipated what was happening what's happening right now in the

straight, it's that this timing could not have been more suicidal politically. if you had anticipated the possibility that you would have this impact of the energy markets going out for potentially weeks or months, you would not have decided to start it in the March before a midterm election where the president's party was already in trouble, already in trouble over, particularly over issues of prices and affordability, and when the president had made one of his key promises in the campaign was that he was going to lower the price of gas. So if you really had seen all this coming, Lamir, you would have known, if you had any sense of that to anticipate that this was going to happen, you might have maybe started this war of choice earlier. Or maybe you would have started it later in the absence of an imminent threat. But the politics of this are terrible.

And that is why, because Iran is, you can talk about their degraded military all day long, they're still striking things. They still hold us straight. And that ability to drag this thing out raises the political costs for Donald Trump to what will almost certainly. become an intolerable level at some point in the next few weeks or months. I keep thinking about the state of the union just a couple weeks ago. His largest audience of the year barely mentioned Iran, just a passing reference

near the end of a very lengthy speech. Spent a long time talking about gas prices. That, of course, no longer the case. The political incoherence of this certainly remains puzzling. All right, still ahead here on Morning Joe. President Trump is also ramping up his rhetoric against Cuba. We'll show you what he said yesterday about

taking that island nation. Plus, Michael Schmidt of the New York Times will join us with his latest reporting on the Department of Justice's failed efforts to go after the president's perceived political enemies. We'll be back in just a moment. Welcome back. It's time for sports. Two of the first four play in games for the men's NCAA tournament tip off tonight in Dayton, Ohio. The fight for a spot in the field of 64 begins with UMBC and Howard playing to advance as the number 16 seed in the Midwest region and win a shot at number one Michigan in the first round of the actual tournament. It'll be followed by a battle for the 11th seed in the west region between NC State and Texas. The winner there will get a matchup with six-seeded BYU. Joining us now to break

down the bracket ESPN College basketball analyst Jay Billis. We're so happy to have them. MS now contributor Mike Barnacle joins the discussion as well. Welcome gentlemen, Jay. Thank you so much. So give us some, we won't, we'll save your final four pick for a minute or two. Right now, just give us some storylines. There are, I mean, you live and breathe this. There are plenty of Americans, though, who kind of just tune into college basketball right about now. Maybe they catch the conference championship weekend, but now they've got their brackets. They're getting excited. Who are a couple teams they should be watching? Well, they should certainly be watching the number one seeds. Last year, Jonathan, as you know, all four number one seeds made it to the final four,

which has only happened once in history since seeding began in 1979. That was in 2008. And this year is a different year. The number one seeds performed the best during the regular season. It doesn't mean they're going to make the final four. It's a difficult path. But you have Michigan, Arizona, Florida, and Yukon are the number one seeds. But Duke has a really difficult path, and they're dealing with some injuries.

Two of their starters didn't play in the ACC tournament last weekend. And it's unclear whether both of them, will be available early in the tournament. And the East region, I think most observers would agree, is the most difficult. I mean, seven of the top eight seeds have won national championships in the past. It's a loaded region. Not that any region is easy, but some are more difficult than others. And I think the East region is the most difficult.

And I think this year, Jonathan, we're going to see more upsets. Last year, it was, I don't want to say devoid of upsets, but it seems like almost every year there are these jaw-dropping upsets that nobody really saw coming. and I think we're going to get back to a little more of that because there are some really good teams. And, you know, that first four, Miami of Ohio had an amazing year this year. They only lost one game and it happened to be in their conference tournament. And they were one of the last teams that wound up making the field because they didn't play a particularly challenging schedule. But they're really good.

And they're going to come in with something to prove in this. Most teams are. They all want to prove they can play. But Miami of Ohio has a little bit more motivated. because I think they've been overlooked after having an amazing season going unbeaten in the regular season, only losing in their conference tournament. So, Jay, there's been a lot of talk this year about how talented the group of players are. Like, for instance, like this upcoming NBA draft class, people say, oh, there's going to be five, six, seven,

maybe stars, you know, coming out. So talk to us, though. Give us a couple players you're going to be watching next couple of weeks. Well, if you're going to the NBA green room, this freshman. class is as deep and as talented as I can remember. We've had some great freshman classes in the past. Last year had Cooper Flag at the top of the group and look what he's doing in the NBA this year. But this class goes about 20 deep. And it starts with AJ DeBanza of BYU. You know, he's 6-8, long-armed and has NBA shot-making ability right now. Had two games over 40 points during the

year. The only issue that BYU is facing is they lost one of their best players. to an ACL injury a few weeks ago, Richie Saunders, and that certainly limits their ceiling. Darren Peterson at Kansas is the presumptive number one pick. I don't think any of that's really decided yet. But Peterson is the most effortless, smooth shotmaker I've seen in college basketball since Kevin Durant. He's had some in-and-out issues with cramping,

and he had a hamstring thing. So he's only played 22, 23 games out of the season. but just a magnificent score. One of the ones to really keep an eye on is Darius A Cuff Jr. at Arkansas. He is a, he led the Southeastern Conference in scoring and assists. He, in SEC play, he's, he averaged over 24 points and over six and a half assists. And he's the first to do that in the Southeastern Conference since Pistol Pete Marevich. And that's quite a while ago.

And that's a lofty, lofty name to have matched. So there's a, there's, and then Cameron Boozer at Duke, who, who's going to be the national player of the year. After having Cooper flagged last year, John Shire, the head coach at Duke, now has Cameron Boozer. And there has not been a more productive and consistent at the highest level player in the country. I mean, his worst game this year was 14 points, five rebounds, and two assists in a

game against Niagara where it only plays 20 minutes because Duke, you know, blitz them. And the consistency that he's shown is really remarkable. The maturity at that age. It's kind of hard to fath. I couldn't find my shoes at 18, and he's doing that. It's ridiculous. Jay, we want to thank you for your appearance today based upon just one thing you've already said, Pistol Pete Maravitch.

One of the greats, one of the greats. And it's great just to think of the memory of Pistel Pete. But my issue when it comes to the final four each spring is I always have a soft spot for certain schools. One of them this year, as always, is Gonzaga. What's the story? Where are they going to go? how far are they going to go? You know, Mike Gonzaga has been one of the most amazing stories in sports,

not just basketball. In the late 90s, Gonzaga was considering, they were talking about, are we going to need to close our doors as a university because of financial issues and all that? And they wound up going to the Elite 8 in 1999 under Dan Munson. And Mark Few, the current head coach, was an assistant then. And because of the success that they had and some of the money that came in, they've been able to, you know, they've gone to the Sweet 16 for like nine straight

years. I mean, it's ridiculous. And people say, well, they play in a small conference. Of course, they're going to be successful. That's, that's crazy. Once they get into the tournament, they perform as well or better than all these Power Five conferences. They're really good again. And I think they're a Sweet 16 team again. The only problem that Gonzaga has this year is they lost one of their best players to injury, Braden Huff. But they've got a big man, Graham E.K., a leftie that transferred in a couple years ago from Wyoming, who's a double-double machine. He doesn't get any easy shots because he gets so many, he gets so much defensive attention. But that's, Gonzaga is going to be a factor.

I don't think they've got the same kind of team that they had in, you know, 2022 or whatever, 2017 when they went to the national finals and the NCAA championship game. But they're legit again. And it's remarkable what Mark Vue has done there. and he's a finalist for the Naismet Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame, and he'll get in there. Just a, I can't say enough about Gonzaga and what they've done. They, you know, it's really funny.

Like they've got, their players are incredibly nice, nice young men. And they go to class, they do their homework. And then the game starts. And they're a motorcycle gang that'll cut your heart out and watch you bleed. They're just amazing competitors. For those filling out your brackets at home, my best advice, do what Jay does. For the record, here's his final. Michigan State, Illinois, Arizona, Iowa State, with Arizona emerging as champion.

ESPN's Jay Billis, thank you so much for joining us this morning. We really appreciate it. Guaranteed to be wrong on all those tricks. There it is. You heard it there. All right. Thanks again, Jay. President Trump's effort to punish his perceived enemies is facing yet another setback. And as our next guest points out, the Justice Department struggled to take even the most basic steps in targeting Trump's rivals. As reported yesterday, a federal judge has blocked the DOJ's criminal investigation of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, noting that U.S. attorney Janine Piro's team had not met the incredibly low threshold they needed to even issue grand jury subpoenas. Joining us now, investigative reporter for The New York Times, our friend Michael Schmidt. Michael, thank you for being here.

We heard from Ms. Piro in a pretty angry news conference the other day about this. but tell us more here about what was a pretty faltering campaign against drone Powell. So look, the significance here is that Trump's retribution campaign starts out with the desire to jail his enemies. They should be subjected to everything he was subjected to and they should be behind bars. Those are his own words. The Justice Department goes out and they try to do this. And last fall, they really ramp it up. they indict Comey and James.

They move forward with other cases. Those indictments are thrown out by judges. Grand juries are then rejecting the case against the six lawmakers that Trump had accused of sedition. Now, this federal judge is basically saying, prosecutors, you cannot use your most fundamental power of subpoena to ask questions and require people to answer them. You are not meeting the incredibly low standard that you need to get to, to. to actually use that power. This is like, essentially like detectives out there with notepads asking questions and a judge coming in and saying, no, you don't have the ability to do that. And in terms of the larger arc of the retribution campaign, where we start out with Trump wanting to put people

behind bars, and now we're at a point where Trump wants a Justice Department targeting the Fed chair, but the Justice Department is being told you cannot get the Fed to answer basic questions that you have, that is not a strong place for the retribution campaign today. Well, Mike, I think it's fair to say, right? That this is, the judge Bosberg is the most of the latest example and the earliest. Cutting off the ability to do subpoenas for a grand jury is like very, very early. But of course, we've seen in other cases the thing, these various attempts fail at the grand jury level, fail to get an indictment.

Of course, they've also sometimes failed actually in court to get convictions. it feels like this retribution campaign, we all wonder, would the Article III branch of government turn out to be a reliable bulwark against Trump, at least at this level, the retribution campaign, the attempt to jail his enemies, it has so far pretty much worked. You're saying that the judicial branch has worked as a check against Trump? Yes. In a consistent way, starting at different phases, it's put a stop to this campaign thus far. The judicial branch has moved on the criminal side more swiftly than anything else that we have seen.

On the civil side, it moves slower. It is more ponderous. It's not as clear. And it doesn't seem like the Trump administration respects it nearly as much. On the criminal side, they have been shut down time and time again. And this has only come in the past few months because they only really ramped up that campaign starting in the fall. And in the sort of, because I think a lot of people were saying last year like, okay, where are the checks on Trump's power? You don't have Congress. Congress is clearly not a check. The Justice Department, which has, you know, you know, typically would look at an administration, even their own administration, was clearly not going to be a check against Trump. The courts seem to have no way of really dealing with Trump's executive orders or actions in an efficient way that was able to stop him in real time. he was able to use his power without the courts really holding him back. But on the criminal side, time and time again, they have not just moved quickly, but they've moved against Trump. And that has made this retribution campaign in a point where, look, Judge Bozberg is basically saying, you have not met the lowest of low standards to ask questions and force people to answer them.

Subpoenas are rarely quashed. And when they're quashed, it's for very inside baseball reasons about attorney-client privilege and stuff like that. It's not because the government has barely met the level of what criminality is. So, J-Mart, we spent a lot of time talking about the president's priorities and Republicans in the last couple of weeks. Obviously, the war in Iran. There are many of them are like, why is this happening now? This is going to drive up prices. We're seeing it at the gas pump.

It's going to go into other fields soon enough. This is going to make our life that much more complicated in November. this is another example of that. His retribution campaign, this is not, it is impossible for Republicans to then sell this to voters and say, yeah, this right here,

this targeting of Jerome Powell, this is making your lives better. Right. Yeah, and John, you know, of all the stuff that he's done that has humiliated members of Congress on his side at his own party, going after Powell is up there with Greenland.

It's really embarrassing because they know that Powell's a serious, is person. And maybe you don't like how he's handled some of his choices at the Fed, but he's an adult. And I think he's one of a vanishing few adults in D.C. And especially in the Senate, you know, that targeting just crossed the line. And that's why they're now in a position, by the way, where they're not going to be able to get Warsh confirmed because Tillis is going to sit on that until he gets assurances that DOJ is not pursuing these charges any longer. But, John, you make a really good point. It goes to the heart of

priorities? What are your priorities? Because, you know, trying to get a legacy is clearly the president's top priority, along with, you know, the physical plan of the White House and a rehab of the Kennedy Center. So he goes for these big, you know, big moves and places like Venezuela and Iran because he wants to have a big legacy of his own. He wants to be a consequential figure. Well, that's for him. That's not for his party. His party's the one holding the bag now when gas is going to be five bucks a gallon. And it's the same with the retribution campaigns. That's about his own grievances and vanity. It's not about his party's fate in the midterms.

Why is he targeting a sitting senator, Bill Cassidy, in Louisiana? That's not for the good of the party. That's for his vengeance. Why is he going after nine Indiana state senators? Not exactly top of the priority list for Mike Johnson and John Thune, the fate of the Indiana State Senate, because they defied his ass, John, on redrawing their congressional lines. The through line on all of this is a president more focused on himself, his impulses, than the good of the party.

And at some point, the Republicans are going to wake up and realize that, probably the day after the midterms. Yeah, Jamie House making the right point. I mean, it's also why is he not endorsing John Cornyn? Because John Cornyn came out against more investigations into the 2020 elections. One of the best things that Donald Trump could do right now to ensure his own political future is make sure Republicans win the Senate. If he were to endorse John Cornyn, the sooner he could get his head round to doing that, the sooner it is that John Corner could get in a position to beat Ken Paxton, the more likely it is that Republicans hold on to that Senate seat in Texas.

I mean, there's snowboarding effects of this, but he won't do it because he's impatient and because he doesn't like the fact that John Cornyn defied him. And yet he keeps, for somebody we've always said, has very strong political instincts, at some points he gets in his own way. Yeah, and I think this time around we're seeing him even more in a bubble. Every president's in something of a bubble. This one in particular, and he is certainly not showing any inclination to make choices to help his party. Investigative reporter at the New York Times, Michael Schmidt, thank you for being with us. But it goes, Jonathan Martin. Thank you as well,

J-Mart. We appreciate it. We now return to our coverage of the Iran war. Rockets and drones were launched at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad early today as the war continues to spread across the region. Iraqi security sources describing today strikes to Reuters as the most intense since the start of the conflict. Iraq's interior ministry also said earlier that a drone hit a hotel in the green zone, which houses governmental buildings and the U.S. embassy. No injuries were reported. The UA.E, meanwhile, briefly shut down its airspace this morning as its military said it was responding to missile and drone threats from Iran. flights later resumed, but shortly after that, authorities sent a missile warning alert to the people in Dubai as explosions were heard in that city. Over in Israel, the military says it launched new attacks across Tehran in addition to its expanding ground operations in Lebanon.

Meanwhile, the Red Cross says that civilians in Iran are paying a heavy price with the head of the delegation in that country, telling the AP, quote, the heavy loss of life is alarming. Daily life in Tehran has been profoundly disrupted, Katty. Yeah, I mean, we have to keep thinking about the number of casualties that there are in this war. And sometimes we don't always know the final answer. President Trump, meanwhile, yesterday claimed that nobody could have predicted the way that Iran would respond to U.S. attacks. Take a look. He said they hit Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait. Nobody expected that. We were shot. Are you surprised that nobody breathed you ahead of time, but that might be their retaliation?

Nobody, no, no, no, no, no, the greatest actress. Nobody thought they were going to hit. I wouldn't say friendly countries. They were like neutral. They lived with them for years. Peter, they were going to take over the Middle East. They were going to knock out Israel with their nuclear weapon. Okay, the problem with the president's claim there is that just last month, Iran's late Supreme

leader issued a direct warning that any U.S. attack would result. in a regional war. Joining us live now from Jerusalem, MS Now International reporter, Innes de la Quatera. Inez, what are you learning about claims today from Israel that two more top Iranian officials have been killed as well? Hey, good morning. Yeah, we just found out moments ago

that the Israelis carried out a strike overnight that took out Erie Lari Johnny, who was a top security official within the Iranian regime. So we knew that the IDF was carrying out a fresh wave of strikes on Iran, specifically on Tehran, They were going after ballistic missile production facilities. Then we found out that they had carried out a strike targeting Ari Lari-Lari-Jani. Specifically, we were waiting for the results of that strike.

And it was the Israeli defense minister who came out to announce that the strike had been successful. So Lari-jani, a really key figure, becomes the second highest-ranking Iranian official to be taken out in these strikes. Of course, after the late Supreme Leader, who was taken out in the first day of the war. He was someone who had actually been sanctioned by the U.S. for the role he played in coordinating the response to the protests. We know those protests, of course, resulted in tens of thousands of people being killed or detained. Worth pointing out that Iranian state media has not confirmed the death. They actually published a handwritten note that they say was written by Lari Johnny that commemorates the deaths of the Iranian sailors that were killed in that U.S. attack earlier this month. So we'll see if they come out to confirm the death.

But a really significant turn of events there. And it's not just Lari Johnny. It is also the head of the besiege force that was taken out. So the besieged force, a kind of paramilitary volunteer militia that is also responsible for cracking down on protests. And this comes, of course, as the Israelis have said time and time again, that they want to see regime change in Iran. They've said that they are creating the right conditions for the people of Iran to topple the regime, because they say that regime change can only come from within. And certainly with these two strikes,

it does seem like they are creating the right conditions for it because these two officials that were taken out overnight would have been key in trying to suppress any kind of potential uprising. MS Now international reporter Inesda Lakwatera, reporting live from Jerusalem. Ines, thank you so much for joining us. That's going to be the question now, John. These are two very significant figures,

Ali Laranjani, who had run for president several times, been on the scene for decades, close to the IRGC, had also been involved in the negotiations last summer, but have become a fierce critic of the war. What does it actually mean now in terms of the stability of the regime and the potential longevity of this regime if he has gone, and another senior figure has gone as well? As we said at the beginning of the program,

the military side of this seems to be running successfully in achieving the aims that the military is going after and here the aims that the Israelis are going after. The bigger question is what's the end? end game and what's the strategy for getting out of this war now that we've got this far? And can President Trump declare a victory if the Iranian regime is largely still in place? There are questions about the new Supreme Leader, his health. Another message went out from him yesterday, but we've yet to see him on camera.

The U.S. officials believe he has been wounded, perhaps, somewhat seriously, right? Though, even if he's sidelined, the regime still seems to be running along. We'll see, though, if these loss of other leaders like this may play a role. Also, President Trump claimed yesterday that U.S. forces destroyed 30 mine-laying ships in the Strait of Hormuz. After making that statement, Trump was asked why the crucial waterway could not be immediately reopened. Well, we could, but it takes two to tango. We have to get people to take their billion-dollar ship and, you know, drive it up. when

Pepe has his big sugar ships coming around and they cost a billion dollars and we say, I think it's okay now Pepe, take your ship, drive it through the straighter for him as he may say let me wait a little while

because it takes ship owners and you know these ships are very expensive they can cost up to $2 billion so they don't want to take a chance that, gee, I think you'll be okay. They got to know it. So they don't have to set, you know, we don't know if they even set any minds. But the thought that they may have

is enough to keep people from saying we don't need it. While the president said that it's not known if Iran has actually laid mines in the street of Hormuz, the New York Times spoke to U.S. officials last week who said Iran was using smaller boats for a mine laying operation. There's also the risk posed by boats laden with explosives or drones in that narrow waterway. Let's now bring in MS now reporter Josh Einerger, live from Dubai. Josh, good to see you. What's the latest on the ground there as Iran continues to widen its attacks on its neighbors? Well, John, Dubai woke up this morning to louder booms in the sky than it had heard in

actually quite some time here in the downtown district elsewhere. across the city, the airspace was closed yet again for a period of time. You know, the interesting question that people are asking here in the UAE with this news out of Israel that two Iranian officials, those two officials were killed by Israel in the last day, what's the retaliation going to be like from Iran? Iran seems to be retaliating for each thing that Israel and the U.S. does here in the UAE. They're going after energy infrastructure. They're going after the airport.

particular, the airport, which is the economic driver that led to this scene you see behind me, this booming city of Dubai, has been targeted over and over and over again by the Iranians that happened again this morning to no effect. There was a brief interruption in the airspace and then things got back to normal. Yesterday, though, it was a much different story. There was an attack on the fuel facility at Dubai International Airport. And that really is perhaps the most effective way, if you want to cripple an airport, go after the refueling facility. These are holding tanks for jet fuel.

And then there's very intricate infrastructure that pumps the fuel out to the gates so that planes can be fueled. That fire burned. We drove past it. It was a towering inferno. It burned for about 15 hours before they were finally able to put it out. And then for maybe another 12 to 15 hours, flights leaving Dubai on Emirates were all. stopping at other regional airports here in a manner that indicates they were refueling at those locations. And that raised a lot of questions about the state of the infrastructure, the assessment

of the damage after the airstrike at the airport. In the last few hours, according to flight radar tracking, it does appear that flights are leaving Dubai directly for their long-haul destination. So perhaps whatever that was has been resolved. Of course, there's very little information from the government, from the airport authority, from Emirates, the airline about the state of play at the airport itself. Things do seem to be somewhat back to normal, but of course it's all very tenuous and very fragile. Every time there's a new volley of drones or missiles headed in this direction, invariably some of them head toward the airport, and that throws the whole system into chaos all over again. John? Josh, whenever you talk to Americans who have recently

been to Dubai or perhaps been to Dubai for the first time. Many of them return and say it was like going to Los Angeles, given the nature of Dubai and the access to everything American in Dubai. Can you give us any sense since Dubai has come under attack from Iran, a neighbor, any sense of the feelings about their neighbors, Iran, and what's going on in Dubai? What's happening to people on the streets of Dubai? Yeah, it's a great question, Mike, because we've been living this sort of duality here. You say L.A., I say it's very much like Vegas. It's very familiar to an American.

You've got these skyscrapers behind me. Every big ticket restaurant, retail brand you've ever heard of. And all of it, what's so interesting, Mike, is that it's all still functioning. And the government has taken great pains to make things seem normal. Everything is open. You can go to a luxury store and buy a piece of jewelry. You can go to the movies. You can go to the food court. You can do everything you could have done before. The difference here today is that there are almost no people at all those locations. The government has told people that they need to work from home. Schooling is being done remotely. But importantly, tourism is way down. You know, that airport, as I said earlier, is the engine that drives this whole city, right? And in many cases, is as through traffic from maybe North America to Southeast Asia, Emirates has turned Dubai into a legitimate and desirable place to connect. And people leave the airport maybe for a couple of days and they experience Dubai.

And they are not here. So it's very muted, I guess, is the best way to put it. All that said, we haven't spoken to a single person who lives here who says they feel unsafe. They have great confidence in the government, which has, you know, objectively done a very very good job knocking down this barrage that's come at them. I mean, they've gotten more hardware sent from Iran than any other GCC country by a lot, by some measures more than Israel. And yet the toll of casualties and the damage is very, very low. And I think the sense here is that people feel confident in the government decision-making, but it's hard to ignore that it's

not the Dubai that it was before all this started. Yeah, UAE officials rightly pleased with their ability to intercept those attacks, hoping it can continue. MS now reporter Josh Einerger, live from Dubai, Josh, thank you so much. John Hyman, I want to go back to you about something you said about an hour back about President Trump's threshold for pain here, political pain, right? Because it's a few, on two different levels. On one hand, we have, we should keep this first and foremost. 13 American soldiers have died. Sure.

In this conflict so far, the longer it goes on, particularly if ground troops, even in a limited fashion, are interjected in this, that number, of course, is only going to go up. There's also the political pain at home with gas prices, first and foremost, but in other ways, too. And that seems to be the question here is that Trump at some point is going to declare some sort of win. We don't know exactly what it'll be, but it feels like the timing of that is going to be when he hits that pain threshold. Right. I mean, we focus a lot for obvious reasons on the splits, the perceived splits and fractures

in the MAGA base, right? And we see these high-profile media figures, whether it's Megan Kelly or Tucker Carlson speaking out and everyone kind of goes to that like moss to the flame, right? The real story of the politics of this is with swing voters, because those of the voters are going to determine what happens in the midterms. And this war is overwhelmingly unpopular with independent voters. It's sitting at like a 30% or so support level among independence right now. Soft Republicans and independents are against the war. non-Maga Republicans are about split about 50-50. Maga Republicans are still with Trump, about 90% of the war.

But where do you win the midterms? Where do you lose the midterms? You lose them with soft Republicans and with independent voters. And those voters eat this war. And so I think this is the question, John. I keep saying that people don't understand how short this year is. You know, the midterms just seem like they're a long time way off still to a lot of people in November. By about June, we're going to be past the point where

legislating is going to be happening on Capitol Hill. You've got only a few months here to really alter the political dynamics that Republicans are going to have to run on. And that gives you a sense of where the window is. If this war drags out into the early part of the summer, the consequences, the political consequences for Republicans are going to be calamitous, I think. Yeah, and GOP getting very nervous about exactly that. Another significant story we're following. An island-wide blackout hit Cuba yesterday amid that country's deepening energy and economic crisis. All 11 million residents of the island were without power after energy officials reported complete disconnection of the national electrical grid. Only about 5% of the island's power was restored by late last night,

with officials warning the fragile grid could fail again. The blackout is Cuba's third major outage in just four months, as the government lacks proper funding for repairs as well as the needed spare parts. Cuba's president recently acknowledged the island has not received oil in three months and blamed the outages on the Trump administration's halting of Venezuelan oil shipments after the capture of Nicolas Maduro. President Trump was asked about Cuba yesterday in the White House. But I think Cuba's seen the end. You know, all my life I've been hearing about the United States and Cuba. When will the United States do it? I do believe I'll be the honor of having the honor of taking Cuba. That's a big honor. Taking Cuba. Taking Cuba.

Taking Cuba in some form, yeah. Taking Cuba. I mean, whether I free it, take it, I think I can do anything I want with it. You want to know the truth. They're a very weakened nation right now. soon after those remarks, the New York Times reported that Trump administration is seeking to push Cuba's current president from power. It's according to four people familiar with the talks. As the Times notes, the removal would be largely seen as a symbolic move since Cuba's president is widely considered a figurehead who lacks true political or economic control. The Cuban government declined to comment on the reporting. So, Caddy, a couple things here. First of all, I reported a month or so back that Trump was really looking at.

looking at his foreign policy legacy as toppling three regimes, Venezuela, Iran, and then Cuba. And then we have President Trump's remarks yesterday. I mean, they're worth repeating. He says, quote, I'd have the honor of taking Cuba. And then when pressed, he said, well, free it, take it, doesn't really matter. That's an extraordinary sentiment from the President of the United States about a sovereign nation. Well, particularly when that president of the United States is embroiled in a war that he's finding it difficult to go out of and that seems to be causing him several headaches. I mean, to still have his eye on Cuba and what he might do in Cuba in this reporting that what he's thinking of doing is getting rid of the current president Diaz Canal,

but not necessarily indicting any of the Castro's. It sounds like it would just be a sort of figurehead move. And it's, I know that he has said to allies that what he would like to do before he leaves office is not just get rid of those leaders, but actually visit Iran, Cuba. Venezuela as kind of putting his metaphysical, if you like, stamp of approval on those countries. But what I find startling is that he is still saying that whilst we are still focused on Iran. I don't know if that is a distraction. I don't know if he still thinks he's going to do that. If he thinks that the cut off of the energy just makes it easy for him to do that.

And anyway, if this is just a ceremonial move, you move one president and you keep the regime in place, how much does actually change? And how does that go down with his Cuban supporters in Florida who actually wants something much more substantial than just taking out one person and putting another person in their place? Certainly a storyline will be following in the days and weeks ahead.