9 hours ago
1
OPINION — “Remember this: We're being nice. I [President Trump] could take out [Iran’s] things within the next hour, we could hang up [this telephone interview] and within one hour you’d be reading about [the U.S. military] taking out [Iranian] nuclear power plants or power plants that create the electricity, that create the water -- they have desalinization all over the place. We could do things that would be so bad they [the Iranian leadership] could literally never rebuild as a nation again. And we're trying to be nice about it.”
That was President Trump during a 33-minute telephone interview that took place early Wednesday evening with Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade. Sections of that interview were later broadcast on Thursday morning during part of the three-hour Brian Kilmeade Show.
The whole interview, as originally recorded by Fox News, covered a range of subjects and listening to it all together provided a sense of Trump thinking one doesn’t get from hearing separate sound bites and video clips generally provided the public.
For example, Trump, having said the above about destroying Iran’s infrastructure, he then talks more about not doing it.
“We’re not doing it,” Trump said, “Now they'll [the Iranians] go around and shoot civilians all over the place, but we don't do that. But we could take out elements of what they have in terms of infrastructure. They would virtually never be able, time wouldn't matter, never be able to reproduce it, and so far, we've chosen not to do that."
Let’s go through what I believe are some of the more interesting elements of the interview.
Early on, Kilmeade noted Trump had talked of the 1,700 Iranians former-President Biden had let into the U.S. and some 700 were still here. Kilmeade added, “You [Trump] mentioned the other day that you believe you know where the sleeper cells are, these Iranian sleeper cells. If you know where they are, can we start going offensively after them legally?”
“We'll watch them very carefully,” Trump replied, adding, “Gotta be a little bit careful in a lot of ways…that's the problem, is you've got a lot of good [Iranian] people, but we're watching them very, very carefully. We have them under watch. Now, when you say that, uh, you say 1700, could be a lot more than that came in, but nobody knows because you had so many.”
Kilmeade did not follow up by asking Trump who is watching these Iranians “very carefully,” but the assumption has to be the FBI.
Minutes later Kilmeade asked Trump about reports about alleged planned Iranian drone attacks on California. “Is that real or is that verified? Did that cross your desk, is that a legitimate concern?” said Kilmeade.
Trump’s response: “Well, the first we heard about it was from Gavin Newsom, the incompetent governor of California.” Kilmeade asked, “He [Newsome] told you so?”
Trump then replied, “No, he announced it. It came out from him or his office. That's where we heard at first, he was talking about it.” Trump then went on to attack Newsom saying, “But he has learning disabilities, so I don't know, maybe he doesn't know, you know. He, he admitted he had learning disabilities. Somebody said, "Well, what's wrong with that?" I said, "That's okay, but not for the president." You know, [Laughs].
In fact, the day before, Wednesday March 11, ABC News disclosed the FBI published a February alert that there were unverified reports that Iran might possibly send drones to hit California. After that, on Wednesday, the FBI published its version of the February notice on social network X. Also last Wednesday, Governor Newsom, during a webinar on another issue, did speak about the FBI drone alert, but that drew no national mention.
More relevant, however, was that last Wednesday evening, Trump upon arriving at Joint Base Andrews, was asked about the ABC News and FBI social message of the possibility of drones hitting California and he responded, “It’s being investigated, but you have a lot of things happening. All we can do is take ’em as they come.”
So it appears to be that Trump was made aware of the California Iranian drone story the day before he attributed his own knowledge of the matter to Newsom, but it did give him the opening to attack the Californian.
Kilmeade asked about the U.S. escorting oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz and Trump replied, “Well, we would do it if we needed to, but we would do it if we needed to. But, you know, hopefully, things are gonna go very well. We're going to see what happens.”
When Kilmeade followed up asking, “But does it concern you that these tankers aren't getting through, and the one that did get through made its way to China? I would think that maybe we'd be stopping these tankers that got through.”
Trump replied: “Well, you'll have to see what happens over the next, you know, this just began. This is their new strategy. So you're going to have to watch, Brian, what's going to be happening over the next few days, and we'll see. We'll see how successful they are. But they're doing this as a last-ditch effort.”
That Trump reply gives support to those critics who have said the President, at least, was not prepared for Iran blocking the Strait of Hormuz, to cut world oil supplies, which most Iran experts knew was Tehran’s main card to play. Trump’s current thrashing around to get other
countries to supply warships to escort oil tankers is another sign of lack of U.S. preparation for this most obvious Iranian move.
On talk about mounting a complex military operation to seize what Kilmeade described as “the uranium that Steve Witkoff talked about, that they said they have over 400 kilograms of it? Is there some type of operation in place to grab it?”
Trump, for whom preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon was the first goal, replied, “No, not at all, and we're not focused on that. But at some point, we might be. Right now, we're focused on knocking the hell out of their missiles and their drones.”
This may not be a firm answer, and the recent plan to introduce a 2,500-person Marine expeditionary unit into the area of operations will give Trump yet another option to stop Iran from having material for a nuclear weapon. But Trump’s reply also shows the unpredictability of the course of the war.
When Kilmeade asked, “Are you thinking about taking Kharg Island where 90% of the [exported] Iranian oil goes through?” Trump replied, “Brian, I can't answer a question like that. You should, and you shouldn't ask it. Yeah, you shouldn't be even asking it. Uh, it's one of so many different things. It's not high on the list, but it's one of so many different things.”
“Okay,” said Kilmeade, but then Trump quickly added, “And I can change my mind in seconds. But, you know, if you'd ask a question, who would answer a question like that?”
Trump went on, “I mean, you're asking me a question, Kharg Island, okay, I think, who would ask a question like that? And what fool would answer it, okay? Let's say I was gonna do it, or let's say I wasn't gonna do it. What would I say to you?”
I look at that Trump response and think the President is thinking of taking over Kharg Island, but cannot make up his mind about doing it.
Kilmeade asked the ultimate question about the Iran war, “When are you going to know when it's over?”
Trump’s first response, “When I feel it -- I feel it in my bones.”
Kilmeade then asked, “Will you ask anybody in particular, would that be some of these, a joint decision?”
Trump replied, “Well, I deal with people. I have great people, you know? I have [Joint Chiefs Chairman] General Raizin Caine, I have [Defense Secretary] Pete [Hegseth]. Pete's turned out to be a star. [Secrtery of State Rubio] Marco's great, [Vice President] J.D. [Vance]. I've got all good people. I've got, we've got a great group.”
Can that be the inner circle for the war in Iran?
“Are people speaking up and speaking their minds?” Kilmeade asked.
“They do,” Trump said. “I let them speak their mind, and they do. And we have some differences, but they, they never end up being much. I convince them all to, let's do it my way.”
That, I’m afraid, tells us all we want to know.
The Cipher Brief is committed to publishing a range of perspectives on national security issues submitted by deeply experienced national security professionals. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of The Cipher Brief.
Have a perspective to share based on your experience in the national security field? Send it to Editor@thecipherbrief.com for publication consideration.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief
