Retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett analyzes the U.S.-Iran conflict, noting 16 destroyed mine-layers and over 1,200 Iranian deaths amid a Strait of Hormuz blockade causing $3.58 gas prices. While callers debate energy independence and blame corporate greed, Kimmett argues coercive diplomacy via an armada is superior to a ground invasion requiring 700,000 troops. He criticizes past negotiation failures under the JCPOA for lacking verification, warns that Iran's nuclear ambitions necessitate action before weaponization, and suggests reparations if U.S. strikes on schools are confirmed errors. Ultimately, the strategy aims to deter regime change while securing NATO defense pledges without destabilizing Iraq. [Automatically generated summary]
Coming up on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, Axios business reporter Nathan Bome will talk about how U.S. military actions against Iran are impacting gas and oil prices.
Then the Cincinnati Inquirer's Jolene Almendares previews President Trump's visit to Cincinnati and northern Kentucky.
And retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett on the latest in the U.S. and Israel's war with Iran and Trump administration military policies abroad.
WASHINGTON JOURNALS STARTS NOW. GOOD MORNING.
It's Tuesday, March 3rd.
Sorry, it's Wednesday.
The Strait of Hormuz, which normally carries more than 20% of the world's oil, has been effectively shut down for the past 10 days.
President Trump has warned of several severe retaliation if Iran restricts transit further, and markets have been reacting in real time with oil prices spiking and dipping as the conflict widens and uncertainty grows.
New reports indicate Iran may be preparing to deploy naval mines in the strait, raising fresh concerns about how long tanker traffic could remain disrupted and what that means for global supply.
This morning, we want to hear how all of this is affecting you.
Are you concerned about higher gas prices as the conflict escalates?
Call in with your thoughts on that and what you think the U.S. response should be.
Here are the numbers.
Democrats, 202-748-8000.
Republicans, 202748, 8001.
And Independents 202748-8002.
You can send a text to 202-748-8003.
Include your first name in your city-state.
You can also find us on social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN, and X at C-SPANWJ.
Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
It is Wednesday, March 11th.
Let me give you a quick update on the conflict in Iran from the Associated Press.
U.S. says it destroyed 16 mine-laying vessels near the Strait of Hormuz.
It says that the Islamic Republic vowed to block the region's oil exports, saying it would not allow, quote, even a single liter to be shipped to its enemies.
The Pentagon said yesterday about 140 U.S. service members have been wounded in the war, and the vast majority of the injuries were minor.
It says eight U.S. service members suffered severe injuries and seven have been killed.
Two more members of the Iranian women's soccer team were granted asylum in Australia before their teammates departed the country.
And the war has killed at least 1,230 people in Iran, at least 550 in Lebanon, and 12 in Israel, according to officials in those countries.
Well, we are focused on gas prices and the fluctuation in the cost of oil.
Here is White House Press Secretary Caroline Lefflett at the briefing yesterday reassuring Americans that the rise in gas prices is only temporary.
The president and his energy team are closely watching the markets, speaking with industry leaders, and the U.S. military is jarring up additional options following the president's directive to continue keeping the Strait of Hormuz open.
I will not broadcast what those options look like, but just know the President is not afraid to use them.
Rest assured to the American people, the recent increase in oil and gas prices is temporary, and this operation will result in lower gas prices in the long term.
Once the national security objectives of Operation Epic Fury are fully achieved, Americans will see oil and gas prices drop rapidly, potentially even lower than they were prior to the start of the operation.
And we will live in a world where Iran can no longer threaten the United States or our allies with a nuclear bomb.
Well, here is the Energy Secretary, Chris Wright.
He was on CBS's Face the Nation on Sunday, and he also talked about gas prices.
Here he is.
As you know, gasoline prices up 14% in the past week, according to AAA reports.
The national average is $3.45.
We've seen oil prices spike.
How high do you think oil and gas are going to go?
They shouldn't go much higher than they are here because the world is very well supplied with oil.
There's no energy shortage at all in the Western Hemisphere.
The United States is a net exporter of oil, a large net exporter of natural gas.
But refineries in Asia and Europe are seeing an interruption from the normal crude flows.
But there is massive energy stores around the world.
What you're seeing is emotional reactions and fear that this is a long-term war.
This is not a long-term war.
And we are taking your calls.
We're asking how concerned are you about gas prices?
Gas prices have gone up.
Here is the AAA citing that the average today is at $3.57 a gallon, $3.58 almost.
Here's what it looks like over the map of the United States, with the red here being the highest prices, average prices in the United States.
The stark blue down the middle here is the lowest.
This gives you an idea of where it was graphically.
So if you look here, $358 almost.
The current average a year ago, it was $3.08.
A month ago, it was $297.
So here you can take a look at the historical average.
Let's go to phones now to talk to Ed in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, Independent Line.
Good morning, Ed.
Yes, Ed O'Donnell, gas prices.
Wait, you moved, Ed?
Well, I'm running for president.
I'm in different cities every day.
Oh, okay.
Go ahead with the gas and price, the price of gas.
Gas prices and every problem in the world are going to get worse and worse because of what's going on in Iran.
It just shows again that absolute pacifism is the solution.
And Jesus was a pacifist.
And one other thing, these TV evangelists, these clergy, they're not speaking out against war and in favor of absolute pacifism, which they should.
All right.
And Ron on Facebook is not concerned because he drives an EV.
And this is Sergio on Facebook.
He says, I spent $50 on a half of a tank.
That's an issue.
John says that he is concerned.
He says, in addition to the higher cost of the fuel itself, higher fuel prices affect shipping, which affects the cost of goods and services.
Wondering how you feel about that.
And here is what's on the front page of the New York Times.
Trump's war in Iran and rising gas prices collide with midterm agenda.
It says that the attack on Iran has led to a surge in energy prices at a moment when the cost of living is a major issue heading into the fall elections.
Here is Rico in Pittsburgh, Independent Line.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Thanks for taking my call.
Yes.
Thanks for taking my call, she's fancy.
Right outside of Pittsburgh, some places are 392, 378, 370, Up to the 370s, which a week, well, prior to the Iran attack, we were down around 320-some.
Now, I just read in yesterday's paper that the barrel of oil had been over $120 plus, and it's now below $90.
So, is that going to reduce our prices or what?
You know what, Rico, we've got a business reporter from Axios coming, joining us in our next segment.
So, we're going to ask all those questions.
And I hope you stay with us for that.
But, Rico, and our last caller were in Pennsylvania.
That average for that state is $366 a gallon right now.
Here is Senator Chuck Schumer.
He is in, he was on the floor yesterday talking about the price of gas.
The most formidable weapon Iran has right now is the Strait of Hormuz, which today is effectively shut down.
And now, thanks to Donald Trump's lack of foresight, Iran has a new, even more radical, even more hostile supreme leader who will not be inclined to give up leverage over the strait.
That's the one weapon that Iran has where it can be, unfortunately, be successful.
The result?
Oil and gas prices are soaring across the world, including here in America.
A barrel of Brent crude shot over $100 a barrel yesterday.
That got Trump to say his contradictory things to try and bring the price down.
It came down a little, but not much.
The average price of one gallon in the United States is $3.54.
That's a 17% increase since the start of the war.
Yet Donald Trump says, if it rises, it rises, he says.
It doesn't really affect us.
What a clueless thing to say.
Has Donald Trump ever filled his own tank in his life?
Has he any clue of what people go through when the price of gas goes up?
Maybe billionaires like him don't have to worry, but for the rest of us, his war with Iran means more inflation in America.
And not just in gasoline, but airline tickets will go up because of the price of fuel for the airlines.
Food prices will go up because of the price of fertilizer.
It'll cut across the board, as we've seen before when oil prices go up.
Donald Trump is causing chaos in our economy.
Wonder what you think of those comments.
These are the numbers to call us and share your thoughts about gas prices.
Democrats are on 202,748-8000.
Republicans, 202, 748, 8001.
And Independents, 202748, 8002.
The lines are open.
We will take your calls.
This is the New York Times saying, while conflict rages, Trump has few tools to ease oil price.
Paralyzed straight creating a supply shock.
It says as the war in Iran causes oil prices to surge and U.S. gasoline prices to rise, Trump administration officials are searching for ways to ease pain at the pump and fend off a voter backlash.
Yet American presidents have learned a tough lesson over and over since the 1970s.
Once global oil prices start spiking, it can be difficult to shield people from the consequences.
Policymakers have discussed various ideas to reduce gasoline prices at home, including tapping the strategic reserves, restricting U.S. exports, and suspending gasoline taxes.
But unless the Iran conflict ends, quick fixes will likely be hard to come by.
Julian, Stamford, Connecticut, Republican, what do you think?
Good morning, Mimi.
How are you?
Good.
What I think every time I see you, right, you are the queen of doom for Trump.
He's done so many things, so many things he's done, but you keep hammering about all the bad things that happen.
I'm sure you forgot about when Biden was president, gas prices were almost $5 with no war, no war.
Okay.
And now you got all these Democrats complaining about food prices, gas prices, food tripled under Biden, housing doubled under Biden.
Everything doubles.
And yet, every time I see you, you keep hammering on things that you know, the things that are bad.
So, your perspective, Julian, is at least gas prices are still better than they were at the height of the Biden administration.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah, go ahead.
That's not what I'm saying, Mimi.
That's not what I'm saying.
Yeah.
What I'm saying is that the prices tripled under Biden.
And these Democrats used to say, oh, it's corporate greed.
Oh, it's temporary.
It's this, it's that.
But now it's doom, doom when Trump is there.
These prices are going to go down.
So that means both administrations are saying the same thing, right?
So under Biden, it was like this is temporary.
It's going to go back down.
And that's what the Trump administration is saying now.
This is temporary.
It's going to go back down.
Not a big deal.
Yeah, but Trump really means it.
Okay.
And besides, there's a war going on now.
I don't know if you knew that.
Okay.
And that's why oil prices are up.
Okay.
But he's going to fix that.
He's going to fix that.
How?
What do you think is going to happen, Julian?
Mimi, Mimi.
There's so much oil in the world right now.
There's so much oil everywhere.
Venezuela, everywhere.
We're an oil-rich country.
Do you really think he's going to keep these prices high like this?
He does what.
How long do you think they'll be high?
When do you think they'll come down?
Give me a time frame.
By Memorial Day, they're going to be about 220, 210.
I guarantee you, Mimi.
And I will call you and remind you.
Okay.
Call me around Memorial Day, okay?
Don't forget.
It's always a pleasure speaking to you, Mimi.
Always.
Don in Iowa, Independent Line.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Political Peril and Seesawing Costs00:16:07
About these oil prices.
It's solved because of big business.
Somebody's pocketing the money.
It's been that way for a long time.
Even against Biden was in office.
It's all about just big business trying to scam the little guys and things that the Democrats are.
So, Don, I mean, what do you mean by that?
Because the price of oil itself is going up, right?
So it went up to like 120, went back down to like 80.
All that affects the price of gas.
It's not necessarily the corporations just trying to make a bigger profit, right?
No, it's all because of the insurance companies.
The insurance companies would not cancel their insurance policies.
The oils would flow.
It's all because of the big insurance companies that are doing this.
And how much is the Democrats processing from this?
It seems like when you get the Democrats in there, all they talk about is how much the Republicans are doing stuff.
But when it comes to reality, there is No source of they're trying to get their money themselves, like Pelosi, manipulating the stocks and stuff.
This isn't just another way for the Democrats to profit from it.
And to me, that's all they're in there for is profit.
All right, Don.
This is what Steve says on Facebook.
He says, not at all.
He's not concerned at all.
This is a temporary thing.
It's not related to production and demand.
It's just until companies start going through the Strait of Hormuz again.
It will likely bring prices even lower than they were before.
And Bob in Missouri sent a text: I have stopped going anywhere while gas prices are this high.
They were $3.29 yesterday.
Now the economy hurts more than it should.
And Molly says, I was concerned about gas prices two years ago, but the price of oil is already going down.
I don't mind paying more to protect America and our soldiers.
Chucky, Richmond, Virginia, Democrat, you're on the air.
Yes, I'm concerned about high gas prices because not just gas prices are high.
Everything is higher.
And why are we in Iran in the first place?
Because the Edstein files.
That's why we're in Iran.
Because we got no business being in Iran in the first place, man.
What do they do to us?
Absolutely nothing.
You want democracy in Iran?
We don't have democracy in America.
Are you crazy?
Come on, Trump and his cohorts are wrecking not only the United States economy, but the whole world.
We need to do something about this.
And this is the front page of the Washington Post this morning.
Oil jolt triggers GOP anxiety.
It says political peril and seesawing prices.
HexHat says Iran's mullahs are, quote, desperate.
It says President Donald Trump was eager to point to gas prices in his State of the Union speech last month as he touted his administration's progress on the economy.
Gasoline, quote, gasoline, which reached a peak of over $6 a gallon in some states under my predecessor, it was quite honestly a disaster, is now below $2.30 a gallon in most states.
Trump boasted minutes into his nearly two-hour address framing his party's message heading into the midterms.
Two weeks later, his war with Iran threatens to undermine that pitch.
Oil prices Monday spiked to levels not seen since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, while prices at the pump jumped nearly 50 cents higher than a week ago.
Price per barrel jumped to almost $120 at one point Monday before dropping to under $90 by the end of the day, as Trump suggested, the war with Iran could end soon.
That's the Washington Post.
And here is Jim in Ohio, Independent Line.
Yes, hi.
Good morning, Cheese fan.
I'm calling about the gas prices and the oil and the economy.
If Trump would take care of the people here in the United States and help them out, like he was supposed to send out that $2,000 rebate check to help people, people would be better off.
That would help pay these prices.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
We are taking your calls on how concerned are you about higher gas prices on the Iran conflict?
Here is Harry in Mount Lebnon, Pennsylvania.
Rising energy prices are great.
They're a real break on global heating.
Who isn't for that?
My guiding philosophy is simply this: any day above ground.
Thanks, Mimi.
And this is Catherine.
Yes, with gas prices high and rising, this will affect everything that needs to be transported.
Our garbage company just announced a gas surcharge.
Are we winning yet?
And this is Lou in New Jersey.
Good morning, Mimi.
I am not concerned at all.
It is only temporary.
Iran's dangerous agenda to the world must be destroyed.
Let's talk to David in Louisiana, Republican.
Hi, David.
Good morning, Mimi.
Yes, ma'am.
The first thing Joe Biden did when he got in office was shut down oil and gas.
He shut down the pipeline in Texas.
He shut down all getting pumped out of the Gulf over here outside Louisiana.
And everything he did hurt the economy.
And I didn't hear none of the Democrats complaining about that.
So, you know, it's going to come down.
It's going to take a little while.
Once things get going good, they're going to come back once the ships are coming through the channels.
That's what's really caused the rise in fuel because the ships quit, couldn't come through the channels with the war coming on.
America is going to try and protect those ships coming through there, and all prices are going to come down.
And after that, gas is going to come down.
It's just going to take a little while because you do have corporate greed with the gas people.
You know, the gas goes up 20 cents a day.
When it starts going down, it goes down two cents a day or two cents a week.
That's corporate greed there from the gas people selling the gas.
We got gas people over here.
When it goes up, it goes up 20 cents at a time.
But it comes down when it starts coming down a penny or two pennies at a time.
That's corporate greed.
All prices are coming down now.
And, you know, back, I remember when I was back in school in this early, what, 70s and 80s, corporate greed again.
It was all companies talking about, oh, there was an oil shortage.
There was never an oil shortage.
Here we are in 2025 or 26.
You know, we had an oil shortage, they said, back in the 70s and 80s.
And it was corporate greed then.
Well, David, let's hear from the Speaker of the House.
He was talking about gas prices and also saying that he thinks this is just going to be temporary.
The hostilities and the military operation in Iran is limited in its scope.
The president has said as recently as several hours ago that it will be over soon.
It's been remarkably successful.
I think I saw the number over 5,000 targets struck in that country.
The leadership of the country, the regime, has been turned over to a next generation.
Who knows how long that will go?
But they're holding the people back.
They've killed tens of thousands of their own citizens.
And importantly, for America, the reason this is in America's interest is because they were going to strike us.
And they have been at war with us.
Iran declared war on us for the last four decades.
They said they wanted to wipe Israel off the face of the map, and they wanted to hit us as the great Satan.
They've killed American citizens.
They have fired upon our service members over there and our installations enough.
But I think that this current operation was, by design, limited in scope and in mission.
I think the mission is being achieved, is nearly completed.
And the commander-in-chief himself said in the last 24 hours they will come to a close.
So gas prices will readjust after that.
You know, most of this is because of the Strait of the Hormuz.
The Strait of Hormuz has been closed by the regime down there, but it will be reopened and it will take a couple of weeks, but gas prices will come back down.
Remember, they were down almost two and a half dollars a gallon on a national average under President Trump, when under Biden they were at almost $5 a gallon.
So this is a temporary blip in an extraordinary trend of a return to American energy dominance.
The evidence speaks for itself and it will continue to.
That's the Speaker of the House saying it's a temporary blip that prices will come down in a couple weeks.
We're getting your thoughts on that.
Robert, Washington, D.C., Independent Line, good morning.
Yeah, thank you.
Thank you for taking my call.
I think that everybody has gotten selective amnesia.
And this is a test that even you guys at C-SPAN, you fail this one.
And here's the question: the test.
When was the first time you paid $5 a gallon of gas in America?
Okay.
Anything else, Robert?
No, no, no.
I'm going to ask you the question because I got some more I'd like to say, but I'm going to ask you a question.
When was the first time that you remember that we paid $5 a gallon of gas in America?
When do you remember that, Robert?
Well, that was in 2004, 2005, under George W. Bush and the war in Afghanistan, where the prices rose.
And I remember seeing gas prices in D.C. at $8 a gallon.
That was like 20-some years ago.
Even when Biden was in office at the time, that was like about at least 15 years plus prior to that.
That was under the Republican administrations when gas prices were trending on a higher up.
But now we got the elephant at the room.
Gas prices now are under what is called AI, which means artificial inflation.
So these have been gummed up by the war.
And then we forgot about that when energy had been, prices have been solved like about at least 140 years ago under Nikola Tesla.
We're not using none of Tesla's inventions.
The whole world could have been saved.
We wouldn't have to be going through all of this.
And then people don't realize what oil is.
The oil lubricates the tectonic plates on this planet.
Once you get that oil out of there, it's impossible to put it back.
We have to lubricate the earth.
And now you're going to see more earthquakes, more thunderstorms, more extreme weathers because of that.
We're using Earth's natural resources, but in the wrong way.
All right, Robert, let's talk to Ali next in Bristol, Virginia.
Democrat, good morning, Ali.
You're on the air.
Good morning.
I think Republicans need to suck this one up.
I mean, we went through the same thing when Biden was in power.
Gas prices went up and they beat the hell out of the Democrats.
And now the table sets on.
President Trump took us to war, and this is the reason why gas prices are going up.
And everybody, just like Biden was saying, it's going to come down.
It's just green.
And the same thing is going on now.
Republicans, yes, it's going to come down.
Just stop crying, please.
Okay, thank you.
Let's talk to Tom next in Manchester, Kentucky.
Republican, you're on the air, Tom.
Yes, ma'am.
I'm just a resurrector.
And I'm going to be, I guess, I don't know.
Hopefully, I'm not sarcastic, but I recently were yours.
And I keep calling about the gas crisis.
I was an owner operator, trucker, for a previous law enforcement officer, and I bought a truck, went on the road.
Obama was in the office.
It went from about $550 to fill up on my truck to $1,000 on my fuel.
It put me out of business.
Then there come Donald Trump.
He just stabilized the price.
Then here come old Sleepy Joe, obedient-eyed Biden.
He's right back up with him, and then he let all these illegals come in.
Now, you can't even find them.
Mom and Pop restored them working the Indians.
They bought them all out by the help of the government.
Now, I've got one more thing to say, so I'm not concerned about prices.
They play politics with this, and the Democrats say something, and then long come Joe and say something that's derogatory to what Blow just said.
Then another thing: I'd like to know: how long were you going to have a job after Donald Trump goes out of office?
You guys won't have nothing to talk about.
Then on C-SPAN, the editing on C-SPAN.
I think we're going to always have plenty to talk about in American politics.
Keith, Anaheim, California, Independent.
You're next.
Good morning, Mimi.
I'm sorry.
What was my name that you pronounced?
I've got Keith.
Is that right?
That's my middle name.
I like that.
My mom wanted me to be Keith, but my dad won it.
It was Kurt.
Okay.
Well, whichever name you prefer, you can go right ahead.
Thank you.
Here's my take on it: gas pricing and food.
I boil it down to three things in life have to happen at once, and you have to be prepared and you have to be ready for a particular outcome.
An opportunity has to rise, and then you have to seize the moment.
I also look at it in respect to a bully on the block.
I remember when I was a kid growing up, you either put up with it if you can't overcome him, or you're lucky enough to move and you leave and you have a whole new life, or you stand up and you face the aggressor.
I think the United States, with the help of Donald Trump, and it could be somebody else in office, the military, we're just prepared for this.
We're going to make sure that nobody bad takes over, control the situation, hurt others.
So I think it's going to be painful.
Yes, change will occur.
Good things will come from this, Mimi.
Military Force vs. Policy Disguise00:15:37
I really believe in it.
And I wish everybody the best out there.
God bless America.
Keith, when you say we're going to make sure that nobody bad takes over there, so what are you thinking about the new supreme leader?
I don't know him personally, but I think if you, Pete, when you say you're going to do something, you need to be taken at your word if you have the means of doing it.
And if you want to say death to the United States, death is real.
Death to others, period.
Man, you're projecting it.
And I think you've, again, the bully on the street.
If you sit back and you wait, you can't get rid of evil, Amy, but you can overcome it with good.
And do you think that's what the administration is doing now in Iran?
I think that's what the United States is trying to do is to try to keep a bad person from making things worse.
And it's unfortunate.
I'm sorry it has to be that way.
Us humans, we only have so much intellect and knowledge.
And yeah, we do repeat ourselves once in a while.
But I feel really good that we're going to have some pain.
We're going to have a little bit of suffering.
It's unfortunate for those American soldiers that have died.
My father was in the service, and he said, Son, don't join the service, don't go into politics.
And I'm thankful that I didn't do either, but others have, and God bless them for their efforts.
It's going to be okay, Mimi.
My step, my father-in-law used to say, Everything's going to be fine and dandy.
That's what's going to happen, Mimi.
It's going to take closer.
I'll bet you by July, by July of this year, not just because of the 250th, but things are going to get better.
And I don't want to hear, I told you so.
I'm not going to say that.
I hope and pray that things will be better for us, but it only comes from standing up and doing the right thing.
And that's what's going on right now, Mimi.
That's my opinion.
Okay, got it.
And Keith is in Anaheim, California.
The price of gas, average price of gas, according to AAA, is $5.33 in that state.
That's the highest in the country.
Here's Diane in St. Paul, Minnesota, Democrat.
Good morning, Diane.
Good morning, America.
And what I want to say about it, I lived through when my gas here in Minnesota was $5.
So it's not, really, I expected this.
When they talk about going into Iran, I think they don't understand the culture.
See, those people over there are not going to overtake their new leader.
They're not going to do that.
They are not going to be west.
You have to understand that culture.
That culture has been there ever since ages.
And then what America did in 1948 is went over there and pulled the Israelis in the middle of them.
And didn't even ask the people.
Nothing about it.
It wasn't done that way.
America did that.
And the people, the UA and all that, they did that.
What did they expect but to have some wars for 47 years?
And they're going to have some more.
Because I remember after Afghanistan, the people came home, the soldiers came home from Afghanistan.
And we're not getting all the news.
See, the one thing you need to know, Iran took and sank one of our ships.
Do you hear anything about this?
No, you didn't hear anything about that.
It was the family of the girl that came from Minnesota that died over there that told that.
And when they have American soldiers that's been injured, that's going into Chelsea hospitals.
We ain't heard that.
See, they don't tell you everything.
That war ain't going as great as they think it is, but they want us to believe that.
And I never wanted there to be a war because after a while, you're going to have all them Arabs fighting because they're not going to let the Americans come in here and the Israelites and take their oil.
That's what this is all about.
Nothing else.
I'm going to survive it.
I got God on my side.
See, I ain't greedy.
I don't read y'all put whoever put Donald Trump in office because you're talking about the stock market.
Most Americans don't have no stock markets.
They got to suffer.
All right, Diane, this is Walt on Facebook.
He says, Yeah, I'm tired of being squeezed every which way.
The administration told me they were bringing prices down, not spending multi-billions on Israeli wars.
And Matthew says, Nope, as long as it stays below $4, and like the previous administration, I will be fine with it.
After much more higher gas prices under Biden without efforts to make America safer, not concerned at all.
I will gladly pay the extra quarter for my grandchildren's safety.
It's a small price to pay.
That's Kelly on Facebook.
And here is Harold, a Republican in Johnson City, Illinois.
Good morning.
Good morning.
I just want to mention that I'm 84 years old and just my only income is a half decent social security check and I'm more than willing to pay an increase in gas because what Democrats are always saying, he never had a plan and never, you know, so on like that.
Well, I just want to mention that we probably got how many bases in the surrounding countries around Iran with thousands of soldiers there.
And if they had preempted, it wouldn't have just been drones.
It would have been high, high-density missiles with very strong warheads on them that go way up in the atmosphere and come down.
And there would have been tens of thousands of soldiers killed if they had preempted.
And thank God that unlike Hillary Clinton that stood at the pulpit and said Iran can't have a nuclear bomb and Biden and the other presidents said the same thing.
And if they had only attacked, they'd be having the same problem on the Strait of Hormoz with gas prices going up until they finished it.
And we just got to live with it until it's finished.
It's a well-worth thing to do.
Thank you very much.
All right, Harold.
This is Jason Eugene, Oregon, Democrat.
You're on the air, Jason.
Good morning, Mimi, and I admire your ability to suffer fools.
The goals of this conflict are removal of the theocracy, control of the hydrocarbons, and distracting the public from the criminal records of President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu.
And I don't think these goals are going to be met.
Even if they are, it's still going to be a while before the powers that ensure shipping to the Straits of Hormuz have somebody in Iran to have assurances that they're not going to strike.
And 80% of the hydrocarbons, or at least 20% of the hydrocarbons of this planet, go through that strait.
And not only fuel prices will go up, but fertilizer prices as well as food.
So, Jason, what do you think of the U.S. Navy escorting tankers?
Are you still there?
Yeah, I'm still here.
Yeah, yeah.
What do you think of that?
You think that's a good idea?
It's not a question of military force.
It's a question of financial force.
If there's not going to be insurance moving, insuring the shipping, no amount of naval presence is going to assure the people who have stakes in these movements are going to comply.
I mean, we need somebody in Iran to tell the rest of the world, yes, the war is over, we're not going to hit you anymore.
But with a new supreme leader, his wife, his father, is just killed.
I don't think he's going to find forgiveness.
I mean, and the world's going to hate us for this.
Food prices are going to go up everywhere.
And dismantling of the U.S.AID has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives.
I don't think we have a bright future for us.
And I'd like to thank the MAGGIT Republicans for destroying our country.
All right, Jason.
Let's hear from Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair, General Kane.
He was with Defense Secretary Hegseth talking about the possibility of escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz.
If tasked to escort, we'll look at the range of options to set the military conditions to be able to do that.
And then like we always do with every potential mission, come to the Secretary and the President with both what are the resources required, what is the command and control required, and what are the risks, and how do we mitigate those risks.
So we're looking at a range of options there, and we'll figure out how to solve problems as they come to us.
But I would reiterate also to add to what the chairman said, the truth the president posted last night about that, saying if Iran does anything to stop the flow of oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America 20 times harder than they have been hit thus far.
He goes on to say death, fire, and fury will reign upon them.
You've seen the truth and read it.
But he takes very seriously the condition of that straits.
We have capabilities that no other nation on earth has, and we're certainly working with our energy partners across the administration to control for that.
That's part of that scoping of this.
The world needs to understand this doesn't have, this isn't intended to be, nor is it something that will expand.
We know exactly what we're attempting to achieve here, scoped properly, and the American people can count on that.
What do you think of that?
Here's Ken in Washington, D.C., Independent.
Hi, Ken.
Good morning.
How are you?
Good.
Great.
So, yeah, this is, I completely agree with the previous caller.
This is terrible policy.
This is also U.S. policy disguised.
Well, actually, what it is, colonialism.
And again, it's control of oil, but also at the hands of a complete another madman.
I've heard recently a lot of Republican pundits or whomever, they start talking about 47 years ago.
But you should start your journey back into 1953 when the United States and Britain together started a coup d'état against Iran to replace their leadership just so that they could get more oil and more access to it.
So this is nothing new.
It's par for the course.
So Ken, what do you think of the argument that this is an evil regime?
It's bent on getting a nuclear weapon.
There's no amount of negotiation that's going to change their mind about that.
I mean, we could delay it, but it'll always be the case that they will be adversarial to the United States.
What do you think of the concept of we need to take care of this now before it becomes an even bigger problem?
Well, the interesting thing, I guess, just like these issues, we also have the issues of debt as well, and it becomes a we thing as opposed to a him thing.
We should change that plurality because I don't think the vast majority of Americans would particularly want this.
Because are we going to send their soldiers into battle and into combat and things like that, let alone the ticket?
I mean, your grandchildren's grandchildren are already in debt based on these actions.
But the money isn't quite as important because you can't take it with you when you leave.
I guess, you know, the potential threat is irrelevant when you instigate this type of atmosphere of dissent.
And the United States has a CIA for a reason.
The United States has hundreds of bases throughout the world for a particular reason.
This is what we do.
We are incredibly dangerous, and we won't hold back.
And the thing is, you want to go through the Strait of Hormuz.
Well, I don't think it'll be the Iranians attacking because the Israelis attacked us in 1967 with the USS Liberty and nothing was done about it.
So I don't trust me being afraid of what if is like being afraid of Friday the 13th, which is this Friday.
So that's just, it's a terrible notion to put in front of us that the only way to accomplish peace is through death.
You don't change regimes with missiles and bombs.
It strengthens people's resolve.
And when the United States was formed, supposedly, it was supposed to be for resisting against taxes and things like that.
Although this nation was formed by a few white wealthy people that didn't want to pay more taxes, nothing has changed.
All right, let's go to Pittsburgh on the line for Republicans.
Patrick, you're on the air.
You know, I've never heard more disinformation, more inaccurate disinformation when it comes to this military operation that the United States and Israel are engaged in, which is breathtaking, which is literally breathtaking on any scale.
Who would have imagined that the Iranian government would be on the verge of collapse?
There is no energy.
They're running out of energy in Tehran.
The infrastructure has been obliterated in a timeframe that has been so compressed and is so magnificent.
I'm so proud of the Israelis.
I'm so proud of our military and what they've achieved.
And I'm vehemently against war.
I've made it very clear on this news broadcast that I'm very much against this war.
But there are realities, particularly when we're talking about the evolution of drone technology, that we have wiped it out.
And for C-SPAN and political actors in the democratic state.
So, Patrick, sorry, I want to ask you something about when you said that they're on the verge of collapse.
This is on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, and I want to get your opinion.
This is what it says.
Grip on Strait lets Iran export more oil than before the war.
Tehran is conducting business as usual, while others in the region cut their production.
So it looks like what it says in this article that Iran is exporting more oil through the Strait of Hormuz than before the war, showing it is in control of a strategic waterway that it has closed off to the rest of the region's oil producers.
What do you think of that?
So there's a converse technological reality and a reality in this country.
We are producing record amounts of oil.
Since the president has taken office, he has fast-tracked unprecedented amounts of oil that are now being pulled out of the ground.
Within a very short period of time with robotics and advanced artificial intelligence technology, we are going to pull even greater amounts of oil.
I have patent applications in the U.S. PTO pipeline that will help identify underwater resources and identify and locate them strategically.
So this absurd notion that the Iranians are somehow benefiting from this annihilation that this insane government, which was literally on the verge of establishing two things.
Distraction Buys Time on Files00:05:04
Number one, they were ready to produce nuclear weapons.
And number two, they were producing so many drones that the Russian Federation has been offset in the Ukrainian theater.
So technologically, you are seeing a paradigm shift like— Sorry, Patrick, going back to the price of oil, since you said that there's so much oil, that we've got so much oil, we're producing so much oil, then why did the price go up?
Or is this simply like what the speaker said, it's a blip and it'll come.
So when will it come back down?
What do you think?
So based upon the securing of the strait itself, we're looking at a timeline of weeks at most.
But we still need the strait.
In other words, we do not have enough global supply to bring the price down by itself?
We are literally on that precipice of literally becoming we were completely energy independent when Trump was on the verge of winning the last election.
So when you're looking at the technological extraction of petrochemicals in this country and around the world, The paradigm's going to shift so radically because we have all new technologies, we have advanced artificial intelligence, and as an expert in robotics, I can tell you this right now, that is the game changer.
All right, Patrick, we'll talk about that another time.
Here's Linda, Mississippi.
We lost Linda.
Here's Robert in Greenville, Texas, Independent Line.
Go ahead, Robert.
Good morning.
I want to kind of take your show a little off tangent here, just a bit.
I think all this kind of really began back in July with our strikes on their nuclear facilities.
Great distraction.
Oh, boy, that was a great distraction that led up to, you know, the government shut down in September based on the fact that there was a vote to, well, there wasn't a vote.
They were one short of a vote to force the government to release the Epstein files.
Okay, that took us another month, month and a half.
We got through that.
And then we progressed into healthcare.
There's another great distraction, which bought them a little more time on the Epstein files.
And then we got to Venezuela right at the point where the files got released a month and a half later than they should have by law.
And all this whole mess is, and I'm so sorry to even think that minds could work this way, especially in government, the people that we entrust.
It's all been one big distraction to try and buy time on bringing people forth, letting them face the music, and talking about the Epstein files.
And viewing some of these individuals, and I'm sure there's a half a dozen or more in Congress that know their names are in there.
You know, there's plenty evidence of that.
All right.
But I think this is all just a big distraction.
All right.
And let's talk to Roger next in Abilene, Kansas.
Democrat, you're on the air, Roger.
Yes, I guess I'm calling in about fuel prices, which I guess was what you were bringing up.
Yesterday I filled up with gasoline for $2.48.
And I asked the attendant what guess is quite a bit cheaper today.
He said it dropped overnight, 25 cents.
He said we have large inventories on hand.
He said we had to go through this period of time where we check our inventory to make sure we have plenty of inventory, but we had to raise our price just to protect ourselves before we got this inventory figured out.
Why they say we have inflation I still personally, and I've brought this up many times when I would call in the border, a million people coming into our country raise the price of everything.
Inflation Fears from Border Crisis00:08:56
They all drive a car.
They all live in a home.
They all spend money.
And that's what's been a lot of our inflation, I believe.
But as far as the fuel prices, I'm in agriculture.
I do notice prices of fuel.
And Joe Biden, we had very high prices of fuel.
We had very high prices of fertilizer.
Our fertilizer prices have gone up also.
So it's just something that we try to try to live with, and you try to be one step ahead of it as we can.
I'll just close quickly with one thing.
Everybody that listens, I'm sure, have some type of religion they think about.
I think everybody could go to their church and get a five-minute devotion to do every morning.
And I think it would help everyone's outlook on life.
Thank you.
All right, Roger.
This is Time magazine that says this.
Iran makes veiled threat to Trump, quote, be careful not to get eliminated.
That is a top Iranian security official made a thinly veiled threat against Donald Trump's life on Tuesday after the U.S. president warned of massive strikes against Iran if it blocked oil shipments to the Strait of Hormuz.
It says, this is Ali Larenjani, the head of the Iranian National Security Council, posted on X, quote, Iran doesn't fear your empty threats.
Even those bigger than you couldn't eliminate Iran.
Be careful not to get eliminated yourself.
This is Alfred calling us from Charlotte, North Carolina, Independent Line.
Hi, Alfred.
Hey, sorry, how you doing?
Good.
I was calling, and I was saying that most of the problems we have in the Middle East has been created by the United States with the, you know, with the overthrow of the Iranian President Mohammad Mezada with the British Patrolum.
And now we had a good Democratic president in there, and then that led to the Alitollah committee.
And we have created that problem with Iran.
Iran is going to be a problem for years to come because we keep creating problems in the Middle East when we go against everything that we stand for.
That's all I want to say.
This is the Washington Examiner.
Trump says, U.S. destroyed 10 inactive Iranian mine-laying vessels.
The article says that the president said yesterday U.S. forces had destroyed 10 Iranian vessels he described as inactive but capable of laying naval mines as tensions escalate over the security of the Strait of Hormuz.
It says the announcement came after the president said there were no reports of Iran laying such mines, but threatened military actions, quote, at a level never seen before.
Taking your calls for another few minutes, let's talk to Newman in San Antonio, Line for Democrats.
Good morning.
Morning.
Yes, good morning.
A minute ago, I was sitting here listening to some gentleman calling in when you asked him the question.
If we are so independent, why are our gas prices so high?
And he couldn't answer that.
He kept going to the state of Hamas, to Hamus.
And I'm still designed to these people, and I'm listening to other people talking about gas prices, this and that.
Don't you know gas prices cause the price of everything else to go up?
And I'm just listening to some of these people calling in.
Every morning, I listen to all of y'all like a religion.
And I'm listening.
I used to get mad at y'all, but I'm listening to when people call in.
I say, man, where do some of these people get these facts they claim from?
Like right now, I had something to say to you.
I'm so stunned with listening to some of these crazy people calling in when you ask them, and they'll answer your question.
I said, when are you going to answer the question?
They want me to ask you, if we're so independent, why will prices so high then if we have so much oil?
And I'm still waiting on somebody to give me that answer.
All right.
Thank you.
Maybe one of our other callers will give you that answer.
Here's Barb in Illinois.
I am concerned about higher gas prices due to the Iran conflict since it does not appear to be ending anytime soon.
And Holt in Ohio says, I am concerned about oil prices.
Here in Ohio, we went from 243 to 348.
But the truth is the United States can't produce oil for less than $70 a barrel.
This war was started to raise the price to above 70.
It also works to remove excess oil off the market.
Republican supporters are blind to the truth.
Here's Andy in Ohio, line for Republicans.
Good morning, Andy.
Good morning.
I'd just like to say that I understand how the price of fuel raised, but it went from, like the lady said, $243 in Ohio to $348.
Well, that I understand because all the bombing and planes and everything else, but it dropped from $119 a barrel down to $80 a barrel.
And the price of fuel in Ohio went down six cents.
Now, somebody's gouging somebody.
And why aren't they going after these oil companies to lower their prices?
Let's talk to Franklin next, Washington, D.C., Independent Line.
Good morning.
Hi, thanks for taking my call.
Yeah, I didn't want to waste my monthly call on this topic, but it's difficult listening to everybody sort of arguing over the prices at their local pumps.
They're just sort of missing the big picture.
So I just want to offer a couple perspectives for people to think about.
I mean, while we argue about the war aims and what might bring this to an end, I mean, just keep in mind, you know, Iran, whatever you think of it, whatever you think of the justice of this cause here, they've been planning for this for longer than, you know, 79 years, a lot longer than that.
I mean, the idea of the reason that Netanyahu has tried to drag no less than four different presidents into this, and nobody's been willing to go along.
I mean, the idea of Straight of Hormuz and what they would do, everybody knew that they would do this.
And there's never been a major disruption to oil prices that hasn't been followed by a global recession.
I think that's where we're headed.
And the last thing that I think is just important to keep in mind as everybody continues to talk about, well, you know, it'll be over soon.
It'll be over soon.
Even if Trump announced right now in the middle of this show that he declared victory and says it's all over.
We won.
We're out of air.
Netanyahu and Israel, they have completely different war aims.
And a civil war and a major disruption in Iran that turns Iran into Syria is entirely in their interest.
And it's obviously not beyond their will or means to do.
Look at what we've just witnessed in Gaza.
Look at what Israel, the march to war that Israel's been on in the last 20 years.
So I don't mean not one of those people who wants to blame everything on Israel, but I think if you just look at the objective facts, we're not in the driver's seat on this thing.
Even if we completely pull out, Israel will continue to bomb Iran.
They'll continue to start bombing civilian targets.
They'll start leveling the city.
It'll disrupt the region.
And Iran will continue to choke the straight of hormuz.
They don't need a Navy.
They don't need an air force for that.
They have asymmetric things, not even drones, just tiny little mines and gows with explosives in it that they've been using since the 80s.
This is not a short-term thing.
And so everybody, oh, well, the price is down 20 cents from yesterday.
Yeah, I would look at bigger picture things and I would start saving some money, everybody, because this is not going away.
Trump has no plan for this.
And this is going to get way worse before it gets better.
All right, Franklin.
And that's our last call to share with you.
This is from Axios.
Russia and oil exporters are winning the Iran war.
It says that the market mechanisms are perhaps obvious here.
Student Wins Fair Pay Documentary00:02:55
Higher oil prices are good for nations that sell oil.
Well, later on the Washington Journal, we'll have retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett.
He joins us for a closer look at combat operations so far in Iran.
But first, after the break, we'll continue our conversation on rising oil and gas prices with Axios business reporter Nathan Bome.
That's right after the break.
Stay with us.
Lights, cameras, impact.
To celebrate the 250th anniversary since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, thousands of students across America started writing and filming for this year's C-SPAN Student Cam documentary competition.
Nearly 4,000 students from 38 states and Washington, D.C. created documentaries examining themes from American history, exploring rights and freedoms rooted in the foundational document, or tackling modern-day issues from the economy to immigration, criminal justice, education, and healthcare.
They researched, they interviewed experts, and they told powerful stories, exploring the enduring impact of the Declaration of Independence.
And now it's time to announce the top winners of Student Cam 2026.
The middle school first prize goes to Harper Hayden and Helena de la Hussé of Correa Middle School in San Diego, California.
For documentary, This is What Democracy Looks Like, about free speech and the No Kings movement.
The High School Eastern Division First Prize goes to Kessler Dickerson and Charlotte Ligga from Millbrook Magnet High School in Raleigh, North Carolina for Roots of Freedom: The Struggles and Tensions of Rural American Agriculture, about farmers and government policies that impact food production.
In the high school Central Division, Benjamin Curian of Oman Tangi Liberty High School in Powell, Ohio, won first prize for A Right to Health about healthcare policy.
And in the high school Western Division, first prize goes to Danaya Safi and Juhi Pari from Indercom High School in Sacramento, California for Dreamers Deferred, the American Dream on Hold about Immigration Policy and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.
And we're happy to announce that Student Cam 2026 Grand Prize winner earning $5,000 is Irena Holbrook from Troy Athens High School in Troy, Michigan for her documentary, The Pursuit of Fair Pay, about the impact of name, image, and likeness, known as NIL, on college sports.
And out of almost 4,000 students who participated this year, you've won $5,000 in this year's grand prize.
Congratulations.
Thank you.
Want to see their amazing films?
Watch all 150 award-winning documentaries at studentcam.org and catch the top 21 winners airing this April on C-SPAN.
C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
Washington Journal continues.
Regional Supply Limits Gas Relief00:15:01
Welcome back to Washington Journal to continue our conversation about gas and oil prices as a result of the Iran conflict.
Joining us is Nathan Bome.
He's business reporter at Axios.
Nathan, welcome to the program.
Thank you for having me.
So first tell us about how much and what kind of oil and gas are going are supposed to go through the Strait of Hormuz and what's the current situation?
Well about 20% of the world's supply of oil ends up going through this very small passageway out of the Persian Gulf.
And so that's one in five oil barrels in the world, which may not sound like a lot, but that's enough to completely shift the market for oil prices.
And it's a global market.
So even if we're not necessarily taking any oil from that particular part of the world, it will affect the price that we pay because we end up having to supply oil to the rest of the world.
And this is a market that essentially is completely fluid, ends up costing us a lot more at the pump and in other areas of life as well.
So explain why our prices go up given that we have a lot of oil and that we're an exporter of oil.
Well it is tricky because the U.S. is energy independent in the sense that we do technically produce enough oil to supply ourselves.
That's really more of a theoretical thing than anything else in the sense that if there was some world conflict in which we had to supply all the oil to ourselves and keep it for ourselves, we could do that.
But this is a global market and the shippers and the suppliers that actually make this oil and send it to the rest of the world, they're operating on a global price.
So the price is set on the global markets and their oil companies are going to sell it at that price whether we want them to or not.
And explain how it works with oil companies and the profits that they make.
Do their profits stay the same so they make the same regardless of the price of oil or do they make more?
I'd say as a general rule of thumb this is good news for the oil companies.
They like higher prices and scarcity is not a terrible thing when it comes to the oil industry.
They're not going to necessarily be thrilled with this though because they also don't want disruption to their oil fields and oil refineries throughout the world if that is to if that were to happen as a result of this.
So you know the oil companies are going to make higher profits.
There's no doubt about it.
And Israel has been hitting oil facilities inside Iran.
Does that impact the price of oil or is that a very localized regional thing?
No I think it will because Iran is still a really significant player in the oil industry.
Certainly not what it was in the 1970s and 1980s but this is a region that is supplying oil to critical parts of the world particularly China which relies heavily on that oil and so China of course being the world's second largest economy is going to be a huge player and a huge impact on the global market.
So you know even if it's a regional military operation it's definitely going to have an impact on the global market.
If you've got a question about that about the price of gas and how that is related to the price of oil you can give us a call.
Nathan Bome is in the studio with us.
He's a reporter with Axios.
The lines are Democrats 2027 8,000.
Republicans are on 2028 8001 and Independents 2027 48802.
The price of a barrel of oil spiked up to $120.
Then it went back down to under $90.
What impact does the swing that delta have in what Americans pay at the pump?
Well it really does actually translate fairly quickly into higher gas prices at American fuel stations.
Now, it does take a little while for the crude oil to actually end up being refined, and then the refineries basically turning it into gasoline.
The gasoline then takes it into the pump.
That may take a week or two.
But because the price is global, it does really tend to very quickly impact us when it comes to our pocketbook.
And this is the kind of thing where a couple dollars in a barrel of oil could actually lead to a fairly significant increase in the price at the pump.
Now, we haven't yet seen a spike to the $5 prices that we saw in 2022 in the immediate aftermath of the Ukraine war.
But could we get there eventually if this were to continue?
Certainly possible.
I know that a lot of analysts do believe $4 a gallon gasoline is very possible in the next week or two.
How do local gas stations set their price?
In other words, do they look every morning at the paper and say, oh, this is what a barrel of oil is going to cost?
So this is how much I should charge for a gallon?
Well, you should never, you know, people often, I think, like to take out their frustration at the local gas station.
In reality, local gas station doesn't have much control over the market.
What they do is they're paying a price, they're setting the price based in part on the delivery price, essentially the wholesale price of gas that ends up getting delivered to them.
And so the actual gas stations don't make much profit on oil, on gas.
The oil companies may.
The local gas station ends up maybe only making a few cents per gallon, and they actually make most of their money in the convenience stores.
How much does gas need to increase for consumers to start changing their behaviors?
In other words, they start driving less or even deciding not to buy a car.
Big debate over this.
And I think that it's something that we have to see in the coming weeks how quickly people change.
Now, historically, getting up to, say, $4 a gallon, that could actually very quickly change people's buying preferences on new vehicles or used vehicles.
So, you know, in 2008, for example, now going a long way back when gas got above $4, that was a big deal back then.
I don't think $4 is quite as significant now in the sense that I don't think it'll dramatically change people's vehicle buying preferences, for example.
But I do think you'll start to see a shift towards smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles if we get to four.
If we get to five, that's where I think you see a big change.
That may be where people start to buy electric vehicles.
The problem is that there aren't a lot of electric cars to buy right now because the automakers have pulled back from that.
So, you know, I don't think there's going to be a ton of great options for people if they do want to make a change.
So, what about the strategic petroleum reserves?
How does that work?
And there is discussion of releasing more.
What impact would that have?
So, the strategic petroleum reserve, some people will say SPR is essentially this emergency stockpile.
It's the storehouse essentially in Louisiana and Texas.
I believe it has about 500 million barrels of oil at this moment.
That's about a few weeks' worth of American oil consumption.
So, it can help to offset the price of oil, the price of gasoline, if we decide to release some of that.
That's only actually happened a few times in American history, the last time being 2022, the aftermath of the Ukraine war.
President Biden released some at that point.
The goal from politicians when they do that is to lower the price of gas because people get so upset about the price of gas.
Now, we haven't seen President Trump do that or other countries do that yet, but there is pressure mounting on them to do so.
Let's talk to callers.
We'll start with Bob in Pennsylvania, Republican.
Hi, Bob.
Hi, go right ahead.
Okay, I've been watching C-SPAN for a good 20 years.
Would you consider California and New York red states?
so we're talking about the price of gas are you wanted okay so you want to California red in New York red Oh, so you've misunderstood.
That's the price of gas.
That is, if you look at the legend, we'll put it back on the screen for you.
If you look at the legend, that's how much the price of gas is in those states, the average price.
So it is highest in.
Blue states.
It is highest in blue states.
Why didn't you show red states?
Okay, so let's get an answer for why the West Coast specifically has high gas prices.
Yeah, this is something that's always been the case.
The West Coast does tend to have higher prices.
It is partially political in the sense that there are higher taxes in the state of California, for example, but I think a lot of it is regional because there aren't the kind of oil supply infrastructure sites and such out on the West Coast as much as there is on the East Coast, you know, in the Gulf.
If you're closer to the Gulf, then you're going to have lower prices in general.
You live in Alabama, you live in Mississippi.
That's where prices of gas are the lowest in this country.
It's not really as much a function of politics as it is a function of regional infrastructure.
But yes, California, for example, does have higher fuel taxes, and that does lead to higher prices at the pump.
What about gas taxes?
So every locality or every state decides on how much they want to charge per gallon in taxes.
Yeah, it is a big factor.
The state of California is, in general, has higher prices.
I think you're going to probably see $5 a gallon if you go to get gas in California.
That's a good possibility here.
And so it is a factor.
And politicians don't really want to reverse that because this could be temporary.
And if they reverse it, then there goes a lot of the revenue that they want to spend on other things.
Let's talk to Eric in Nicholasville, Kentucky.
Democrat.
Good morning, Eric.
Good morning.
I think the idea of us being energy dependent when it comes to oil is kind of a big misconception because regardless of how much oil we pump out the ground here,
we're going to continue to export it and import oil because we aren't set up to refine all of the grades of oil that we produce here in America.
So I think when we talk to energy independent stuff, I hear people ask, well, you know, why do we import oil and everything that we pump out the ground here being used in the U.S.?
You know, I think people kind of lost over that or avoid mentioning that at all.
Any comment?
Well, I think he's certainly correct in the sense that energy independence is sort of something that exists on paper in the sense that, yes, we are producing a lot of oil now.
The U.S. is the world's largest producer of oil, and we are a net exporter of oil at this point.
We actually send more oil to other countries than we import.
But he's correct in the sense that it doesn't necessarily translate into lower prices for us.
Sure, if we produce more oil, that would probably lower the price of oil globally.
But U.S. energy companies have been battered in recent years by lower prices, and they're not necessarily eager to produce more oil just because something has happened here for the last few weeks.
Maybe if this became a really prolonged thing, you'd see more oil companies produce more oil.
But I don't think we're going to see much of that in the coming weeks.
Let's talk to Michael in Plainfield, Illinois, Independent Line.
Go ahead, Michael.
Yes, good morning.
And please don't cut me off.
You know, I'd like to see C-SPAN prove that they're balanced and patient.
Okay.
Now, here's the question.
I disagree with what the guest just said a few minutes ago when he was defending the local gas stations.
Now, it takes 90 to 120 days for a barrel of oil to be pumped out of the ground, to be shipped, refined, and end up in the local gas station.
So, why is it that the day that Trump and Israel attacked Iran, that very day in my neighborhood, the prices on gas jumped 30 cents a gallon?
Okay, and now they're a dollar a gallon above what they were for.
So, it's price gouging, nothing less than that.
I'd like your comments.
Yeah, you know, whether it's price gouging or not, it's certainly a matter of opinion, but I don't think it's the local gas station that's doing it.
It would be the wholesale sellers, the oil industry itself.
The local stations, again, don't make much profit on gasoline itself.
They're really just kind of passing along the price that they get to the suppliers that they're working with.
And so, the local stations often aren't even really part of the big oil companies.
You may see a big oil company name on there, but they may just be licensing that brand.
They're not necessarily part of the company themselves, they're just local operators in general.
There are exceptions, of course, but I don't think that they're really responsible for the price.
This goes much over their heads.
So, respond to Michael's point about the lag time.
So, he said it takes 90 to 120 days to get the oil out of the ground, to get it refined, to get it shipped, all that kind of stuff.
So, what explain that lag time?
Yeah, the lag time is true.
That's absolutely accurate.
I think what happens, though, is the wholesalers quickly increase the price because they see what's happening downstream.
Because they know what's going to happen, right?
And so, you know, there's certainly that's where the higher profits are coming.
But again, the local station maybe isn't the one that's actually doing it.
They're seeing the price, they have to pay for the gas that gets supplied to them.
And then they then charge the customer.
The customer ends up paying maybe a few cents a gallon more than what the wholesale price was as it was sold to those stations.
Tom and St. Augustine, Florida, Democrat, you're on the air.
Hi, I appreciate Washington Journal, and I appreciate the show today.
Very educational.
We had mentioned exporting oil, and we've been doing that for a long time.
And certainly, everybody down the line, the retailer, the wholesaler, the people who get the oil out of the ground, each have to make a profit.
Refining Margins Add to Pump Prices00:15:46
How much of the oil would we have to keep here in the United States to bring the price down to the lowest point?
As an example, let's say we need 20% of what we're exporting, and the goal is to get to the cheapest retail point.
So, we tell the people who get it out of the ground through legislation, they can make 10%.
It goes to maybe a distributor.
He's capped at a 10% profit, and then, of course, to the retailer, which would be a market he would have to compete locally, which would control his prices at probably less than 10%.
So how much of that oil that we're drilling here in the United States would we have to keep to achieve the lowest retail price at the pump, in your opinion?
I know there's a lot of variables involved.
Thanks a lot.
I think most of it is the answer.
I don't have the numbers in front of me.
Theoretically, if we were to do something like that, it would require us, I think, to keep most of the oil.
We are a net exporter, so we are sending more oil to other countries than we're actually importing.
I think the question is academically interesting, but it would probably only ever happen in the event in which the U.S. oil industry is nationalized by the government, which would be probably a scenario that would be equivalent to something like a world war, because otherwise I don't see that happening.
This is a capitalist economy, and that's why we're subject to the global price.
If we had an exclusively a domestic oil industry that didn't send any oil anywhere else, and we were setting the price, that would be restricted, those would be restrictions that would be imposed by the government, which would probably only happen in the event of some massive global conflict, and so we don't want that to happen.
So is restricting oil exports, is that something the administration is thinking about?
And would that help if they restricted it somewhat?
I'd be shocked if they did that.
I think that that would cause huge hullabaloo in the oil industry if that were to happen because, and ultimately, it's unlikely because oil companies have a very powerful lobby, and they would cry foul if the administration were to try something like that.
George in Purcellville, Virginia, a Republican, you're on the air.
Thank you.
C-SPAN's the best.
I appreciate it.
A question.
I test gas wing at premium used to be 10, 20 cents a gallon more than regular.
Now it's like 70 or 80 cents in some places.
Is that price gouging or is there a rationale behind it?
It's been a while since I've studied the premium market, but I think it's generally a function of the market economics there.
Not nearly as much demand as there used to be for premium.
You know, most vehicles now can run on unleaded, and so I don't think there's as much demand, but I don't think there's as much supply either, which is probably partly why that price is higher.
So I haven't studied it in a while, but I think the gap is mostly a function of market economics.
And Nikki and Queens wants to know, aside from the price at the pump, what are the consequences for diesel and jet fuel costs?
Really important question because diesel prices have already spiked, and this is something that will impact people because diesel affects the price of shipping.
So if you're a UPS or a FedEx or any other shipping company that pays the price of diesel, you're going to end up paying a higher price.
And where is that going to go?
It's either going to affect your profit margin or it's going to affect prices.
And so, you know, the prices that they charge to the companies that are shipping products, then those companies have to decide are they going to pass the price along to us.
Historically speaking, I would be really surprised if they don't pass along the prices of the higher diesel, which means inflation.
Mary Lynn, Massachusetts, Independent Line, you're on the air, Mary.
Good morning, and thank you for your show.
I'm enjoying it.
I have a question.
My understanding is back in the first Trump administration in May of 2017 that Saudi Arabia went from owning 30% of our largest oil refinery in the United States in Port Arthur, Texas, to owning 100% of our largest oil refinery in Port Arthur, Texas.
And I'm wondering what this situation, how that affects the price of gasoline.
Obviously, in the southern states, I know there were some contracts done with distribution in the southern states.
Some of them I didn't go do a deep dive into it.
But, You know, the refining of the oil, and I'm assuming that they ship most of that out of the country.
So, how does that affect the gas prices with regard to Iran right now?
Well, the refining industry does have a direct impact on the price that you pay.
In fact, that's arguably the biggest impact.
Our refining capacity, as it goes up and down, has a direct impact.
If you think about hurricanes, for example, when there's a major hurricane, that often takes out refining capacity, and then the refining, and that leads directly to a spike in the price of gas.
Now, I don't know that Saudi ownership of that particular refinery has a significant impact because there are a lot of refineries throughout the country.
So, I think they can pick up capacity if there were to be some attempt to reduce capacity or reduce shipments from that refinery.
But certainly, it's important to keep an eye on ownership of those types of facilities.
And I think if there was ever a concern about it, then the politicians would probably speak up.
So, speaking of the Gulf, what about natural gas?
Because that has been affected as well.
Does that impact U.S. consumers?
It does.
And, you know, now I think in some ways we're fortunate that we're just now coming out of winter, so natural gas prices won't have as big of an impact on the pocketbook right now.
But if this conflict were to be prolonged, we could see a bigger impact over the course of the year.
But yeah, natural gas is a factor.
There's other things coming out of the Gulf as well, like fertilizer, for example, which could directly impact food prices.
Because if farmers are paying a higher price for fertilizer, then that means a higher price for their crops.
And ultimately, that can flow through into the food that we're actually buying.
So, you know, I think we often don't think about these ripple effects, but they're happening.
Let's talk to John in Norfolk, Virginia, Independent Line.
Hi, John.
Yes, could you please comment about state taxes, the role they play in increasing gas?
Because I worked at a gas station for like eight years, and that was the basic determinant factor of when gas went up and down.
Because we got a message across all Ruby, it was registered.
And it signaled that plus three or minus three, that determined whether gas went up and down.
Yes, you just comment about the role that state taxes play in the increase or the decrease in gas.
Please, thank you.
Yeah, it's a big factor.
So, you know, the price of fuel draws from all sorts of factors, but state taxes is a big one.
And again, that's why California typically has essentially the highest price of gas in the country.
And so, and in the states along the Gulf, though, that's often why you see the lowest, because they often have the lowest taxes on a gallon of gas.
And so now there's a sort of a reason for that, which is that a lot of these states in the Gulf are oil states.
And so they tend to keep taxes lower on their domestic industry.
And so that's definitely a factor.
And that's one that doesn't change very often.
So it's a steady factor that the states aren't going to really change much in the near term.
So related to that, Steve in Tampa, Florida is asking how much tax is recovered from the oil taken from the Gulf of Mexico.
And he wants to know about subsidies to oil companies from the U.S. Don't think that we are getting much tax revenue from that oil because most of it's not ending up here.
It's ending up in places like China, for example, and other places throughout the world.
We don't necessarily get as much directly.
We are impacted by the global price, but not necessarily getting as much oil from that particular part of the world.
Now, subsidies, a whole nother conversation that is critical and does impact the price.
In general, subsidies tend to increase profits.
may keep prices somewhat lower depending on who you ask.
Let's talk to Dan in Glenside, Pennsylvania, Independent Line.
Go ahead, Dan.
Yeah, several years ago, 60 Minutes did a piece on artificial fuels, and they were using corn stocks and other things like glees and stuff.
And it looked like it was a viable way to subsidize any kind of fossil fuels.
Is there anything, any information out on that that might help us?
Yeah, the biofuel industry, essentially ethanol, has ebbed and flowed over the years.
A lot of this coming out of the Midwest, Iowa, for example, basically getting fuel from corn is essentially what we're talking about here.
There was a period, I cover the auto industry, and there was a period of time where the auto industry was pretty giddy about the prospect of ethanol as an alternative source of fuel.
A lot of this you heard in the aftermath of the auto industry's near collapse in 2008 because of the fact that they were selling these big gas guzzlers and all of a sudden gas prices spiked.
But over time, the auto industry has not had much success in selling these types of vehicles.
And ethanol as a source of fuel is still available, but not a big factor.
I don't think we'll see a big pivot toward that.
At this point, most of the auto companies have transitioned to focusing on hybrids and plug-in hybrids and EVs as an alternative source of fuel.
And so, you know, we'll maybe see some more on that, but I don't think we'll see many biofuel-powered vehicles.
Cruz in California, line for Democrats.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Go right ahead.
Yes, ma'am.
My call is about all the snibbling that's going on about gas prices going up.
Not too long ago, I had to drive my wife from Central California to Los Angeles because she was suffering from breast cancer, and I took her to Cedar Sinai, and they wouldn't take her because of the COVID.
And I was paying $7 a gallon for gas.
And we've had a war going on for two weeks, and it hasn't even gone halfway up that high.
And people weren't sniveling back then, and they're sniveling now, and we're in the war.
So we're going to keep them Iranians from making an atomic bomb and shipping it in a container to New York because that's what they wanted to do.
And it's not going to happen thanks to Donald Trump.
So I don't want no more snibling, please.
What do you think, Nathan?
Well, I'm not sure what to say.
I will note that today is the sixth year anniversary of the pandemic beginning.
It's interesting he mentions that.
Global disruptions like that have, you know, suddenly reconfigure how we interact with things like the price of gas.
And I think at this point, he's right in the sense that prices haven't spiked to a level that we, the historic levels that we have seen in the past.
But we could get there if this continues.
Who benefits from the increased oil prices?
Who are the winners here?
Well, there's a number of winners.
Certainly the oil companies that make higher profits would be winners here.
I think everyone agrees that Russia is definitely a winner right now because Russia has been so economically isolated in recent years because of all the sanctions on them due to the war with Ukraine.
But one thing they still have is they have significant oil producing capacity and their oil price has spiked.
And so people, all of a sudden, they're a more important supplier of oil than they were before without Iran in the picture.
And so Russia is a big winner here.
Let's talk to John in Dallas, Republican.
Hi, John.
Hi.
My question is: you know, how big of a story really even is this?
We're less than two weeks into this conflict.
There's, you know, a possibility the conflict could be open in another week or a couple weeks.
And after that point, you know, prices level back up.
No big deal.
We had a month of some higher oil prices.
It seems like, and correct me if I'm wrong, but there's more hay being made out of this than there needs to be.
What are your thoughts on that?
Thank you.
Well, I think that it's fair to say right now that yes, prices haven't even got above $4 a gallon today.
The average nationally is $3.58.
So we're not there yet.
But I think the difference here is that we are immersed in uncertainty over where this is headed.
And I think the administration itself has not given clear signals about how they were going to end this conflict.
Now, the president sort of said that it's quote-unquote very complete, but then the Defense Department signaling that they're still going very strong on this.
And how is this going to end?
How is this going to de-escalate?
When the market is facing significant uncertainty, that's when price volatility is at its greatest because the market, the investors, the traders, don't see where this is going.
And so when they have a clear exit, they see a clear exit of sorts, that's probably when you'll start to see the volatility decline.
Until then, I think we're going to see prices continue to escalate.
Here's Brian in Barr, Massachusetts, Independent Line.
Hi, how are you doing?
Good.
One of your callers had asked the gentleman about maybe restricting oil being sold or being produced in the United States and being sold overseas.
He didn't think it could ever be done.
After the oil embargo of the 70s, an act by Congress had put in in 75 to stop selling U.S. oil overseas.
We could only sell it to U.S. territories and bring it up into Canada.
And we used to have to use U.S.-made tankers in order to run it around the United States.
And then after Obama was in office and the shale production of oil increased dramatically in 2008, I believe it was a nine.
In 2015, Congress reversed that act and let them start selling oil overseas again and put us back on the world market, which made more profit for the oil companies, right?
Because in order for the oil companies to raise prices prior to that, they had to go through Congress in order to get approved to be able to raise prices to make more profit.
Decades of Profits at Stake00:04:04
And I'm just wondering why they don't go back to something to that effect.
We could still sell some oil overseas, but we don't have to import as much.
If you look what the GAO had studied, it showed that the exports of U.S. oil went up dramatically after 2015.
And we were importing more at a higher price, which costs us more to produce gasoline than any other oil byproduct.
All right, Brian.
Go ahead, Nathan.
Well, certainly good history there, and it's very important to remember that we haven't always been exporting oil to foreign markets.
But I think after a decade of reaping the revenues and profits from doing that, to actually go back to a scenario in which we're not exporting oil to other countries would be pretty devastating to American oil companies.
And so I just don't think that's going to happen, especially with Republican Congress and Republican administration.
Pretty unlikely that they're going to restrict global oil markets.
Bob on X brings up Venezuela.
He says, why are our gas prices going up?
We can steal all the oil we'll ever need from Venezuela.
He says, why does the price of gas go up immediately when it takes time for the effects to show we're being gouged?
Can you talk a little bit about that, the Venezuela part?
So Venezuela does have a lot of oil, but the status of their oil production capacity is pretty poor.
You know, over the last decade or so, it's deteriorated to a point where they just don't have the kind of facilities that they need to actually generate the kind of oil that we would need to supply to replace or to lower the price very quickly.
And this is actually a matter of debate in the industry, but the truth is that the oil companies have essentially said that they're not that interested in investing in Venezuela until they know that they can do so safely.
And so you see Exxon, for example, very reticent to go in.
So who's going to do that?
Who's going to actually go steal the oil, to use his phrase?
I don't think there's a real viable path to that.
One more call for you, Daniel, Mount Erie, Maryland, Independent Line.
Good morning, Daniel.
Yes, I believe I may have just had the exact same question.
At the point at which we seized Maduro and the comments were made that they had previously taken our oil or nationalized when they nationalized some of the platforms.
At that point in time, the oil was not profitable two months ago.
However, now that the war, now that we have this war and prices spiked up to $120 and now back down up to 86 yesterday, closed that, the oil is profitable.
And I was curious, you know, what effect do you think that's going to have on the global supply?
And the coincidence seems to be a little suspicious to me, shall we say, that this sort of happened in sequence like this.
Yeah, I don't think it's a coincidence that we are engaging in these global conflicts with countries that do have significant oil capacity.
The president himself has said that oil is one factor in these disputes.
And so, you know, I think that it's fair to ask those questions.
But in Venezuela in particular, it just would take years, not months, to actually get the oil industry there back on its feet and then to actually end up having that oil really impact the global price.
Iran, of course, you see quickly the price has been shifting because of what's happening there.
But again, as you've seen, as you noted, the price coming down a little bit in the last day or two as traders got more optimistic that this could end soon.
The president is certainly sending some signals there.
As political pressure mounts from folks like yourself and all the callers, I think there'll be more pressure on the White House to get this over with so that the price is stabilized.
All right, that is Nathan Bome.
He is business reporter at Axios.
He's also the author of the Axios Closer newsletter.
You can see that at axios.com.
Traders Optimistic on Price Drop00:04:18
Thanks so much for joining us.
Thank you for having me.
At about 9:15 Eastern this morning, it's a conversation with retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett on the combat operations so far in Iran and what he's watching in the days ahead.
But first, it's open forum.
Your chance to weigh in on the Iran conflict or any topic in the news this morning.
You can start calling in now.
The numbers are 202-748-8000 for Democrats.
202-748-8001 for Republicans and 202-748-8002 for Independents.
We'll be back.
Watch Q&A tonight featuring our conversation with California Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom on his memoir, Young Man in a Hurry, chronicling moments in his life that influenced his political career.
From mayor of San Francisco in 2004 to becoming governor in 2019.
Doors were open wide because of my father's relationships.
And that created all kinds of opportunities.
And that took me in many different directions as a business person with restaurants, hotels, and wineries that I started right out of college, pen to paper, to opportunity to serve on the Parking and Traffic Commission.
You only knew if you read the book, Parking and Traffic.
You were offered the film commission, I believe, by Willie Brown.
Look at this.
This is impressive beyond words.
He lied to me.
He said, I wanted to go on the film commission.
I'm 20-something years old, and I opened a few small businesses, and I thought, this is fantastic.
Film commission.
I love it.
Part-time.
And then I get sworn in with about 30 other people, and he goes through everybody.
And he says, and Gavin Newsom, the next chair of the Parking and Traffic Commission.
I literally didn't even know what chair meant.
California Governor Gavin Newsom with his book, Young Man in a Hurry, tonight at 8 Eastern on C-SPAN's Q ⁇ A. You can listen to Q&A and all of our podcasts on our free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
C-SPAN invites you on a powerful journey through the stories that define a nation.
From the halls of our nation's most iconic libraries and institutions comes America's Book Club, a bold, original series where ideas, history, and democracy meet.
Hosted by renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein, each week features in-depth conversations with the thinkers shaping our national story.
Among this season's remarkable guests, John Grisham, master storyteller of the American justice system.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, exploring the Constitution, the court, and the role of law in American life.
Famed chef and global relief entrepreneur Jose Andres, reimagining food.
Brita Dove, Hulitzer Prize winner and former U.S. Poet Laureate.
The books, the voices, the places that preserve our past and spark the ideas that will shape our future.
America's Book Club, Sundays at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
Get C-SPAN wherever you are with C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app that puts you at the center of democracy, live and on demand.
Keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the U.S. Congress, White House events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips.
Catch the latest episodes of Washington Journal.
Find scheduling information for C-SPAN's TV and radio networks, plus a variety of compelling podcasts.
The C-SPAN Now app is available at the Apple Store and Google Play.
Download it for free today.
C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
Washington Journal continues.
Welcome back to Washington Journal.
Putin and Trump Align Against Iran00:05:16
It's open forum.
Looking forward to hearing what's on your mind.
Before we get to that, though, a couple of things for your schedule.
Right after this program at 10 Eastern, it's a summit on infrastructure with elected officials, corporate leaders, global experts.
They'll discuss how the U.S. can speed up economic growth through technology, energy, and construction improvements.
It's hosted by the financial services company BlackRock, and you can see that live starting at 10 a.m. Eastern right here on C-SPAN.
Also on C-SPAN later at 3 p.m., it's the director of the Congressional Budget Office.
He'll testify on the government's long-term federal budget projections between 2027 and 2036.
That's the Senate Finance Subcommittee hearing live starting at 3 p.m. Eastern, also here on C-SPAN.
All that you can always watch on our app, C-SPANNOW and online at c-span.org.
To the calls now to Larry and Vermont Democrat.
Hi, Larry.
Good morning.
I've been watching C-SPAN this morning.
I watch it a lot of mornings.
I've been calling in on about the gas issues.
A lot of mashing of teeth, a lot of people who are just so distraught over rising gas prices.
You know, there's something you can do.
I'm 73.
I lived through many of these crises, and I finally could put my foot down with my wife.
And we bought a house that's energy efficient, that works totally on the sun off-grid.
And the next thing we did was we bought or we leased a Chevy Equinox electric car, which we charge at our house.
And now when we drive by the gas station, we don't stop.
We just keep on going.
And when we get home, we plug in our car and we can go on another 324-mile trip and not have to worry about Middle East crises that are, you know, terrible.
The last time I called in, you know, the president was bad-mouthing electric cars.
Well, maybe people should really start thinking about these good things for the future.
So it's not a bad thing.
It didn't cost us a lot of money.
We live on Social Security.
We're now rich.
And there are alternatives.
I just want you to know you don't have to go around wringing your hands because of the next war and wherever.
All right.
Larry, let's talk to Mike next.
Independent Line, Arcade New York.
Good morning.
Hello.
Hi, Mike.
Go ahead.
I lived through the time when the gasoline got spiked up in 1973 after the Arab oil embargo.
This gas stations didn't want to sell gasoline because they couldn't adjust their prices because they put control on the prices.
So we had long lines at the gas stations, and you'd be desperate to fill up your tank, and you'd be running out of gasoline at 4 p.m.
And we don't want to go to that, but I believe with the war and the uncertainty that the prices will just adjust up and up and up, but at least we'll still be able to drive.
And as soon as you close the Strait of July, it's going to affect the entire economy because it's not only oil that goes through there, it's everything.
And just the Stopping of the shipping or slowing it down anyway will cause all prices to go up initially and they'll just adjust because of free market, you know, just adjust.
And I'm pretty sure that Mr. Trump will keep on pressing to get those political prisoners out of Iran and that Russia will probably come in to help us.
And it's just at the right time because Russia will help us.
We have what you said, Mike?
I believe he, about a week ago, he started to cooperate militarily with Russia.
That was announced.
Who is cooperating?
Russia will probably Putin and Trump will get together to press Iran.
But there were reports, Mike, that Russia was helping Iran with intelligence on targeting of American sites and American service members.
Kentucky Turmoil and Party Shifts00:08:21
Did you see that report?
Their whole societies is totally opposite ours.
I believe that that report's true that they would help Iran.
But Mr. Trump, he would, and Mr. Putin, if we Mr. Trump calls up Mr. Putin and says, hey, will you help us go against Iran?
You know, then you think they might be open to that.
All right.
Well, if you're on the line, stay with us on the line.
We'll come back to you because President Trump was in, or he's going, I should say, to Cincinnati today.
And we are going to be talking to Jolene Almendares, the Cincinnati Inquirer Northern Kentucky reporter.
Jolene, welcome to the program.
Good morning.
Thank you for having me today.
So this is the first trip to Cincinnati and to North Kentucky for President Trump since six years ago.
So can you talk about what's going on and what's on the agenda?
Sure.
So there's obviously a lot of excitement from people in the community.
There are people who want to come out and show support for the president.
There are also people who are planning, probably about right now, who are at some of the nearby libraries making protest signs, protests against him.
There's a massive storm outside, a lot of lightning and thunder.
So I'm curious to see who actually all comes out.
As far as what's on the agenda, we're actually in the dark for a lot of this, which we noted yesterday in a meeting that was pretty unusual.
There won't be really any media at the airport to film him coming in.
He's going to be in Reading in Cincinnati.
That's a neighborhood in Cincinnati.
And we do not know what's on the agenda there.
It's not open to the public.
And I believe it's not open to just about all media, although there may be some poll reporters there.
And then after that, he's going to be coming over to my neck of the woods.
I'm actually in Covington, Kentucky right now, but I'll be going to Hebron where President Trump will be talking at a packaging facility.
And there, we also know that he's going to talk about the economy.
And we suspect, we haven't confirmed, but we suspect he'll also be talking about or with Congressman, congressional candidate Ed Gallrin, who is going up against longtime incumbent U.S. Representative Thomas Massey.
So let's talk about that.
I'm glad you're excited about it.
Yeah, let's talk about that race specifically between Massey and Gallery.
Can you talk a little bit about what's going on there and what the issues are?
Oh man, so this is the fun part.
Basically, this is one of what I think is probably the most watched congressional race in the country this year.
So Congressman, U.S. Congressman Thomas Massey, he's a little bit of a firebrand.
He often votes, well, not often, but on occasion votes against the Republican Party.
And that has really irritated President Donald Trump for years, actually.
But within the past year, starting when President Trump took office again, Thomas Massey and him just repeatedly butted heads publicly.
They disagreed about things like the big beautiful bill.
They disagreed the first time Iran was bombed.
They have disagreed about the release of the Epstein files.
And that has been a really big one.
And so this past year, President Donald Trump has been calling for a Republican to go up against Massey in the Republican primary in Kentucky.
Thomas Massey has been in office since 2012 and he is wildly popular in Kentucky.
He often doesn't have anyone running against him.
And even when he does, he really crushes those.
I think in the past three elections, he's won his primary with more than 75% of the vote of the vote.
So he's very popular.
So President Donald Trump in October endorsed Ed Gallrin, who is a fifth generation farmer.
He's a former Navy SEAL captain.
And he previously ran for state senate in Kentucky, but he narrowly, very narrowly lost that race.
And it is becoming one of the most expensive races, if not the most expensive race, congressional race in the country.
It's a very interesting time to be reporting on this kind of thing and to be a resident of Kentucky at the moment.
And you put out an article with the headline, Massey says voting record shows Gallorin was a, quote, Trump traitor and that he hasn't always been a Republican.
What can you tell us about that?
Right.
So not last night, but the night before, I went to a Q ⁇ A that Thomas Massey had with the Campbell County Republicans.
This is all in northern Kentucky, right across from Cincinnati, if you're not familiar.
And when he's talking to these folks, at the very end, he sort of pulls out these little cards and he's like, I have one more thing to tell you about my opponent.
And that is that he has not always been a Republican.
Back in 20 Trump, the same week that he won the Republican nomination for president, Gallorin actually changed his voter registration status to an independent from a Republican.
And he stayed an independent until, I believe it was 2021, right before he was going to run for state senate.
He became a Republican again.
Congressman Thomas Massey had said that Gowrin uses the Republican Party because it's convenient for him to get elected.
I actually was surprised to get a response from Gallrin's camp.
They often do not respond to media.
So the fact that they sent me an email yesterday that said Gowrin actually decided to become an independent because of Thomas Massey, I think they said that he was reacting to sort of the turmoil that Massey created within the Republican Party in Kentucky.
And that's why he became an independent.
I was shocked to get that email.
So it really shows me that things are heating up.
And that is the story there.
So it's kind of to paint the scene.
Congressman Massey had these little cards and he was passing copies around to all the voters in the room.
And some of these people are the local leaders and some of the most active Republicans in the area.
So that was pretty impactful to be in the room when that happened.
So the primary is May 19th.
How are things looking?
I mean, what are the polls saying?
So right now we don't have any really great polls.
We have some older polls and maybe some information that I am not sure that I don't feel comfortable really saying on air because I have questions about some of these polls.
But I recently was just last week traveling through Eastern Kentucky, which is where Thomas Massey lives.
It's where he's from.
And there were people mostly in support of him, which probably isn't surprising because he's from the area.
And probably the most surprising thing that I found in Eastern Kentucky was that most people didn't even know a race was going on.
Most people had no idea.
And I had to be the one to tell them, no, this is one of the biggest races in the country.
So I think that says a lot about, and a lot of people talk to us about just how exhausted they were with the nastiness that is in politics.
And so I really, we're not quite sure who's ahead at the moment.
And I'm looking forward to seeing some polls come out just as soon as they do.
All right.
That's Jolene Almendariz, a Northern Kentucky reporter for the Cincinnati Inquirer.
Thanks so much for joining us.
Of course.
Thank you.
And you can look for live coverage here on C-SPAN of President Trump in Ohio starting at about 4.30 p.m. actually on C-SPAN 3.
We're back to Open Forum and John is in California.
Republican, thanks for waiting.
Go ahead.
Good morning.
Thank you.
Two issues.
I'll get to them as quickly as I can.
Naval Base Near School Target00:02:10
This war, when it first came about, I thought, Josh, what a dumb thing for us to do.
How stupid is this?
And I was really pretty angry at Trump and believed that maybe, you know, Netanyahu had talked him into a bad move.
Actually, a caller to C-SPAN is the one that kind of got me to thinking when he said, what would have happened in 1933 if the British and the French had stood up to the Germans and said, you can't have these weapons.
And then I got to thinking, there's a big difference between a society like Russia or even China that are political and are thinking and a society that's ran by a bunch of seventh century mullahs that are religious radicals that would probably kill us all if they had the chance.
And so I've kind of mellowed about my staunch opposition to the war and how silly I really think it is.
The one thing I like about Trump is he's fighting a war.
He's not handing down a bunch of ridiculous rules of engagement, putting a lot of things, mosque, for example, off limits as far as targeting.
Where that school is concerned, what a tragedy.
But you have to remember that these crazies that were fighting, that's where they put their attack weapons, their ammunition, the things.
They put them in hospitals.
They put them next to schools.
And there was a target right next to that school.
Yeah, yeah, that's what I was going to say.
There was a naval base, but that school was no longer part of that naval base and that there was a fence.
How many schools do we have right next to an attack situation that we've got?
What about hospitals?
They found a horde of weapons in the hospitals when they finally got the Hamas ran out of their country.
If you don't want your schools to get blown up, don't put your weapons right next to them.
Solar Farmer Sees High Gas Costs00:02:45
Don't put your military right next to them.
And that's how bloodthirsty and animalistic to me these people that are running Iran are.
They went out and killed, what, 30,000 people just for demonstrating in the street just before this war started, walked out there and just started shooting unarmed people.
All right, let's talk to Ted in Ocean View, Hawaii, Line for Democrats.
Good morning, Ted.
Good morning, Amy.
It's good to see you again.
Yeah, I was listening.
I've been listening to you guys for many years anyway.
I heard a guy a few callers back talk about he had gone out and bought himself an electric vehicle and electrified his house with solar, et cetera, and like it's a new thing.
And when the Vietnam War got over, I was in the Air Force and I was pretty much drafted in there.
They said, well, you either join that or join the Army.
So I joined the Air Force as a fuel specialist.
And 71234, and I told my wife when we got out, we're going to coda, Hawaii, and we're not leaving.
And that's where I've been.
And I became a solar contractor 50 years ago, 5-0 years ago.
And it was economically viable, 5-0 years ago.
That's a long time ago.
And I did it for 12 years.
I'll never be able to retire because I can't make any money at this.
So there's an old Elton Johnson should have listened to my old man and gone back to the farm.
I grew up on a farm.
Now I've gone back to farming and I did 35 years farming after solar.
And I was a macadamia nut farmer for many years and I retired from that.
But yeah, solar has been viable for 50 years and nobody's bothered to take advantage of it.
They would just rather buy gas, I figured.
I just kind of gave up.
I just said, no, they don't want it.
I can't fight the world.
So anyway, I was just responding to a fellow that went solar.
And now recently, in the last year or two, I've gone solar.
So I'm completely off the grid.
Got batteries, solar.
I'm not connected to anything power or water-wise.
I'm totally independent on two acres here in Hawaii down.
I'm actually on the volcano at Mauna Lua on the volcano.
And I've lived here for 38 years, and it's great.
But we can do solar.
And how's the price of gas?
I understand it's $5 a gallon, and it's been that way.
And about 15 years ago, when the prices went up after 08, and I would be out at the Costco gas pumps, and I'd see the price jump way up, and I'd go, yeah.
And the guy goes, what are you cheering for?
I said, well, I got a lot of my 401k in gas stocks, so I just made $5,000.
I don't mind paying 50 cents more for, but we're at $5 a gallon, and it's been that way for years.
All right, Ted.
Congress Cowards Face Street Protests00:12:22
Let's talk to Bobby, Republican in Kentucky.
Hi, Bobby.
Yes, ma'am.
Today's morning Democrats are actually just trying to ruin this country.
People like Jeffreys and Schumer.
All they do is want to fight everything President Trump tries to do.
If they would leave the man alone, I think this country would be a whole lot better shape.
What do you feel like they're stopping him from doing?
What would you like him to do that he can't because of those?
Anything he wants to do, just like they're holding the Congress hostage, wanting the homeland security people, you know, that such government now.
People ain't getting paid.
Everything he tries to do that's going to help this country, or in my opinion, help this country, they cannot stand it.
I think they're working with some of these foreign countries to try to Our country.
Bobby, let's hear from Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal.
He's from Connecticut, and he spoke to reporters after a Senate Armed Services Committee briefing on the Iran war.
Here he is.
I emerge from this briefing as dissatisfied and angry, frankly, as I have from any past briefing in my 15 years in the Senate.
I am left with more questions than answers, especially about the cost of the war.
My questions have been unanswered, and I will demand answers because the American people deserve to know.
And I guess I am most concerned about the threat to American lives of potentially deploying our sons and daughters on the ground in Iran.
We seem to be on a path toward deploying American troops on the ground in Iran to accomplish any of the potential objectives here.
And there is also, as disturbingly as anything else, the specter of active Russian aid to Iran, putting in danger American lives.
Literally, Russia seems to be aiding our enemy actively and intensively with intelligence and perhaps with other means.
And China also may be assisting Iran.
So the American people deserve to know much more than this administration has told them about the cost of the war, the danger to our sons and daughters in uniform, and the potential for further escalation and widening of this war, a war of choice made by this president, not chosen by the American people,
with potentially huge consequences to American lives.
Senator Blumenthal, I wonder what you think about what he just said.
It's open forum.
And Doug Douglas in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, Independent Line, you're on the air.
Yes, I'm calling in regards to the reporting.
I don't know how many years we've heard that America is independent, meaning they have their own oil.
And as soon as something breaks out as what's happened here recently, we are affected.
So I'd like for the media and all of you to explain that.
Why is that?
The other issue I have is just again, and I've said it before, is the way that C-SPAN divides us.
You constantly say that America is divided.
Well, having us introduce ourselves or you informing people of their political affiliation being Democrat, Republican, or Independent is a component of keeping us divided.
Listen to what people say and determine who they are and what they are.
That's all I got.
Tricia is a Democrat in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Hi, Tricia.
Hi, good morning.
I wanted to call about, so many people make this statement that, well, they shouldn't put their schools next to their military.
We have in the United States 160 schools that are on U.S. military bases.
If you drive, my husband was in, served in Iraq, my late husband.
And when he would go to the base, you drive around, the schools are right there.
Where do they think that all the kids, you know, that families of military kids where they go to school?
So I just want to clarify that for people that keep saying that, you know, well, this is what they get when they put military bases next to their schools, that that's an excuse to bomb a school with children in it.
Thank you.
And update for you from CBS News.
It says Iran attacks more ships.
Dubai Airport warns U.S.-linked banks are next.
As the Trump administration says, it's winning the war with Iran.
Tehran hits three ships near the Strait of Hormuz and the Dubai airport and warns that banks are next.
Lester, Republican in Minnesota, good morning.
Good morning.
I'm an 84-year-old Vietnam vet.
And then I seen this Democrat who was just on.
He said something about, you know, Republicans sending people off to war or Trump.
Now, who started the Second World War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War?
You go down the line, it was all Democrats.
Now the thing is, our gas prices, they went up the day when we went in and bombed Iran.
That comes from the top.
I had a friend who run the gas station, and he would, in the morning, call other gas stations around to see what prices they were going to set.
So that's price setting.
Okay.
And here's what the Associated Press says.
This is an analysis that they did.
It says, Iran war becomes a contest of who can take the most pain.
It says that surge in oil prices points to what may be Iran's most effective weapon and the United States' biggest vulnerability in continuing the campaign, damaging the world economy.
A sharp rise in gas prices has rattled consumers and financial markets, and international travel and shipping have been severely disrupted.
Virginia in Columbia, South Carolina, Democrat, you're on the air.
Yes, I'm the widow of a deceased Vietnam veteran.
I had a brother who went to Vietnam.
I had many friends who went to Vietnam.
I am angry that this man who is a draft dodger, this man who cares nothing about Vietnam or any kind of conflict, he sees people as collateral damage.
And how dare you start this war?
How dare you do that when there was no reason to?
Negotiations were taking place and they could have continued.
We can't believe a thing he says.
I mean, he says this happens, that happens, but the people I know, no one believes a thing that comes out of his mouth.
And until, and the cowardly members of Congress who should be controlling this idiot isn't.
It used to be that the members of Congress had numerous people in it who had once served in the military or had relative members in the military.
Now I doubt if there are 20 members of Congress who has even ever served in the military.
So we're going to have to get that man out of office and we're going to have to do something about it.
I have been protesting and I hope more people will come out into the streets and since these people in Congress are such cowards, more people need to come out into the streets to let him know and the members of Congress know that we are not satisfied with the way this government is currently being run.
And Virginia, how are you protesting?
Where are you going?
What are you doing?
We go downtown in front of the state house.
And are you holding up a sign or are you holding up a sign?
What does your sign say?
My sign, tell truth, tell the draft dodger, stop the conflict.
All right.
Well, here is the Iranian ambassador to the UN.
His name is Iravani.
He spoke to reporters yesterday about the civilian casualties in Iran and accused the U.S. and Israel of terrorizing the people.
Their intention is clear to terrorize civilians, massacre innocent people, and cause maximum destruction and suffering.
The world is witnessing how a rogue and irresponsible state, together with an illegitimate regime, is targeting the Iranian schools, hospitals, residential building infrastructure, sports halls, and relief facilities.
These attacks have already claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians, including women and children.
And back to the calls to David, North Carolina, a Republican.
You're on the air, David.
Hi.
When we enlist in the military, it's not a jobs program.
I mean, it has that benefit.
But you swear your allegiance to follow the orders that you're given.
And there has to be some element of trust that there's proper intel for the causes that we may have to go fight for.
That's one thing.
But what really needs to happen is a discussion, a rational discussion of whether or not Iran would use a nuclear weapon, or 11 of them, if they had them, unprovoked.
They're not like even North Korea or Russia or China.
You really have to know, would they use them unilaterally against Israel, which they swore they would do.
And if you believe that they would, then how else are you going to prevent them when they start getting close, except a unilateral attack from us or our allies to end their program?
So it really comes down to would they use them.
So you have any question about that?
No, I don't.
I'm going to talk to Edna now in Illinois, Line for Democrats.
Go ahead, Edna.
Strategic Ambiguity Hampers Goals00:15:44
Good morning.
I cannot understand why the American people can't see.
Trump is not a politician.
He's a gangster.
He was raised in a gangster atmosphere.
He's not managing.
He's not leading.
Why are not the American people talking about the 25th Amendment in the Constitution?
What is it there for if you can't use it?
We know we have a vice president who needs to speak up to get it going.
Let's get it going.
This guy is killing America.
He's a wrecking ball.
And Edna, would you be happier with Vice President Vance as the Commander-in-Chief?
No.
We do not have any leadership in Washington.
All we have in Washington is gangbangers.
They are ruining the country.
Why can't the American people see this?
Now they can see what they voted for.
Thank you so much.
Bye-bye.
And coming up after this program at 10 a.m. Eastern is a summit on infrastructure in the United States.
That is going to be hosted by the financial services company BlackRock, and we'll have live coverage of that here on C-SPAN.
Sorry, it's on C-SPAN 3, not here on C-SPAN.
So that's in about 45 minutes that's coming up.
But coming up next on this program, it's a conversation with retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett.
We'll talk about combat operations in Iran and what he's watching in the day ahead.
We'll be right back.
Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold original series, this Sunday with our guest, The Chronicler of Adventures, award-winning, best-selling author David Graham, whose books include The Lost City of Z, Killers of the Flower Moon, and The Wager.
He joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein.
So what about this fact, about this occurrence, made you think this could be something worth your time?
And I started to realize that this odd little old manuscript contained, you know, the seeds of one of the most extraordinary stories of survival and mayhem I had ever come across.
Watch America's Book Club with David Graham this Sunday at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
Friday, on C-SPAN Ceasefire, bipartisan discussion on U.S.-Israel combat operations against Iran with former Defense Secretary and Obama administration CIA Director Leon Panetta and Defense Secretary during the first Trump administration, Mark Esper.
Joined by our host Dasha Burns, looking at the potential of a wider escalation regionally, as well as the Trump administration's messaging on the justification and goals of the operation, especially with Iran's selection of a new supreme leader.
Watch Ceasefire Friday at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
Washington Journal continues.
Welcome back.
We are joined now by retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett.
He was former Assistant Secretary of State during the George W. Bush administration.
General Kimmett, welcome to the program.
Thank you.
Can you talk a little bit about your military experience and what your role was during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars?
Yeah, well, going from first to last, after 9-11, everybody became a Middle East expert in the military.
My first assignment there was in Iraq in 2003, 2004.
After that, I went to U.S. Central Command where I was the lead planner for contingency operations in the area of operations.
I then left there to be the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Middle East Affairs.
And after that, I was Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs.
A lot of people are talking about the lessons learned or not learned from the Iraq War and the Afghanistan war as we're conducting this war in Iran.
What do you think is the most important lesson that we need to take from those two wars in conducting this one?
Well, I think the first one is constantly being repeated by the administration, which is no regime change.
The second is no nation building.
Both of those require a significant amount of boots on the ground, and the administration has said, we're not going to put boots on the ground.
We're not going to get involved in nation building.
Well, the president has not ruled out boots on the ground, just to be clear.
And that's strategic ambiguity.
If you don't rule that out, then the enemy has to plan for what if he does.
And that's a different kind of planning if he was to say new boots on the ground.
That would relieve a lot of assets inside Iran to be used against everything else.
You mentioned strategic ambiguity, which I understand for our adversaries.
Do you believe that President Trump has clearly identified the objectives of this war for the American people?
Oh, I think they could clearly be laid out better.
For example, George Bush explained that for Iraq.
His father explained that for the first Gulf War.
But I think that's a fair criticism that strategic ambiguity with the enemy has values.
Strategic ambiguity with the citizens of the United States hampers the objectives.
There was a State of the Union just two weeks before the first strikes in Iran.
Do you think that the President should have laid out a case for war at that time, or would that have given the enemy too much information?
No, I think that would have been an appropriate time to lay out his plans for the military operations.
I make the distinction between military operations and war because war requires a declaration of war from the United States Congress.
He has not asked for, nor has he received that.
So by that standard, we haven't had a war since the Korean War.
Since before the Korean War.
What do you think led the U.S. to act in the first place?
Secretary Rubio has said that Israel would have gone it alone without us and that that could have pushed President Trump into acting.
What are your thoughts on that?
It's very simple.
Let's take a look at when North Korea developed the nuclear capability.
We are still at threat, but the fact remains that North Korea is the hermit kingdom.
It just wants to be left alone.
The Iranian revolution, starting in 1979, the only country in the world that subscribes to Velieta Faki, which is the rule of the supreme leader, is a expansionist ideology that says the entire Ummah, the world should become the community of Islamic states.
Now, imagine if the Supreme Leader had at his disposal nuclear weapons.
So my view is this had to happen well before they developed nuclear weapons.
So if the opportunity arose to strike at Iran before they have a nuclear weapon, and I would say they would not have 500 kilograms or whatever the number is of enriched uranium without the aspiration for a nuclear weapon.
There's no other reason for enhanced uranium.
So let's talk about that enhanced uranium.
Is it possible that the United States get that material?
Because without boots on the ground, my understanding is there's no way to get to it.
And the regime gets to keep it.
My view is that can be worked out at the negotiating table.
You're right.
It's tough in the battlefield.
Can be done.
We have units trained to do that.
But I think we'd have an intelligence gap before we found it.
But the negotiation table seems pretty far away at this point in the middle of a war.
Do you think that the new regime, the new supreme leader, would be willing to sit down with the United States?
If compelled.
Now you say that's an abstract esoteric thought, but in 1970, I would tell you that the Paris peace talks were not going well.
The North Vietnamese walked away from the negotiating table.
The president at that time ordered Operation Linebacker 2, which was a daily continuous dropping of bombs from B-52s on Haiphong Harbor and Hanoi.
Within two weeks, they were back at the table.
If you've got a question for retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett, he is with us until the end of the program.
You can start calling in now.
The lines are bipartisan.
So Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
Republicans 202-748-8001.
And Independents 202-748-8002.
Let's talk about the Strait of Hormuz.
That has essentially been shut down to any kind of traffic besides Iranian vessels.
What does, can the United States do something militarily to reopen those straits?
Well, let me take you through a little bit of history.
In 2008, one of the biggest problems in the world was counter-piracy off the coast of Somalia.
International traffic at that point had virtually halted because of pirates taking ships, taking hostages, asking for exorbitant amount of money in order to let those ships go, let those people go.
One of my last jobs in the State Department was started by Condi Rice pulling me up at her office, and she said, make this go away.
The piracy coast of Somalia.
Right.
She said, fix this.
We formed an international coalition, had Russia in it, China, Egypt, France, the United Kingdom.
And we also got a UN Security Council resolution, her last Security Council resolution, while in office.
And to this day, that counter-piracy task force framework is still operational because there are other causes of piracy.
And the whole notion of just keeping a permanent convoy out there was unnecessary.
We broke the back of counterpiracy off the coast of Somalia.
Are you suggesting an international coalition like that could work for this issue in the Strait of Hormuz?
You will be surprised to know that I was writing that article on my cell phone as I was coming in.
Yes.
You write articles on your cell phone?
You want to see it?
No, no, no, I don't.
But getting back to the topic, you believe that Russia and China could join this kind of a coalition now?
Maybe not Russia and China, but who benefits most from that oil?
America is energy independent.
Europe benefits from that oil.
Europe is the one that needs that oil more than we do.
We don't have enough.
We don't have sufficient assets to do this ourselves.
France has 20.
When you say assets, we're talking about military assets.
You're talking about bringing in those European navies into the Gulf.
I'm talking about bringing in specialized ships focused on countermine activities.
France has 20.
I'm working my way through that article and Grok to find out how many other ships are in Europe.
And this is one of those few areas I think that there is a self-interest for those countries and an interest in the United States to conduct that mission.
Let's talk to callers.
This is Richard in Wyoming, Independent Line.
Richard, you're on with retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett.
May I make a comment?
I don't need to hear what their party affiliation is.
They're Americans, so let's just talk to Americans.
Okay, let's talk to Americans.
Richard, you're on the air.
All right, thank you.
I'm a veteran myself at the Navy.
I was in Persian Gulf in 1974 aboard the USS Constellation.
Next door to Iran is Karachi, Pakistan.
They have 150 warheads already on their missiles.
They are kind of friends with Iran.
I know they have the same religion.
And they have been demonstrating in Pakistan against America.
So what angle will we play in that one?
Thank you.
Well, you bring up a very good point.
I don't know if the number is 40 or 150, but we've got to accept that Pakistan is a nuclear-armed state.
Full stop.
They do share the same religion, Shia Islam, but they do not share the same notion of Heliat al-Faki, where a religious cleric is the supreme leader inside the country.
You can talk about what form of democracy, military rule they have in Pakistan, but it is not run by a cleric.
Running a religion that believes dying for your faith and martyrdom is the greatest honor of all.
We have good relationships with Pakistan.
The new Field Marshal Munir was the first Field Marshal invited to the White House by President Trump last June.
And I think what you're saying is exactly right.
We need to maintain good relationships with Pakistan so they like us more than they like Iran.
And Pakistan is largely Sunni, not Shia.
Isn't that correct?
Charlie, in Roslana.
If you are correct, then I'm not.
Okay.
Charlie, go ahead.
Yeah, hi.
I like to challenge the idea that Iran is expansionist.
It's really Israel that has attacked seven countries in the past few years.
Fact Check on Israel Attacks00:06:07
I don't trust my information that I'm getting with the mainstream media.
I use the Young Turks online, also Scott Ritter, who was the UN's arms inspector, Colonel Colonel, I forget his name, but there's a lot of good things online and really breaking down the truth.
And you're not getting it on the mainstream media about this.
Iran, this was an unprovoked attack against Iran.
And from what I understand, Netanyahu, I think his house was bombed.
Not hearing this on the news either.
Unprovoked attack.
Yeah, and the first thing I'd say is, I know Scott Ritter, I know the Young Turks not as well.
I would say that they demonstrate as much bias as you find in the mainstream media.
So we can go down our own echo chambers and find our biases confirmed.
But I do agree with you.
There is a lot of information on the internet.
And I would just always encourage to go both sides of the internet.
I watch MSNBC, MSNOW now, and I watch Fox News.
I think that dialectic between the left and the right helps me to understand both sides of the argument, and in some cases, both sides of looking at the truth.
Unprovoked attack on Iran, I would simply argue what I argued before.
I would rather negotiate with a non-nuclear Iran than a nuclear Iran.
And it is clear that the Iranian Revolution is an expansionist ideology.
And I can't disagree with you that Israel has expansionist ideology as well to take over Judea and Samaria, the West Bank.
They think that that's their God-given land.
And that's why I think that's one of the more difficult subjects that we deal with in Middle East negotiations.
This is just a fact check on that real quick, that about Netanyahu's house being hit, that does not appear to be accurate.
That looks like that that was a video of something else.
So just to make sure we have that correct.
Ark in Upland, California, you're on the air.
Go ahead, Ark.
Yes, thank you very much for taking my call.
I have two points to make.
One is, I believe that TSB will do a great service if it represents the Iranian people as a whole rather than focusing on Iran as one country run by one ethnicity that are the Persians, rather than the makeup, the ethnicity makeup of Iran are at least 10 to 12 different nationalities, each with their own history of struggle for freedom.
And Iran at the center has always acted as a whack-a-mole type policy toward other nationalities.
So human rights has been absolutely violated to the core, both during the Shah regime as well as during this existing regime.
Just one point.
And that, by the way, is true throughout the Middle East, both traditionally known as the Ottoman Empire and the Persian Empire, used to try to reclaim their old glory, but it's absolutely on the wrong course.
And they are using Islam as a vehicle to achieve their objective.
And I remember during the Iranian Revolution in 1979, they emphasized the Iranian clergy group.
They emphasized that there is a Jewish nuclear club and there is a Western Christian nuclear club and why not the Islamic Nuclear Club.
And they have been absolutely adamant about acquiring that nuclear weapon.
And I would not be surprised if even Ordeghan, after he will join him as well in this effort.
You have a couple of points you made there.
One is on human rights.
I agree that the human rights of the people inside of Iran have been pretty well trampled since the beginning of the Islamic revolution in 1979.
And you can also argue that SAVAC was pretty good after Mossadegh was put in at trampling human rights as well.
My question would be, in the back of my mind, President Trump laid out very clearly that the military operation would support the people of Iran to do the uprising, but he was not going to do the uprising with military assets.
I think that's one of those missions that at times we see being expressed from the White House.
Other times we say no.
You're absolutely right about the ethnic makeup of Iran.
They're Kurds.
They're Azeris up north.
They're Baluchis out in the west.
It is incorrect to suggest that they are a heterogeneous Persian nation.
I also do agree with you that Iran is hell-bent on acquiring a nuclear weapon despite the proclamations suggesting they have no interest only for medical use.
The fatwa they claim came from the Supreme Leader.
Oil Revenues Fuel Russian War Effort00:03:22
The evidence is pretty, pretty convincing to me and to others, to include the IAEA, that Iran has produced and now admits about 200 kilograms of enhanced uranium, which is, as I said earlier, only uses for a nuclear weapon.
So fundamentally, I agree with all three of your points.
General, I want to ask you about the cost of the war.
The Washington Post said that just in the first two days, $5.6 billion worth of munitions were expended.
How easily are those replaced, and will the administration need to go to Congress and ask for more money?
Three points.
They're hard to replace because of the time it takes to produce.
The president had a meeting with the major defense producers last Friday, believes that he is on a path, but that path will take a long time.
Look how long it's taken us to produce dumb artillery rounds to provide to Ukraine.
You'd think that would be simple.
In fact, the hardest part of that is not the production of the metal, but it's actually the propellant.
So number one, problem with timing.
Number two, you can make the argument that we've already paid for those rounds, those precision munitions, so there's no new cost to the American people.
But of course, if we want to replenish our stocks at the end of this war, there will be a burden on the American people.
Now, that's not technically, that's not a problem for the administration.
That's a problem for the United States Congress as the organization that appropriates the money.
So I think that the United States Congress will have to stand up after this war as we take a look at the required inventories to fight other wars and see if they want to appropriate the money or not.
You mentioned the Ukraine war.
The New York Times reports that the Trump administration has started to loosen some restrictions on Russian oil experts that were designed to pressure the Kremlin over that war in Ukraine.
Is this conflict in Iran benefiting the Russians and enhancing their ability to fight in Ukraine?
Well, number one, the second question, the Russian economy is now a war economy.
If you inject more money into the Russian economy from additional oil revenues, the answer is yes.
They could produce more stuff which would prolong the war.
Is Russia a beneficiary or not a beneficiary?
I'm having a hard time understanding where Russia would have, would not be benefited by this war.
Their intelligence exchange that they're doing with Iran is a poke in the eye to the American intelligence that has been provided to Ukraine over the last four years.
So yeah, Russia is a winner in this war in Iran.
Iran Sponsors Regional Militia Groups00:15:27
I don't see where they don't benefit from it.
Mark is in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
Good morning, Mark.
Yeah, hello.
Good morning, and thank you for C-STAN.
Just for the host there, I like hearing one of your callers what their political leanings are because you get some real duties of cause and I like to know what those people, party are with, and I can judge from there how I think about those things.
But for your general there, considering that apparently you were there at the very beginning of what I would call the Bush administration's misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and you were there through the end of the Bush administration, if I understand correctly, what kind of grade would you give your guys' performance in that operation?
And whatever happened afterwards is on those guys.
But how did you guys do?
Well, I don't want to re-litigate the Iraq war.
I think that's pretty much history, whether it's fact or not.
It is conventional wisdom and history.
Could we have done better?
Of course we could have.
I'm not trying to justify or excuse anything that happened there, but I would tell you that with the exception of the Iranian proxies that would have been in Iraq, I think, in any situation, there have been more free elections inside of Iraq since 2003 than any other country, to include Israel in the Middle East.
It's a relatively prospering nation.
The security before the war was, and I expect it to be after the war, pretty safe, very safe.
I walk around the streets of Baghdad with no problem at all.
Is it a perfect country?
No.
Is it a secular democracy?
Yes.
What grade would I give the Iraq war?
C-.
Iraq, obviously, a border with Iran.
Could this conflict in Iran destabilize Iraq?
It won't destabilize Iraq.
There are a significant number of Iranian-backed militia groups that don't answer to the central government.
We have been pressuring Iraq for years to demobilize those illegal militias.
They've been unable to, but there's a big difference between Hezbollah and Lebanon and Khatib al-Hezbollah inside of Iraq.
It's a much smaller problem, but it's a problem nonetheless.
But I don't think it has any chance of destabilizing Iraq.
Elaine is in Michigan.
Good morning, Elaine.
Good morning to you.
Thank you.
I'm concerned, General, about all the news coverage that deals with the military situation in Iran.
And Iran can in no way compete with us militarily, except their skill is in terrorism.
And I can't help but believe their retaliation is going to be terrorism within our borders, like 9-11.
Is there any kind of awareness program that the military or the government can start discussing, even on programs like Washington Journal?
Well, the answer is yes.
To my knowledge, the U.S. government is actively seeking out Iranian-backed groups.
We know that a significant number have come across the borders over the years, and they are a threat.
I just would make note that the terrorist threat from Sunni-backed organizations has been over the past 20, well, since before 9-11, much more violent, much more focused on terrorism than Shia like Iran.
But nonetheless, Iran is a threat.
But even as recently as the attack on Mayor Mamdani's house the other day, that was clearly a Sunni-based organization who swore allegiance to ISIS.
I'm not trying to minimize the threat of Iranian terrorism.
It is there.
But compared to other Middle East terrorism, it's significantly less.
We just have to keep it on boat.
Do you think that might change, given the events of the last 10 days?
That's a good question.
Iran traditionally has not used terrorism as a method to broaden the Iranian revolution.
They've mostly used proxies, groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, the Hashid in Iraq, the Houthis.
I guess the requirement to be a proxy is that the first letter of your name is an H, but it just seems to work out that way.
Now, there have been Hezbollah-backed attacks in South America, and I don't see any reason why it couldn't happen in the United States, but historically, it hasn't happened.
Adam, Silver Spring, Maryland, good morning.
You're on the air.
Thank you for taking my call, and General.
Thank you for your insights.
One quick point is, you know, Iran has been, in recent times, sponsoring Shia and both Sunni and Shia-based militia groups across the region.
But to your point earlier that you don't feel that Russia could anything but benefit from the current conflict, I wonder if perhaps that's a short-term view.
Oil prices will rise in the short term.
When the conflict ends, they will come back down and Russia will be right back where it was.
But Russia has placed a number of strategic bets across the globe in Venezuela, in Cuba, in Iran, and across the Middle East.
And it's watching all of its bets lose.
Well, I think that's fair.
The question was asked about would they win in the current Iran war?
I see them having benefits there.
But I completely agree.
You also forgot the big loss they took in Syria.
So you're right.
Around the world, their bets have been losing over the past 10 years.
My view is simply that they're winning a little bit in the current situation in Iran.
And as you say, oil prices will probably come down when the war is over.
We've got this from Mike in Sierra Vista, Arizona.
He said, isn't the one thing that will keep the U.S. from attacking you is to have a nuclear weapon?
That's exactly my point.
And that's my point that I'd rather negotiate with Iran when it doesn't have a nuclear weapon than when in many ways it becomes invincible for defense when it does.
We're not going to attack North Korea anytime soon.
One of the major concerns we had after 9-11 was if Pakistan was linked to the attack, what would we do?
Would we try to topple the government in Karachi and potentially allow those, at that time, 40 nuclear warheads fall into the hands of the mullahs?
So, again, agree with you completely, which my view was it was only a matter of time before they developed the nuclear capability and we had to either negotiate it away or take it away.
The negotiations have failed repeatedly either because the Iranians have sent us home with agreements that did not stop their programs and even the latest round of negotiations with Witkoff and Jared,
it was becoming quite evident that the Iranians were just doing their standard delay, deny, dissemble, and I think that's why we walked away from the negotiating table.
Now, there are reports that Israel has said that they will target any Iranian leader.
So the new guy, the son of the late Khamenei, has also been targeted by, at least by Israel.
So what does that mean for stability in Iran and who we would negotiate with since you think that diplomacy is still possible?
Yeah, the joke going around is I wouldn't want to be much of a Khamenei's driver.
We act in our own self-interest and to some extent the defense of our allies.
Israel has to do the same thing.
It has to make decisions on its own independent of the massive amount of support they get from the Americans.
What the Iranians are doing, excuse me, what the Israelis are doing is what I call the Hezbollah tactic.
After the attack on October 7th, they started going after Hezbollah and they basically kept slicing away at the leadership of Hezbollah until they got a relatively pliant leader in the form of Naeem Qasim.
With the activities over the past couple of weeks where Hezbollah has risen up and started attacking again because of their support for Iran, that was a tactic.
It wasn't a completely successful tactic.
But I think that's what they're trying to do in Iran, is just slice away at the leadership.
If they ever, of the religious, of the clerical leadership and the supreme leader.
I don't necessarily agree that somehow taking out the clerics is going to give the power to the seculars.
In fact, there may even be a worst outcome, a worse outcome, which is if you get away the clerics and you go to a secular state, the most powerful institution inside the state is the security services.
And I would rather be negotiating with the clerics than I would with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards force.
Which is something that could happen as a result of this conflict, that we end up with a more extreme regime and a more radicalized population.
Perhaps not a radicalized population, but certainly a more radicalized security services.
It's interesting that after we killed the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, they dusted off.
You're talking about Soleimani?
No, that's the Quds force.
Okay.
I'm talking about the recent of the main Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps when he was taken out as part of the beginning of the war.
They dusted off Wahidi, the original founder of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, and put him back in office.
He started that organization in 88, and now he's running it again, which in my mind, and to many, is a sign that the IRGC is only getting stronger than weaker.
And if you take out the clerics, that's going to make the hardliners.
In fact, that's one of the reasons that Mochabo was brought in as the leader.
He's far more hardline, so much so that the clerics don't necessarily like him.
The clerics believe that the Spring Leader should never be a dynastic position, and it shouldn't have gone from father to son.
They would have preferred to see somebody other than Hamini's son take over.
But the fact that he was is an indication to many that the hardliners are getting more and more prominence inside the key political decisions of the country.
Let's talk to Paul Wintergarden, Florida.
You're on the air, Paul.
Thank you, General.
Thank you for your service.
And you mentioned that the president, it would have been a good time for him at the State of the Union to address this plan.
And I'd like you to elaborate a little bit more on that.
I mean, it was pretty obvious by watching the news that he was telling people that aircraft carriers were being stationed around Iran, that different ships were being stationed.
Surely you didn't mean giving a date and time of when the bombing would occur.
So if you just elaborate a little bit about that.
And secondly, we had previous on the show, we had a senator who was worried about putting boots on the ground and putting our soldiers in harm's way.
And nobody likes sea casualty.
I feel sorry for the family and pray for the families that lost the seven military members, their family members.
But isn't that what we have a military for to protect our country?
And with Iran yelling death to America, and you mentioned negotiating, they've been lying.
They've gotten cash.
They've had their assets unfrozen.
I mean, what else are we supposed to do knowing that they lied to the American people and to our government?
And they came right out and told Steve Woodcoff that, you know, we have uranium.
We have enough for 11 nuclear heads.
And that's all right.
And we're not going to give that up.
So, I mean, how much negotiation do you do before you say enough is enough, and we're not going to take the chance of them sending a bomb to the United States?
Thank you.
Yeah, very good questions.
And I would simply say at the State of the Union, he could say that We are assembling this armada, as he called it, as a means of coercive diplomacy.
When I was a young soldier in Germany, we used to say our job there is to deter, and if deterrence fails, to defend.
In other words, a visible sign of coercive diplomacy were the hundreds of thousands of American troops on the border, but that didn't necessarily mean that we were going to attack into East Germany.
But I would have preferred that he said at the State of the Union, I'm assembling this force, and if Iran is unwilling to negotiate in good faith and tell us how they're going to disassemble their nuclear program, I'm prepared to use that force.
My view is that would have been better.
Let me tell you about boots on the ground.
Coercive Diplomacy Requires Troops00:07:21
First of all, this administration has said we're not going to get involved in forever wars.
We're not going to spend 20 years inside of Iran.
That's not only a policy, but it's a reality.
In post-war Japan, we conducted an occupation with more soldiers than we have in the U.S. Army now.
We had about, if you believe General Shinseki, to conduct an occupation inside of Iraq would have taken several hundred thousand American troops to do it properly.
Iran is roughly four times the size of Iraq and two and a half times the population.
So extending that math, it probably would have taken maybe 700 or 800,000 soldiers on the ground to do that mission.
We only have 485,000 soldiers in the U.S. Army at present.
So either we go in with an insufficient occupation force, or we would have to renew the draft in my mind to get the number of forces it would take to assemble that force to do a proper occupation.
And I, too, am sorry to the families whose sons and daughters are either killed or injured in this fight.
David in Scottsdale, Arizona, you're on with retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
General, I don't understand why you can't come out and say that Donald Trump has made a myriad of mistakes in this process.
It seems to me that you're more willing to, if you will, shill for the Republicans than to criticize a president.
This president took us into a situation using, number one, two incompetent negotiators, not even members of the diplomatic staff.
In fact, the diplomatic staff has been eliminated, at least several hundred, since Trump came into office.
We had no quality people to negotiate, number one.
Secondly, the root of the problem begins when Trump trashed an agreement that would have at least maintained the status quo.
And I'm hearing some of the callers say that Witkoff said that he was told that they had warheads, 10 warheads or whatever it was.
There's no evidence of that.
That's coming from some media source.
There's no proof that that existed.
Trump has made a grave mistake, gotten us into something that we can't get out of right away, thinking that we would be hailed as liberators, like they thought in Iraq, and the Iraqis hate us, and this is what's going to happen.
You don't kill the leaders of the foreign country, and we didn't do it.
We let Israel do it.
So now we're following Israel's lead instead of taking the lead ourselves.
I think you should be much more critical of the Trump administration and Donald Trump than you are being.
Thank you very much.
Sure.
Listen, I understand all your points.
Let me see if I can go down them one by one.
I am critical about how this president and his staff and ministers, secretaries, have been communicating this war.
I too believe he should have more articulately expressed the purpose and end state for putting American aircraft in the air and the potential for taking casualties.
But I do believe that military action should have taken place if the Iranians are unwilling to give up their admitted nuclear capabilities in the form of their admission and the IAEA's confirmation that they had enhanced uranium sufficient enough to make,
sufficient to make a 11- nuclear weapons.
There's no evidence that they had enhanced it enough to weaponize it, but it was still, it's pretty easy to go from enhanced uranium to weapons-grade uranium.
Whitcoff and Jared have been fairly successful in negotiating the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon with Hamas.
and at least they got the Russians to the table for the Ukraine talks.
Diplomatic staffs, I also agree with you there, but I would also tell you that it was normally the case at the State Department where I served that it was rare that we would have the diplomatic staff of the State Department do the face-to-face high-level negotiations that was typically done by appointed special envoys, Dennis Ross, for example, on the Middle East peace process.
I do agree with you that the State Department has been gutted of its senior people, but I would also tell you that Schumer is preventing a lot of floor votes on appointment of ambassadors.
So I think that it's primarily an administration problem, but not exclusively an administration problem, the size and the depth of the diplomatic corps.
The agreement that you're talking about, the JCPOA, had a sunset clause of five years.
And if the Iranians were allowed to produce enough enhanced uranium for 11 nuclear weapons, I would argue that that is not an agreement that was working, primarily because we gave the responsibility for inspection and verification to the IAEA.
I would note that we have an organization, the On-Site Inspection Agency and the Open Skies Agreement that allow us to look at, touch, and inspect the nuclear weapons of Russia, and they in turn can do the same thing with us.
I don't believe that unless we have U.S. inspection and verification, which was not included in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which, oh, by the way, was never an agreement.
it was an agreement on a plan of action, then I don't think the JCPOA achieved the outcomes that we sought because of the denial, the delay, and the duplicity of the Iranian government.
By the way, if you go to factcheck.org, they do have the claims on Iran's nuclear and missile capabilities.
JCPOA Denied by Iranian Duplicity00:04:43
You can go through that.
If you look at factcheck.org, they've got a lot of good information on what is fact, and they've checked a lot of the claims.
This is Shonda in Florida.
You're on the air, Shonda.
Go ahead.
Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
Yes, General, I just want to ask you, how do you feel?
Do you think it's smart to go on an insult campaign to our NATO allies, to Canada, threatening and bullying countries?
And even after coming off of this whole, not even coming off, but still on this whole tariff thing.
And if I don't get what I want, I'm going to tear a few, tear a few, tear a few, and then go off and start a war.
Do you think our NATO allies would be there for us and would show up in the way we would need them to show up if we needed them?
Certainly some of them are sitting back going, nah, even though they may not want to see the American people hurt, but I'm sure some of them are praying on the downfall of Donald Trump.
They're not very happy with him now.
And I've even noticed with this war, I have military family.
I don't see the flags out like in the past.
I don't hear the patriotic songs like in the past.
And I think in the past, even if we didn't trust the president, we trust those that were advising him.
I'm not sure about those that are advising him now.
I don't think I trust them.
I don't know if they're as capable as in the past.
Well, first of all, to your family with military service, I thank them for their service, and I thank you for having to watch your sons or daughters or fathers or husbands join the military with the risk they take on.
There is a term called coercive diplomacy.
Now, every president since the founding of NATO has expected the NATO allies to devote an agreed upon percentage of their gross domestic product to their defensive requirements.
And every president has failed that mission up to Donald Trump.
He got the pledges out of them through coercive diplomacy, or as I call it, New York City dealmaking.
We would prefer the means and the ends to a line up, which is through means, through the use of diplomacy, and the NATO allies will pay their fair share for their defense needs.
That hasn't happened since NATO was founded in 1947.
So the president, as President Obama said, if you keep doing the same thing, expecting a different outcome, that probably won't happen.
So we get a New York businessman that comes in who uses coercive diplomacy and achieves the outcome.
So you can say what you can argue legitimately that point, whether it's that classic dichotomy between values and interests.
And in this case, our interests seem to have won out.
but at the cost, as you say, of losing friends and then adopting the na-na-na response.
We've got a question for you about the school that was hit in Iran.
It says, can General Kimmett comment on the Tomahawk missile that was mistakenly directed at a girls' school, killing over 200?
Was that a mistake by poor intelligence or a malfunction of the missile or neither?
I don't know.
If it has been admitted by the United States that it was a tomahawk missile, then we screwed up.
It wasn't admitted.
They said it's under investigation.
The Pentagon said it's under investigation.
It's under investigation.
And if it was done by a U.S. tomahawk missile, we need to get to the bottom of why that happened.
Tomahawk Mistake Under Investigation00:01:04
And candidly, at the appropriate time, we need to pay reparations to those families who have lost those daughters.
One last point about those advisors.
I agree with you in the main.
I would tell you that I continue to watch the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Kaine, and I am constantly impressed by the way he throws balls and strikes and keeps the politics out of his briefings.
We could have better advisors advising the president.
And I think Secretary of State slash National Security Advisor Marco Rubio has done a pretty good job.
Everybody else, well, let me just leave it at that.
All right, and we will leave it at that.
That's retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmett.
He was former Assistant Secretary of State in the George W. Bush administration.
General, thanks so much for joining us.
Oh, thanks for having me.
I appreciate the questions asked by the Americans.