The MeidasTouch Podcast - Top Trump Officials Throw him Under the Bus at War Hearing

Episode Date: March 19, 2026

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on the House Hearing featuring Trump’s top intelligence officials where they throw him under the bus and all blame him for the disastrous war in Iran while under cross-examination at the hearing. Rocket Money: Cancel your unwanted subscriptions and reach your financial goals faster with Rocket Money. Go to https://RocketMoney.com/meidastouch today! Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At Desjardin, we speak business. We speak equipment modernization. We're fluent in data digitization and expansion into foreign markets. And we can talk all day about streamlining manufacturing processes. Because at Desjardin business, we speak the same language you do. Business. So join the more than 400,000 Canadian entrepreneurs who already count on us. And contact Desjardin today.

We'd love to talk, business. Uh, where are my gloves? Come on, heat. Winter is hard, but your groceries don't have to be. This winter, stay warm. Tap the banner to order your groceries online at voila.ca. Enjoy in-store prices without leaving your home. You'll find the same regular prices online as in-store.

Many promotions are available both in-store and online, though some may vary. When Westcham first took flight in 1996, the vibes were a bit different. People thought denim on denim was peak fashion. Inline skates were everywhere, and two out of three women rocked, the Rachel. While those things stayed in the 90s, one thing that hasn't is that fuzzy feeling you get when WestJet welcomes you on board. Here's to Westjetting since 96. Travel back in time with us and actually travel with us at westjet.com slash 30 years. Ever feel like car shopping is designed to make you second guess yourself?

Is this a good price? Am I making the right choice? With car gurus, you don't have to wonder. You get deal rating? price history and dealer reviews without the surprises so you can shop with confidence. Buy your next car gurus at car gurus.ca. Go to car gurus.ca.comers.ca. To make sure your big deal is the best deal. That's c-ar-g-G-U-R-U-S dot CA. Cargooros.ca. This podcast is sponsored by TalkSpace. Last year, I went through many different life changes. I needed to take a pause and examine how I was

feeling in the inside to better show up for the ones who need me to be my best version of myself. When you're navigating life's changes, Talkspace can help. Talkspace is the number one rated online therapy, bringing you professional support from licensed therapists and psychiatry providers that you can access anytime, anywhere. Living a busy life, navigating a long-distance relationship, becoming a first stepfather, Talkspace made all of those journeys possible. I could speak with my therapist in the office.

I could speak in my therapist in the comfort of my home. I was never alone. Talkspace works with most major insurers, and most insured members have a $0.00 copay. No insurance, no problem. Now get $80 off your first month with promo code space 80 when you go to talkspace.com. Match with a licensed therapist today at talkspace.com. Save $80 with code space 80 at talkspace.com.

Wow, Donald Trump is getting thrown under the bus by his own top officials in this hearing that's taking. place before the United States House of Representatives. So yesterday you had Donald Trump's top intelligence officials, Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, the CIA director. And today, Cash Patel is there as well before the House of Representatives. Yesterday, they were kind of cagey with their responses because I think all of them all assessed that Iran did not pose any imminent threat to the United States. And in their threat assessments that they gave to Donald Trump, they said Iran did not pose any imminent threat. They looked all cagey

yesterday and all the MAGA people were going after them, especially as you had Joe Kent, this like ultra MAGA right wing guy who was the number two to Tulsi Gabbard. He resigned. He did a Tucker Carlson appearance where he was like Iran definitely didn't impose an imminent threat to the United States. This was all directed by Israel and Donald Trump following Netanyahu's lead. This was Trump's top official as of 72 hours ago, right, as of last week. And the guy resigned. He was working with Tulsi Gabbard. Tulsi Gabbard's whole thing was no foreign wars in the Middle East.

That's literally her entire message in her political life. And so she looked like an utter fool before the United States Senate. So she and John Ratcliffe and to some extent, Cash Patel today, they kind of changed their tactic. And they were very much distancing themselves from Donald Trump during these House hearings today. I mean, even in Tulsi Gabb, her opening statement, she goes, I'm here to provide a threat assessment. I'm not giving you my own personal views or my opinion. So she already starts off by kind of distancing herself saying, I may not believe what these things are. Here, let's just play this clip. I'm here today to present

the 2026 annual threat assessment and joined by my colleagues, the directors of the CIA, the DIA, FBI, and NSA. This briefing is being provided. in accordance with OD&I's statutory responsibility. What I'm briefing here today does not represent my personal views or opinions, but rather the assessments of the intelligence community, of the threats that facing the United States are homeland and our interests.

In this assessment, we're following the structure of priorities that were laid out in the President's national security strategy, starting with threats to our homeland, then shifting to global risks. And one by one as Democratic Congress members and even Republican Congress members, are asking Tulsi Gabbard questions, which is, so why are we listening to Israel and following them in this war? Why don't we have our own views of things?

Why is your assessment this and Donald Trump doing that? Isn't Iran more dangerous now than they were before? And ultimately, what Tulsi Gabbard and John Ratclip the CIA director, Cashpita would say is, well, you know, ultimately Donald Trump's the one who makes those calls, he makes those decisions, to which at one point, you know, these Democratic Congress members like, well, what's the point of your job then? What are you doing? What is your, what is the point of your existence in this government role if you just say, well, Donald Trump does it? Donald Trump does it. It's a dictatorship. So over here you have Congress member Carson saying, so is there any evidence at all that Iran intended to do any preemptive attack on the United States? And then Tulsi Gabbard is like, ultimately it is Donald Trump who is responsible.

It is Donald Trump responsible. And she'll keep repeating it over. again, but here play this clip. Directors Gabbard and Ratcliffe, is there any evidence that Iran intended to conduct a preemptive attack on the United States? And I asked this because 13 service members have been killed in Trump's war, including Captain Seth Koval, a husband and a dad from my state of Indiana, and my constituents want answers. So is there any evidence that Iran intended to conduct a preemptive attack on the U.S. prior to beginning this war, yes or no?

Congressman, the answer to this question needs to be reserved for a closed hearing. I will say, however, the intelligence community does provide the assessments of the threats that exist to the president so that he can make that determination within the body of information and intelligence and activities within the region that ultimately he is responsible for. What is an imminent threat? And if there is an imminent threat, what actions need to be taken? Then you have Democratic Congress member Crow. Watch this exchange with Tulsi Gabbard, where she's like, the imminent nature of threats.

That's not determined by me. That's determined by Donald Trump. Play this clip. You or the IC make any assessments as to the timing of potential threats facing the United States from Iran in the last 90 days. I'm sure there was timelines factored into the intelligence assessments that were delivered. Did any of them show imminence? The imminent nature of a threat is determined by the president based on a totality of the intelligence and information provided to him. Did any of them show that there were attacks anticipated within the next 90 days from Iran?

It's too simplistic of a statement to say that because it depends on various scenarios occurring or not occurring. Did those assessments show timelines for the threats that Iran posed to the United States? The totality of threats, yes, there were timelines involved where it applied and where that information was available. But again, to your question about the determination of imminence, the president makes that determination based on the totality of information and intelligence. The bottom line is there was no eminence provided. And you know that. And there's no product that shows that. I yield back.

And this was some scathing cross-examination here by Democratic Congress member Gomez. I want you to watch this. Let's play this clip. More from Congress member Gomez right here. Play this clip. Last year, you testified that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon. Do you stand by that statement? Yes or no?

Context matters with that statement. Iran had all of the materials and capabilities to do so. Mr. Chairman, I reclaim my time. It's an easy answer. You either stand by what you said last year or not. It is a serious question that requires the totality of the information available. I reclaim my time. I reclaim my time.

And more from Congress member Gomez play this clip. Today, you said that only the president, only the only person who can determine what is an imminent threat is the president of the United States. Do you stand by that statement? Yes, I do. Director Ratcliffe, do you agree with that assessment? That the president is the only person that can determine if something is an imminent threat or not. The president's commander-in-chief gets,

to make a decision about what's an imminent threat. The intelligence, well, the intelligence, Reclaim my time. Is it, is it, reclaim my time. Reclame my time. Reclaim my time. Reclaim my time. That's the reason why is that if the president can determine

and ignore what you're doing, why do you guys even have a job? Why are even, like, why do you even advise them? So you're saying tomorrow the president of the United States can say China is an imminent threat. And then he can take his own, no matter what the intelligence says, He can take his own action. So that's what you're basic.

Let's go back to Democratic Congress member Crow himself, an Army Ranger right here who served many combators of duty, who knows what war is actually like firsthand. Watch this play this clip. Director Gabbard, it is your job and the job of your agency and department to assess the views of Iranian leadership, their policy beliefs and policy positions, correct? Yes.

That includes now deceased Ali Komen. of Iran, correct? Yes. And the now leader, his son, Moushtaba, Komeni, correct? Yes. The son is considered more of a hardliner than his father. Isn't that correct? Yes.

So hardline that even some of Iran's leaders thought he was too aggressive. Isn't that correct? That is the intelligence community assessment, yes. Mush Taba, the son is particularly close to the brutal Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and their most hardline commanders, correct? That is the intelligence community assessment. He was involved in ordering violent crackdowns on Iranian protesters, including their murder, correct? Yes.

And we don't know if the son will continue his father's religious ban on developing nuclear weapons. Is that correct? It is unknown at this time. You testified before this committee last year that the elder now deceased Comenei had in 2003 banned the nuclear weapons program, or suspended it, correct? There was a fatwa in place that stated that. And that fatwa remained in place last year when you testified by war with. before this committee, correct? Yes.

And that fatwa remained in place recently, correct? As far as I know it has not been lifted. Yeah, you're aware of no information that would lift that fatwa. I'm not aware of any intelligence reporting that states that. To be clear on the Mojtabah, the son, who has been named to replace him, it is unclear of his status or his involvement. He was injured very severely through one of the Israeli strikes. and so the decision making is unclear about what's happening in the Iranian leadership.

So it's unclear. So we're less certain of the positions of Iranian leadership and their intentions than we were 60 days ago, correct? That's an accurate assessment. And you had Congress member Gothheimer over here saying, by the, that's why this hearing was relatively bipartisan as well. Saying, what are we doing in Iran? Congress member Gothheimer said, so did the IC brief the president on the impacts to the global supply chain? And she's like, yeah, we told them. We told them. Here, play this clip. American people. Director, were you in a meeting to discuss a possible strike on Iran? Congressman, there were several meetings that were held in advance. I'm sure I was in at least some of them. Did the intelligence community briefed

the president on the potential impacts a conflict could have on global supply chains and on oil and gas prices prior to the outbreak of hostilities. Were you in a meeting? Were you in any meetings where that came up? Yes. That is the intelligence community's assessments and those were provided. Director, did the IC, Director Radcliffe, if I can ask this to you. Did the IC brief the president and who would succeed the supreme leader if he was killed

and the likelihood that our placement would be a hardliner? Did the president say it again? Did the I see the president who would succeed the supreme leader if he was killed and the likelihood that our placement would be a hardliner? or could be a hard lender. So to be clear, the president's objectives with respect to Operation Epic Fury did not include regime change. That may be different from what Israel's objectives were, but yes, the president was briefed in

the event that Supreme Leader... That's great. Thank you so much. I'm sorry to cut you off. I just have 20 seconds. Director Patel does a... How about Congress member Barra here play this clip? Aber, did you...

There is no imminent... threat of nuclear breakout. Did you deliver that assessment to the president? I have delivered the intelligence community's assessments to the president. There was no imminent nuclear threat to the United States. There was no evidence of imminence that Iran was going to attack American assets. That was different from anything they've done over four decades. That was going to attack our homeland. There was no imminent threat. But Eminent is defined in the dictionary as something that is about to happen. Not something that's been happening for four decades, not something that is going to happen

three months from now, not something that's going to happen a year from now. Eminent said this is about to happen. Did you deliver that assessment to the president? I deliver the intelligence community's objective analysis of the threats, the severity of those threats and the scope, along with assessments of the different scenarios and context that exists within the Middle East. The president owes it to the American people to go on television, to explain to the American people to the service members

who have died in action serving our country, why we are at war with Iran. He needs to go on television and explain that directly to the American people what the imminent threat was. All right, I want to ask you something. What's the most ridiculous subscription you've ever found buried in your bank statement? I'll tell you mine. I realized I was paying for two streaming services I didn't even use anymore.

and somehow I had duplicate subscriptions to one of them. I kept telling myself I'd go cancel them later, and of course, later never came. That was before I started using Rocket Money. Rocket Money is a personal finance app that helps find and cancel your unwanted subscriptions, monitors your spending, and helps lower your bills so you can grow your savings.

What I love is that it actually shows you every subscription in one place, and if you don't want it, you could cancel right inside the app with just a few taps. No digging through passwords, no sitting on hold. It's simple. It also automatically categorizes your transactions across accounts so you could actually see where your money is going. Dining, shopping, subscriptions, it's eye-opening.

And once you see the patterns, you can set budgets and goals that actually make sense. It feels like having a financial assistant, keeping you honest. Let RocketMoney help you reach your financial goals faster. Join at RocketMoney.com slash MidasTouch. That's rocketmoney.com slash MidasTouch. RocketMoney.com slash MidasTouch, M-E-I-D-A-S-Touch. T-O-U-C-H. Elise Stefonic was getting in on the action.

Congresswoman Stefonic, let's play it. Assessments. Thank you. I also wanted to ask this because this week there was a high-profile resignation of Director of National Counterterrorism Center. Now, I want to be clear from the outset, I've communicated directly with President Trump, my support for Operation Epic Fury, and I was very not only disappointed, but how inappropriate this letter was. And I want to read a statement that,

and get your personal assessment whether you agree or disagree with that. And that's this. Early in this administration, high-ranking Israeli officials and influential members of the American media deployed a misinformation campaign that wholly undermined your America First Platform and pro-war sentiments to encourage a war with Iran. This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed no imminent threat to the United States and that you should strike now. There was a clear path to a swift victory.

This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used. to draw us into a disastrous Iraq war. Now, I cannot say how much I disagree with that statement. Do you agree or disagree with what this letter was put out by former director Kent? He said a lot of things in that letter. Ultimately, we have provided the president with the intelligence assessments, and the president is elected by the American people and makes his own decisions based on the information that's available to him.

But do you agree with, does that sense? statement he made, blaming Israel, concern you? Yes. More over here, an exchange between Democratic Congress member Castro and Tulsi Gabbard. Let's play it. So the death and destruction continues. The economic cost to the United States, to Israel, to the Gulf states, and to the world continues to increase. So I want to ask you, to the best of your knowledge, do you know whether Israel is supportive of the president's call to make a deal with Iran? I don't know the answer to that. I don't know Israel's position on that.

And to what do you attribute Israel's decision to strike Iranian energy infrastructure, despite President Trump's call to keep those facilities off limits? I don't have an answer for that. So they ignored the president. Do you agree with that? I'm not privy to any of their deliberations or what went into their calculus in launching this or other. attacks. I'm not, we are, we are not involved with the, in the operational element of this.

We're providing continuously on a daily basis, the intelligence assessments of the events that are occurring. I guess, I know the FBI can't because they're domestic, but can anybody else at the table provide any insight into that? I guess I'm not sure what the question you're asking, Congressman Castro, I guess a couple things. The goals that the president set out are clearly defined. The DNI related those. What was not included is a goal of the U.S. Well, Director, let me start with this. Let me start with this question. You asked what my question is. Let me reclaim my time, director. Come on. Do you know why Israel

decided to strike that infrastructure despite the fact that the president said it should be off limits? I wouldn't speak for Israel. And what do you? What do you? guys know we're at war what do you guys know let's take that for the record yes let's take it for the record thank you mr chairman and here when john ratcliffe said to be clear the president's objectives for operation epic fury did not include regime change that was just israel here play this clip right here this to you did the i see brief the president who would succeed the supreme leader if he was killed and the likelihood that our placement would be a hardliner Did the IAC brief the president who would succeed the supreme leader if he was killed,

and the likelihood that our placement would be a hardliner, or could be a hardliner? So to be clear, the president's objectives with respect to Operation Epic Fury did not include regime change. That may be different from what Israel's objectives were, but yes, the president was briefed in the event that Supreme Leader... That's great. Thank you so much. I'm sorry to cut you off. I just have 20 seconds. And finally, take a look at Congressmember Cohen, his cross-exam with Gabbard. Let's play it. Director Gabbert, are you familiar with CI-12? I'm not Congressman.

Okay. Let me ask you this question. In the intelligence community's unclassified annual threat assessment from last year, it said, quote, Iran's large conventional forces are capable of inflicting substantial damage to an attacker, executing regional strikes and disrupting shipping, particularly energy supplies to the Strait of Hormuz. It seems the I.C. was entirely correct in its assessment about Iranian retaliation in the strait. Did the I.C.'s assessment about the Iranian capabilities and the straits of Hormuz changed in the past year? No, Congressman.

Does Iran still have the capability of threatened shipping in the Straits of Hormuz with missiles, mines, and small boats? Their capabilities have been largely degraded, but yes, they still have means to threaten passage to the Strait of Hormuz. And how long can they keep the Strait closed? Based on current events, I'd have to get an updated assessment from the intelligence community on that. Did you have an analysis of the impact of a war on global supply change in the price of oil and gas? I believe that assessment may have come from the Department of Treasury or Energy. Treasury or energy. It didn't come through your office.

It came from their element within Department of Energy or Energy. Do you know if the President was briefed on those assessments? I believe so, but I can't confirm. So if he was briefed on those assessments that that was a problem and the Straits of Ormoos could be shut off and that's causing a great problem in the world's economy with oil prices going up to like under $120 or something a barrel

and an effect on all the country's economies, why would the president not take an action to strengthen defense around the strait of Hormuz? All I can say is that the president ultimately is responsible for making the decisions based on the totality of information and intelligence that he has available to him. The intelligence that he has available to him,

that's a scary thought. Well, there you have it, folks. Let me know what you think over there. Hit subscribe. Let's get to, 7 million subscribers and thanks everybody for watching. Want to stay plugged in? Become a subscriber for our substack at Midasplus.com.

You'll get daily recaps from Ron Philkowski, add free episodes of our podcast, and more exclusive content only available at Midasplus.com. Getting ready for a game means being ready for anything. Like packing a spare stick. I like to be prepared. That's why I remember 988, Canada's Suicide Crisis Helpline. It's good to know just in case. Anyone can call or text for free confidential support from a train responder anytime.

988 suicide crisis helpline is funded by the government in Canada.