Sec. Rubio speaks from White House amid Iran conflict

[0:00] Rubio. I'll have a brief remarks here and then we'll get to your questions. [0:05] As you know, over the weekend, the president announced this project, Freedom, and the goal of [0:10] it is to, frankly, if you want to talk about it, it's to rescue like almost 23,000 civilians from [0:15] 87 different countries that are trapped inside of the Gulf and left for dead in the Persian Gulf [0:22] by this Iranian regime. For more than two months now, these innocent sailors and commercial crew [0:28] members have been stranded out at sea because Iran is conducting something that's not just [0:32] criminal. It's criminal for sure, but it's desperate and destructive, this blockade of the [0:36] Straits of Hormuz. Nations from around the world, the overwhelming majority of whom are not even [0:40] engaged in any military hostilities, are now at risk not just of losing their cargo, but the lives of [0:47] their own citizens because of this blockade. These ships, you know, you don't leave a ship out there [0:52] for this long. You start running out of food. You start running out of potable water, essential [0:56] supplies, and they're at the mercy of this piracy. What it is, it's piracy. And not only that, [1:02] but some of them have seen, you know, been open fire on and rained down senseless attacks on several [1:08] civilian ships already. So, frankly, the way to put it, these are innocent bystanders. These are [1:13] countries and ships and so forth that have nothing to do with any of this and nonetheless are being caught [1:18] in the middle of it and being held hostage merely because Iran could do that. Just because of, [1:22] just as the regime brutally slaughtered tens of thousands of their own citizens for the crime [1:29] of peaceful protest because they're unhappy with the quality of life or the lack of quality of life [1:33] in Iran today. And so they're sitting ducks. They're isolated. They're starving. They're [1:37] vulnerable. And at least 10 sailors have already died as a result of the civilian sailors. So already [1:43] many nations privately and some publicly have asked the United States to help free their ships and to [1:48] restore freedom of navigation in the Straits of Hormuz and this critical artery of global trade. [1:53] And so President Trump, as he always does, stepped up and answered the calls for their help. And [1:58] he's directed the United States military to guide these stranded ships to safety, to provide a [2:02] protective bubble under which they can operate and move product and get themselves out of there and [2:07] out of harm's way. And this is the first step towards reopening the strait and bringing this regime's [2:12] last-ditch act of economic arson, bringing that to a close. Only we're doing it, not only because we [2:19] were asked, but because we're the only ones who can. Only we have the power to sort of take the steps that [2:24] we've taken now. Under this president, under President Trump, the United States will help our friends. We're [2:29] going to stand up to rogue regimes like the one in Tehran. And we're going to be unashamed to use our power and [2:36] our abilities to project military power in the service of our national interest above all else. Now, what's really [2:42] important for you to report and for everyone to understand is this is not an offensive operation. This is a [2:47] defensive operation. And what that means is very simple. There's no shooting unless we're shot at first. Okay? We're not [2:53] attacking them. We're not. But if they're attacking us or they're attacking a ship, you need to respond to that. [2:58] You're not going to let some fast boat come up on the ship and shoot it up. We're going to respond to it. And we've been [3:03] successful at it. I don't know what the exact number is, but I know a number of those fast boats have now been targeted [3:07] and will continue to be if they pose a threat to our forces. We'll shoot down drones. We'll shoot down [3:12] missiles. But it's defensive in nature. This is defensive. So if you hear stories about attacks [3:17] and launching of firing back and forth, it's not back and forth. We are only responding if attacked [3:22] first. This is a defensive operation. And that's what's occurring here. Just about the importance of [3:27] the Straits for a moment. This is approximately a quarter of the world's oil trade, along with significant [3:31] volumes of fuel and fertilizer that operate through the Straits of Hormuz. The Iranian regime cannot be [3:37] allowed to dictate who uses this vital waterway. I don't think this is also being reported enough. [3:43] Maybe you are reporting. I don't read everyone. I don't have any damn outlets here. I don't know [3:46] who you all are. But I mean, I know who some of you are, but I don't know who all of you are. [3:50] But I will say this about it. This is an international waterway. This is an international [3:56] waterway. And international law is very clear. And I love it because everybody always talks about [4:00] international law. And this international law on this is very clear. International waterways, [4:04] no country can control them. There is no international law that allows you to [4:08] say, I'm going to put mines in an international body of water, and I'm going to blow up ships [4:12] that don't listen to us and try to go through. That's what Iran is doing. This is a criminal [4:16] act. And someone needs to do something about it. Something needs to be done. It's completely [4:20] illegal, completely illegitimate, and completely unacceptable. And that's why the United States [4:24] military is guiding stranded commercial ships safely through the strait, and is working [4:29] to restore freedom of navigation and putting an end to these efforts to hold the global economy [4:33] hostage. So far, as a proof of concept and as a proof of function, two U.S. flag merchant [4:40] ships have successfully transferred the Strait of Hormuz in the first stages of this project, [4:44] and they're now safely on their way. The U.S. military is deploying the necessary assets [4:49] to extend this defensive umbrella over commercial shipping. But there should be no mistake, and [4:54] as I said this already, this is a defensive operation. I want to reiterate that point. This is important [4:59] to understand. If no shots are fired at these ships and no shots are fired at us, we're not firing [5:04] shots. But if we're fired on, we will respond, and we will respond with lethal efficiency. [5:09] The assets supporting this project, by the way, include guided missile destroyers, over 100 land [5:14] and sea-based aircraft, multi-domain unmanned platforms, and 15,000 of the finest military service [5:20] members on the planet. These forces have already destroyed, as I told you earlier, I thought it was [5:25] six. It's seven Iranian fast boats that failed to heed our warnings. And by fast boats, we're talking [5:30] about, you know, some of these things look like Boston whalers, okay? So these are not like Navy [5:34] ships. But nonetheless, they come fast at these boats, try to swarm them, try to harm them. We're not [5:38] going to let that happen. So seven of them now sit at the bottom of the sea, along with, by the way, [5:43] the rest of Iran's Navy. That's where you can find their Navy today. And we're going to continue to [5:47] systematically clear this passageway through the Straits to restore freedom of navigation. Now, while this [5:53] project steadily progresses, Operation Epic Fury, Economic Fury, I'm sorry, continues to impose [5:59] maximum pressure on the Iranian regime and what remains of their already frail economy. Today, inflation [6:05] in Iran is 70 percent, and their currency is in total and complete freefall. The U.S. sanctions [6:12] enforcement is stepping up. It's moving in lockstep with the naval blockade to degrade Iran's capacity [6:17] to generate, to move, and repatriate revenue. It directly targets the regime's primary revenue [6:23] lifelines. The blockade alone is costing Iran as much as $500 million a day in lost revenue. [6:32] Ninety percent of total Iranian trade has been halted, causing permanent damage to Iran's oil [6:36] infrastructure as wells are forced to shut in. Again, all of this is in response to their piracy, [6:42] okay? It cannot be that you have these straits, and they blow up any ship that moves, and the only [6:47] ships they get to go through are theirs. You can't have a situation in which the straits are close to [6:50] everyone else, but they benefit from the piracy. That can't happen. That's why the blockade is in [6:55] place, and that's why these sanctions are crippling them. Any foreign financial—by the way, Treasury is [7:00] now identifying and cutting off every dollar of revenue that's flowing to this regime. And so, [7:05] look, any foreign financial institution or commercial actor that enables Iran sanctions evasion is going to [7:11] face secondary sanctions, exposure, and a loss of access to the U.S. financial system. As President [7:17] Trump has said, and the facts clearly bear out, the United States of America holds all the cards. [7:22] There is no scenario here in which if they decide to join a ladder of escalation, they wind up getting [7:28] the last say. But our preference is for these straits to be opened to the way they're supposed to be [7:33] open, back to the way it was. Anyone can use it. No mines in the water. Nobody paying tolls. That's what we [7:39] have to get back to, and that's the goal here. Every day the conflict continues, however, our leverage [7:43] on Iran will continue to increase, and their position will continue to weaken, especially as [7:48] the blockade really begins to bite in conjunction with the sanctions. So, look, the times come for [7:53] Iran to make a sensible choice, and it's not easy for them to do that, obviously, because they have a [7:57] fracture in their own leadership system. And apart from that, I mean, the top people in that government [8:02] are, to say the least, you know, they're insane in the brain. And so we need to address that, and it's [8:10] difficult because it's hard to get past that in their system. But it's important for them to make [8:14] a sensible choice and the one that's right for their people. The president, our president, has proven [8:18] time and again that his preference is peace. But Iran must accept the reality of this situation and [8:23] come to the negotiation table and accept terms that are good for them but ultimately good for the world. [8:28] The diplomatic path, if there's a real diplomatic path, I'm not always going to be one, but if [8:32] there's a real diplomatic path and we continue to explore it, Steve and Jared are working on that [8:36] very hard, if there is one there, it could be one that leads them to reconstruction, to prosperity [8:41] and to stability, and to not posing a threat to the world. The alternative is growing isolation, [8:46] economic collapse, and ultimately total defeat. I know what the right choice is for Iran. I hope that [8:52] the people over there making decisions will make the right one. The last point I would make, [8:55] and it really is important for them to understand this, is they really shouldn't test the will of [8:59] the United States, at least not under President Donald Trump. He has proven time and again that [9:04] he will back up what he says. And if they test him, ultimately they will lose. The hard way, [9:09] the easy way, the long way, the short way, they will lose. And with that, it's time for your questions. [9:15] So, Catherine, why don't we start with you first? [9:17] Hi, Catherine Herrich. I'm an independent journalist. Secretary Rubio, have you seen any recent indications [9:23] that Iran is willing to give up this nuclear weapons program that is credible, verifiable, [9:28] and that would lead to an immediate de-escalation? [9:31] Well, look, this is a longstanding problem for them, right? I mean, they have wanted, [9:36] they have always said they don't want a nuclear weapon. That's because they've always said that, [9:40] they just don't mean it. And why do you say, well, how do you know they don't mean it? Well, [9:43] we don't mean it because they do all, they're doing all the things and historically have tried to do all [9:46] the things that you do if you want a nuclear weapons program. For example, they innovate and try to [9:51] innovate long-range delivery missiles that now, in some cases, are capable of reaching much of [9:55] Europe. They build these large underground centrifuges for enrichment activity. There are [10:02] many, there are countries in the world that are involved in the enrichment business, but these [10:05] guys do it in mountains and in caves and in hiding. They've always had secret components of their [10:10] nuclear program undisclosed to the world. And we know for a fact that they retain highly enriched uranium [10:16] at 60% that they, that they did so. And that has no civilian use, none, zero whatsoever. So they [10:22] have an opportunity here to agree to something that will make it clear that they're, that they're not [10:26] interested in a new, one thing is to say, we don't want a nuclear weapon. Another thing is to do the [10:30] things that prove you don't want a nuclear weapon. By the way, if what Iran wants is a civilian nuclear [10:34] program for power plants and stuff like that, there are a lot of countries in the world that have that [10:38] and they don't enrich. They, they import, they import the enriched material. You know, they could have that if [10:44] that's what they wanted, but they're not acting like that's what they wanted. They're acting like [10:47] they want a military, you know, nuclear program. That's unacceptable. So that's the process we're [10:52] engaged in now to create, that's the, the object of this diplomacy is to come up with some level of [10:58] understanding about what are the topics that they've agreed to negotiate on. We don't have to have the [11:02] actual agreement written out and one day this is highly complex and highly technical, but we have to [11:06] have a diplomatic solution that is very clear about the topics that they are willing to negotiate on [11:12] and the extent and the concessions they're willing to make at the front end in order to make those [11:15] talks worthwhile. That's what Steve and Jared and the whole team is working on, and I hope to have [11:19] good news on it. That's the outcome we would prefer. That's the outcome we would have preferred a year [11:24] ago. That's the outcome I think most of us would have preferred a long time ago, but that's not the [11:28] option they've given us given their activity. All right, can I, there's no way I can figure out who to [11:32] call on. I'm just going to like press right in the middle, right there, you right there, yeah, yeah, [11:36] in the back row. Thank you, Mr. President. I'll go to you next. All right, go ahead. Thank you, [11:42] Secretary Rubio. Keep going right. Welcome to the White House. What's that? You're talking to me, [11:46] sir? Yeah, to you. Yes, sir. Thank you. I have two questions on two separate issues that come under. [11:52] Do they get two questions for these? Two questions. There's a lot of people in here. [11:55] All right, well, you answer it. You can ask me two questions. I'll give you one answer. Go ahead. [12:00] Thank you very much. And I'll pick the one I like better. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. The first has to do [12:04] with the blockade. There are lawmakers from both parties who claim the blockade is an act of war. [12:11] What do you say to that? And my second question has to do with the fuel embargo of Cuba. How long, [12:18] Mr. Secretary, will that last? Okay, two things. All right, good. I'll answer both your questions [12:22] because I like the second one, too. The first one on the blockade. And so why do we have a blockade? [12:26] We have a blockade because they shut down the straits. So I don't know which members of Congress you're [12:30] talking to, but here's what I would ask them. I would ask everybody here. It's very simple. [12:33] These guys have shut down the straits of Hormuz. This is what Iran is saying. We will shut down [12:38] the straits. No one can go through. No country in the world can go through unless we allow you to [12:42] go through and you have to pay us. But our ships can go through, meaning the Iranian ships, as much [12:47] as they want. That's crazy. Who would agree to that? So how are we going to have a situation where they [12:51] get to close the straits to everybody and the only people who are allowed to go through there 100% [12:55] without paying anything are the Iranians? If you do that, they'll keep the straits closed forever. [12:59] They're trying to make this some new normal. Under no circumstances can we ever allow them [13:04] to normalize the fact that they get to blow up commercial ships and put mines in the water. [13:09] So the response to that is we're going to blockade your ships. If everyone's ships are not getting [13:13] out, your ships are not getting out either. That's not an act of war. That's a defensive measure. It's a [13:17] counter to what they have decided to do. You know what is an act of war? Putting mines in the water. [13:23] Why don't the members of Congress, whoever it is, is complaining about it. They should be all over that. [13:26] These guys put mines in the water. That alone, mining in the water is illegal, period, under any [13:32] circumstances. And they've done it. This is crazy stuff, but this is what they've done. On Cuba, oil [13:37] blockade on Cuba. There's no oil blockade on Cuba, per se. Here's what's happening with Cuba, okay? [13:42] Cuba used to get free oil from Venezuela. They used to give them a bunch of free oil. They would take like [13:47] 60% of that oil and resell it for cash. It wouldn't even go to benefit the people. So the only blockade [13:52] that's happened is the Cubans have decided, I mean, the Venezuelans have decided we're not giving you free [13:56] oil anymore. And you can only imagine nowadays, the way oil prices are, no one's giving away free [14:01] oil, much less to a failed regime. So the problem with Cuba is worse, okay? Their economic model [14:07] doesn't work. Doesn't work. And the people who are in charge can't fix it. And the reason that I can't [14:12] fix it is not just because they're communists, that's bad enough, but they're incompetent communists. [14:16] The only thing worse than a communist is an incompetent one. And that's what, so an incompetent [14:21] communist run that country, they don't know how to fix it. They really don't. And we have 90 miles from [14:24] our shores, a failed state. That also happens to be friendly territory for some of our adversaries. [14:29] So it's an unacceptable status quo. I will be addressing it, but not today. Okay. [14:34] Let's go to the front, right there. Secretary Rubio, Secretary Rubio. [14:37] You are going to the Vatican to meet with the Pope. Is this an attempt to smooth things over [14:42] with the Pope, given the rhetoric between President Trump and Pope Leo? [14:47] No, I mean, it's a trip we had planned from before, and obviously we had some stuff that happened. [14:51] No, look, there's a lot to talk about with the Vatican. I'll give you one example. The Pope just returned [14:54] from a trip to Africa, where the church is growing very vibrantly. And we have shared concerns about [14:59] religious freedom, religious freedom in different parts of the world. We'd love to talk to them about [15:04] that. The topic of Cuba, you know, we gave Cuba $6 million of humanitarian aid, but obviously they [15:09] won't let us distribute it. We distributed it through the church. We'd like to do more. We're willing to [15:14] give more humanitarian aid to Cuba, by the way, distribute it through the church, but the Cuban regime [15:18] has to allow us to do it. They won't allow us to give their own people more humanitarian aid, [15:22] and we're willing to do it through the church. So there's a lot to talk about. [15:25] And the president recently said that the Pope is endangering a lot of Catholics as a result [15:30] of his rhetoric around the Iran war. Is that a sentiment? [15:34] Well, I don't think that's an accurate description of what he said. I think what the president [15:36] basically said is that Iran can't have a nuclear weapon because they would use it against places [15:40] that have a lot of Catholics and Christians and others for that matter. It goes back to the central [15:44] point. I think the president, without trying to speak for him, but I think I can characterize it this [15:48] way. He doesn't understand why anybody, leave aside the Pope, the president and I, for that matter, [15:53] I think most people, I cannot understand why anyone would think that it's a good idea for Iran to ever [15:58] have a nuclear weapon. Look what they're doing with the Straits right now. They're holding the whole [16:01] world hostage. They have these sailors, you know, on commercial ships that are going to starve to [16:06] death out there. They don't care. They don't care that this is melting down, the economies around [16:10] the world, even of their own allies. This is what they're doing with the Straits. What do you think [16:14] they would do if they had a nuclear weapon? They would hold the world hostage with that nuclear [16:18] weapon. That's what they would do. They would do exactly to the world with a nuclear weapon, [16:21] what they're doing now with the Straits. And I think the president's point is how anyone cannot [16:25] see that as an unacceptable outcome and an unacceptable risk is beyond him. It's puzzling. [16:30] And someone has to do something about it. The difference between this president and like [16:34] the six presidents that preceded him were that he's the only one that's actually been willing to do [16:38] something about it. Everyone says Iran can't have a nuclear weapon, but you got to do something about it at some [16:42] point. And he's been willing to address that threat. And that's what he promised he would do [16:45] when he got elected, by the way, is address threats like this. [16:49] Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary. [16:51] Yeah, you. I wish I knew your name. [16:53] Yeah, thank you so much, Mr. Secretary. [16:54] Can you put name tags on? [16:56] Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary. [16:57] Who are you with? Who are you with? [16:59] I'm with Roudao Media Network. [17:01] Okay. [17:02] Mr. Secretary, the president has said multiple times that weapons were provided to the Kurdish [17:07] group to pass on the Iranian people. However, Kurdish political parties and the regional government [17:11] says they have not received such weapons. Even some claim, these weapons remain in the U.S. [17:17] base in the region. Can you clarify who those weapons were given to and whether you intend to [17:22] retrieve them or still want to pass to the Iranian people? [17:25] Yeah, look, ultimately, what the president is expressing and I think has repeatedly is he [17:29] wished the Iranian people had, you know, look, he's heartbroken by these images. You think about it, [17:34] you're an Iranian, okay? You're unhappy that your economy doesn't work for you. You don't have [17:38] freedom. You don't have an opportunity to express yourself. You know, you've got friends that have [17:42] been shot in the head because they're out protesting. And he just, it's heartbreaking to him to see that [17:46] these people are abused in this way and have no measures to take against their own government [17:50] as a result of it. By the way, this goes back, if you guys remember the protests in 2009 where [17:54] they slaughtered people in the street. This is a vicious regime, guys, okay? These are people that hang [18:00] people from cranes in the town square so everyone can see. They continue these executions of people [18:05] and have done, continue to do so for over a decade and a half now. And so I think what the president [18:10] is expressing is the desire that he wishes the Iranian people had an ability to fight back [18:15] against some of these things that are happening to them. And I would view that as distinct and [18:19] separate from the specifics of this operation that was ongoing before it concluded and certainly [18:25] different from the operation that's going on now. [18:27] Mr. Secretary, thank you so much. On Lebanon, are we in a ceasefire or less fire? And the [18:42] second question, do you think you would be able to achieve an agreement between Lebanon and Israel [18:48] and Israel without risking a civil war in Lebanon? What are you doing to risk—what are you doing to—? [18:53] No, I got it. I got just your question. So look, here's the challenge with Lebanon, okay? There's [18:58] no problem between the Lebanese government and the Israeli government. Israel doesn't claim [19:02] any land in Lebanon belongs to them. And by and large, I think a peace deal between Lebanon [19:06] and Israel is imminently achievable and should be. The problem with Israel and Lebanon is not [19:11] Israel or Lebanon, it's Hezbollah. Hezbollah operates from inside of Lebanese territory. They terrorize [19:17] and attack Israelis, but they also are inflicting tremendous damage on the Lebanese people. The [19:21] reason why Lebanon gets attacked by Israel is because of Hezbollah, because Hezbollah is hiding [19:26] in some house, launching rockets against Israelis, and then they get hit. So what you're seeing now is [19:32] Israeli responses to either attacks or perceived threats. And this is going to be—this is not new. [19:37] This has been going on for a very long time. What is our hope? Our hope is to engage the Lebanese [19:42] and Israeli governments under, you know, our mediation at the table to achieve this. And that [19:47] is having Lebanese armed forces and a Lebanese government, not just with a willingness, [19:51] but with the capability to begin to challenge Hezbollah and disarm them. Because the Lebanese [19:57] people are also victims of Hezbollah. And by the way, on the topic of Hezbollah in Lebanon, [20:02] who is behind Hezbollah? Why do they exist? They're an agent of Iran. If you go through that Middle East [20:07] and you identify every problem—Hamas, Hezbollah, to some extent the Houthis, obviously, and others—behind [20:13] every one of these groups is Tehran. So apart from the nuclear weapons, apart from all these other [20:18] things, these guys are behind all the bad actors. Hezbollah is a wing. It's an extension of Iranian [20:23] desire to destabilize the region. So we're very committed to this process. It's not going to be [20:27] easy. You're asking me a complex question. You know this has been going on for a very long time. [20:30] It's not going to be easy. We're going to do everything we can to make sure that both sides [20:34] continue to talk so that progress can be made on some sort of permanent ceasefire that isn't [20:39] constantly spoiled by Hezbollah and by Hezbollah violence. Right in there. [20:43] Thank you, sir. I'm just—I'm winging it, guys, okay? Right there. Yes, sir. [20:47] You mentioned the two U.S. ships that safely cross the Strait of Hormuz. Are other ships being told it's [20:53] safer to get back to regular levels, or are we still going to see limits in place for the foreseeable [20:57] future? Well, for obvious reasons, I'm not going to broadcast who we're talking to or who we're [21:00] telling them to move. I mean, we want these operations to be safe. And I think as it unfolds and ships get [21:05] through, we'll make those announcements after the fact just for operational security purposes. [21:09] But the goal here is pretty simple. Establish a zone of transit that is protected by a bubble, [21:15] the United States, both naval and air assets, and then allow ships who want to move to move [21:19] through there and get to market to begin to increase confidence in the ability to do so. [21:24] That doesn't happen in 12 hours. It takes time to set up that bubble and gain that confidence, [21:28] but that's the goal. We have been in touch. We've been in touch, I don't know, with a bunch of different [21:32] liners about moving. And we're hoping to continue to improve the security situation, and we'll start to [21:38] see some of that movement. And we'll announce it as it happens after the fact. We're not going to be [21:42] like broadcasting, hey, tomorrow at 12, Ship X is going to be coming through for obvious reasons, [21:46] because that degrades the security. But we feel confident we're going to be able to achieve [21:49] that. Look, it's not going to solve the whole Straits problem. It's going to solve a lot of it. [21:53] But it's important to challenge what Iran is doing now. Guys, again, I wonder if you take anything away [21:58] today. And I can't tell you what to write. But we, Iran cannot be allowed to normalize this [22:03] control of the Straits. It's completely unlawful, illegal. It's outrageous. And every country in [22:08] the world should be joining us and condemning it and doing something about it. But the United States [22:11] has stepped up and is trying to do something. [22:13] I'm sorry. We'll see if we get to Colombia today. Go ahead. You guys have an election. [22:21] Why don't you want to talk to your election? Go ahead. [22:23] Mr. Secretary, John Michael Ross with Daily Mail. I was curious about your meeting with SouthCom [22:26] earlier. There was a picture, a map of Cuba behind you. What did you discuss with SouthCom [22:32] about Cuba? And do you have any updates on Greenland? [22:34] I'm not going to tell you what I discussed with SouthCom. [22:36] But it had to do something with Cuba. [22:38] No. Well, I mean, Cuba's in SouthCom. You know, it's the closest part. And so the second [22:42] point, our ambassadors were in from the whole Western Hemisphere. I was addressing them, [22:47] meeting the general who just took command of SouthCom. And there happened to be a map of Cuba. [22:51] And I said, it'd be good if we took a picture in front of that map, because it's like the closest [22:54] thing in SouthCom to the United States. So there it is. We have maps of other countries. [23:00] But, but, but, but, but, huh? [23:02] What about Greenland? Did you update on Greenland? [23:04] No, they didn't have that map then. [23:06] Right there in the red. [23:09] In the red. Okay. [23:11] Cristina de Telemundo, Mr. Secretary. Can I ask you in Spanish? [23:13] Or can I ask you in both? [23:14] Yeah, you can answer in Spanish. You can ask me. [23:16] They'll have to translate for them what you asked me. [23:18] I'll say it in English, and if you can answer in both languages. [23:20] Today, I checked the webpage of the State Department, and there's still [23:25] a $25 million bounty on Diosdado Cabello, the Secretary of Interior, for drug trafficking [23:31] and narco-terrorism. I was wondering if that has been put on hold, or if you're negotiating [23:36] with President Darcy Rodríguez to turn him over. [23:39] Yeah, I don't have any updates for you on that. [23:42] The website is what it is, and that's where it stands. That policy hasn't changed. [23:46] But I, guys, I mean, let's be mature here a little bit. I'm not going to tell you about [23:48] what we're talking about with the leader of these countries. [23:50] The policy of the United States on that topic hasn't changed. When it does, you know, [24:08] obviously it will inform you, but I don't have any news for you on that today. [24:11] Right there in the green. I'll get to you guys. Are you guys all the TV people? [24:18] All right, go ahead. I'm sorry. Go. I'm learning. They gave me a little map. I don't know where [24:22] I put it of the people here. Some of you have, like, red Xs. I'm kidding. No, that's not true. [24:26] Go ahead. [24:26] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. The average price of gas in the country right now is $4.50. [24:32] Do you have a thought on how long Americans are supposed to kind of accept this? Do you think it [24:37] will affect Republicans majorities in the midterms? Well, I don't, I'm not going to speculate on the [24:41] politics of it. You can tell me, I mean, look, it's obviously being driven by global events. That [24:45] was true during the Russia-Ukraine war as well, where you saw that come up. It's one of, look, [24:49] we don't benefit from the Straits as much as other countries. I don't know if you've seen what the [24:52] gas prices are like in other parts of the world that are really suffering big time. So we're very [24:57] fortunate that the United States, I believe right now is like the world's largest net exporter of oil and [25:02] natural gas as a result, not because of this war, but because we have this capacity. So we've been insulated to some degree. [25:06] We're obviously still vulnerable to some extent to global prices and so, but in the end, I mean, [25:11] we're more insulated than other countries, even though that's not welcome news to Americans that [25:15] are paying more at the pump, no doubt about it. And it certainly is one of the circumstances of it. [25:20] There are people that we're predicting would be much higher at this point, but we're not taking [25:22] that for granted. Suffice it to say that this is, think about it this way. Everybody needs to think [25:28] about it this way. If Iran had a nuclear weapon and they decided to close the Straits and make our gas [25:32] prices like $9 a gallon or $8 a gallon, we wouldn't be able to do anything about it, [25:36] because they have a nuclear weapon. And a nuclear armed Iran could do whatever the hell they want [25:41] with the Straits and there's nothing anyone would be able to do about it. And that's one of the many [25:46] reasons, apart from like the massive loss of life and a nuclear strike, why Iran can never have a [25:51] nuclear weapon. I mean, so this is an example of if they had a nuclear weapon, they closed the Straits [25:56] and they would tell the world, what are you going to do about it? We have a nuclear weapon, we can attack [25:59] you with it. That's the world none of us want to leave behind. It won't happen under this president's watch, [26:03] but some future president and future, you know, and the future Americans will have to deal with this. [26:07] So just one more example of why these guys can never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. [26:11] Right there, in the black. Right you in the black. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. [26:16] Where are you? No, right there. You both are wearing black. She's closer. No, you don't have black, [26:21] you have blue on. I'm colorblind, but I know blue and black. Right there. Yes, ma'am. No, no, [26:25] you. The first one I called on. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you. This is chaos, guys. [26:29] Go ahead. Welcome to the White House. [26:31] You've long been a leading voice on human rights in China, including religious persecution and [26:37] forced organ harvesting. So President Trump prepares to meet Xi Jinping next week. Do you [26:42] expect human rights concerns to be on the table? Well, we always raise those issues and they [26:47] remain true. And I think we've proven in some cases it's most effective to raise them in the [26:50] appropriate setting. But we always raise those issues. They're important to us, among with others, [26:54] of course. But those issues remain prominent in our view and in our conversation about these things. [26:58] And we'll continue to raise them in the appropriate forums. All right. Let's get to the front. [27:04] These guys are going to get mad. Go ahead. I'm sorry. Thank you. So I'm McKinney Associated Press. [27:08] You mentioned earlier that some countries are privately and publicly indicated their willingness to help [27:12] with Project Freedom. Can you say how many have reached out to the U.S. with the offers of help and [27:17] what kind of capabilities? Well, I mean, thank you for your question. That's a good question. I mean, [27:22] multiple countries have said we've got to do something about it and fix it. Is it like [27:25] dozens or single digits or more than a hundred? I don't know. I don't put a number on it. I would [27:29] just tell you that. Here's what I would say about it. The capabilities is the issue. Okay. A lot of [27:34] countries would love to do something about it. They don't have a Navy. Right. Or they can't get [27:37] there in time or they can't. Others, you know, are less, you know, that some unfortunately do have a [27:41] Navy are saying, oh, we'll be involved, but we'll be involved after it's over. Well, after it's over, [27:46] it's kind of like, you know, that makes sense. So, you know, we'd like to have it. Now, there may be some [27:51] utility in a post, you know, closure mission. I'm not downplaying that, but I think that's been [27:57] the challenge, but there are other ways they can help unique ways that they can help. And I don't [28:01] want to get into who these countries are for obvious reasons, you know, because they are prepared [28:05] to help us in certain ways, but maybe don't want that publicly disclosed for no other reason than it [28:09] impacted foreign policy. It could have some domestic ramifications, but ultimately, I don't want to [28:14] mislead you. The primary responsibility for this project freedom is on the United States because we're the [28:19] only country that can project power in that part of the world the way we're doing now. [28:22] We're the only ones that can do it, and we're going to do it as a favor to the world. Understand [28:26] this. This is a favor to the world because it's their ships that are stranded. It's their fuel [28:30] supplies that are stranded. By the way, it's their humanitarian. There's humanitarian aid [28:34] destined for different countries in the world that's stranded in the Persian Gulf right now. [28:39] It's the fertilizer that they need for their food and crops that's stranded in the Persian, [28:43] not our fertilizer, their fertilizer. So we want to be helpful, and that's why the president [28:47] stepped forward, because we're the only ones that can. Frankly, we're the only ones that can. [28:51] Mr. Secretary, on the rising oil and gas prices, the president has said that this is a small price [28:55] to pay for getting rid of a nuclear weapon, but 10 weeks in, are we any closer to getting rid of [29:01] Iran's nuclear material? Yeah, but look, here's the way to think about Iran, and this is what I [29:05] described at the very beginning of this. What was Iran's plan? You have to understand what their plan was. [29:09] Their plan was they were going to build this conventional shield where they would have so many [29:12] thousands of missiles and drones and rockets that they couldn't be attacked. And behind that [29:17] conventional shield that they were trying to build, they would then break out and do whatever they [29:20] wanted with their nuclear program. They no longer have that conventional shield, okay? We told you [29:24] guys from the very beginning, and we're very consistent in this messaging, the operation that has [29:30] concluded was going to destroy their navy. They have no navy left. They don't. Not a navy. They have small [29:34] boats and Boston whalers, but they don't have a navy left. They don't have an air force. I challenge you. [29:39] When is the last time you read or heard about an Iranian jet flying anywhere? They don't have an [29:43] air force. Their missile launching capability has been substantially degraded, and their industrial [29:48] base, their defense industrial base, has been severely, severely damaged. So their ability to build a [29:54] shield behind which they could hide their nuclear program was wiped out. That's a very substantial [29:59] achievement, and that was the purpose of this operation from day one. But do you have to get their [30:02] nuclear material in order for this war to end? Well, that's one of the topics that needs to be [30:06] discussed. I don't know about... I think you're linking it. The operation is over. Epic Fury is [30:11] a president notified Congress. We're done with that stage of it, okay? We're now on to this project of [30:16] freedom. As far as the negotiation is concerned, I think the president's been clear that part of the [30:20] negotiation process has to be not just the enrichment, but what happens to this material that's buried [30:25] deep somewhere that they still have access to if they ever wanted to dig it out. That has to be addressed, [30:30] and that's being addressed in the negotiation. I'm not going to go further on what progress has been made on that [30:35] topic because I don't want to endanger the negotiations, but suffice it to say that the [30:38] president and this entire team is aware of the centrality of that question, and that will have to [30:43] be addressed one way or the other. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I have another two-part question for you. [30:52] Okay. First, are you taking part in those negotiations that you just detailed there? And then, [30:57] secondly, President Trump has made it clear that the U.S. doesn't rely on the straight-up hormones, [31:03] so why should Americans even care about Project Freedom and these shipping tankers going through? [31:09] Well, I think on the second point is the one I want to address first, and that is why should [31:13] Americans care and why it matters to us? Because ultimately, these things have an impact on the [31:17] global economy, which ultimately has an impact on our economy in the long term. That's number one. [31:21] Number two, because if we live in a world where a rogue state like this Iranian regime is allowed to [31:27] claim as a new normal control over international shipping lane, it will not be long before you see that [31:32] happen in multiple shipping lanes around the world. I can identify for you six or seven vital shipping [31:39] lanes around the world that some countries can decide, guess what? If Iran was able to do it, [31:43] we're going to do it too. We're not going to start charging tolls, and it'll get closer and [31:47] closer to us. That's unacceptable. We cannot live in a world that there's a lot of time and energy [31:52] been invested behind the idea that international waters are free for the free flow of goods. [31:56] The stuff we make in this country and export has to go through international shipping lanes. [32:01] And for us to live in a world where a country can decide now we own the international shipping lane [32:06] and you have to pay us if you want to use it, that is a normal that we will never be able to [32:09] accept. And that's what the Iranians are trying to get us to do. So we're doing two things about it, [32:13] and we haven't talked about the second one enough. The second thing we're doing is we're going to the [32:17] UN. Everybody loves the UN, right? We're trying to go to the UN and we're saying, okay, countries of the [32:21] world, condemn this. Say that it is wrong for you to put mines there. It is wrong for you to shoot at [32:27] commercial vessels. Guys, that's what we're talking about here. These guys are bombing commercial [32:32] vessels. They're not bombing naval vessels. They're bombing commercial tankers. It's just [32:36] outrageous. That needs to stop and it needs to end. And if it doesn't, then the world should be [32:42] diplomatically and economically isolating Iran as well. But if we live in a world where global [32:46] shipping lanes can be taken over by countries, that will have a direct impact on Americans in the [32:50] short and the long term. And we can't let it start by Iran doing it. And we're the only ones that can [32:55] do anything about it. Mr. Secretary, does the president intend to press Beijing on its Taiwan [33:07] policy when he visits China next week? I'm sure Taiwan will be a topic of conversation. It always [33:11] is. As you know, we understand that the Chinese understand our position on that topic. We understand [33:17] theirs. And I think both parties, without getting ahead of myself of what will happen in the talks, [33:22] but I think both countries understand that it is neither one of our interests to see anything [33:27] destabilize happen in that part of the world. We don't need any destabilizing events to occur [33:32] with regards to Taiwan or anywhere in the Indo-Pacific. And I think that's to the mutual [33:36] benefit of both the United States and the Chinese. [33:38] Hey, Kara Castanova from Lindell TV. Thank you for taking my questions today. [33:45] How does the State Department- What happened? Why is everybody giggling? What happened? [33:48] I'm sorry. Are they not me and me? No, they're not me and me. [33:52] Oh, okay. I don't think they are. I hope not. [33:55] But I'm Kara from Lindell TV. I'm nice to ask you a question today, sir. [33:59] How does the State Department interpret the president's recent remarks when he said, [34:02] quote, the Iranian people need to have guns, and I think they're getting some guns, end quote. [34:07] What did he mean? And do those comments relate to any ongoing or potential U.S. actions like supplying those [34:12] weapons? Well, I think it goes back to the question I was asked a moment ago. I think the [34:15] president thinks it's heartbreaking that the Iranian people are abused by this regime the way they are. [34:20] In the end, I mean, this regime is not- Guys, I know, I've said this, I think I said this in my [34:24] hearing before the Senate when I got confirmed. I don't know of any country in the world where [34:28] there's a bigger difference between the people and the people who run the country. Okay? This [34:32] country is run by radical Shia clerics. And that's not what Iran and the Iranian people are. Now, [34:37] they may be Shia, but they're not radicals and they're not clerics. And they just want a normal [34:41] life and a regular life. And in many ways, a very cosmopolitan country with an incredible history, [34:46] incredible history and incredible legacy and the like. So there's this huge divide between the people [34:51] of Iran whom we sympathize with and who the president sympathize with because they're the [34:55] ones suffering. Look, the world is a victim of Iran, okay? The world is a victim of Iran because [34:59] they're terrorists because of what they're doing now in the Straits. But the people of Iran are daily [35:04] victims of the regime. And the president has deep sympathy for what they're going through. And I think he's [35:08] just expressing that sympathy and that frustration that they don't have the ability to do more [35:12] to get rid of this regime that has crushed this country and isolated it from the world, [35:17] which is a country that shouldn't be isolated from the world because it's people are phenomenal. [35:21] All right. I wish I had like a dice. Go ahead. Yeah. [35:28] No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Right there. I'm going to Italy. [35:33] He's Italian. I know him. He used to cover Capitol Hill. You're Italian, right? [35:36] For many years. For many years. Okay. [35:38] Danielle Spatangelo. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. So I have two short questions for you. [35:42] Oh, damn, two questions. [35:45] First, as you head to the Vatican and Italy, how do you view the Pope's global role in the [35:51] current geopolitical shift? And what are your objectives in Italy? Is this trip tied to recent [35:57] remarks by the president suggesting Italy has not been supported as expected? And the second one [36:03] is about the Hezbollah in Lebanon. On a recent interview on Fox News, you had some, you raised [36:09] some concern about stronger vetting within the Lebanese armed forces. Can you, what do you make? [36:15] Can you, can you elaborate a little bit? Yeah. I've answered the first one about the Vatican. Look, [36:18] I mean, the, the Pope is obviously the vicar of Christ is a Roman Catholic, you know, that's, [36:22] but he's also the head of, of a nation state for, you know, but, and, and it's a organization that has a [36:28] presence in over a hundred something countries around the world. And we engage with the Vatican quite a bit [36:32] because they're present in many different places. I've already outlined to you two examples. We [36:36] worked with the Catholic church on the distribution of humanitarian aid in Cuba. We share with the [36:40] Catholic church a concern about the destruction of religious liberty, the persecution of Christian [36:45] minorities, and, and also, you know, the challenges that are being faced by Christians in Africa, [36:49] where the, where the Pope just recently visited. So we have a lot to talk about with them. And, and, and, [36:54] and I engage with them quite a bit on that front. So the trip is, is, is really not tied to anything [37:00] other than the fact that it would be normal for us to engage with them. And other secretary states [37:03] have done that in the past on the second point about Lebanon, also a question that was asked [37:07] earlier. And what was the Italian part about the expectation of the press? Oh, no, look, [37:12] I mean, the Italians have been involved for quite a, for some time in training the police and training [37:16] their forces. So we'd love to hear their input on it. And in the way, look, we welcome everybody's [37:20] help. Eventually what has to happen in Lebanon, what everybody wants to see is that you have a Lebanese [37:24] government with the capability to go after Hezbollah and take the Hezbollah apart. There shouldn't be, [37:31] like, there shouldn't be a Hezbollah and a government. There should be a government. [37:34] Everyone should fold underneath it. And if we do that, then there'll be peace between Israel and [37:38] Lebanon, but we have, but we have to build the capacity of the Lebanese to do it. And I think [37:42] Italy could be helpful in that, in that regard. All right. I call on you already. You already got a [37:49] question in the green. Did I call on you already? No. Okay. All right. Go ahead. You mentioned the UN [37:56] resolution that you announced today. Can you talk about what the goal is with that resolution? And there was a [38:01] similar one last month that was vetoed by China and Russia. You spoke to the Russian foreign minister. [38:06] Do you have an assurance that Russia will be on board with this now? Well, we don't know. Yeah. Look, [38:10] I mean, everyone wouldn't want to see this vetoed again. And then we've made some slight adjustments [38:13] to the language, but I don't know if it'll avoid a veto or not. But the language isn't very complicated. [38:18] And I think it's a real test for the UN, right, as a function, as something that functions to, that can [38:23] solve global problems. What is the purpose of the UN? The UN was supposed to be a place where you [38:28] could peacefully resolve global conflict. Right now you have a country who is unlawfully, criminally, [38:34] and illegally taking possession of an international waterway and blowing up commercial vessels and [38:39] putting mines in the water. I don't know if people appreciate, like, how outrageous this is, [38:44] how unacceptable it is that any country would fire and try to sink commercial vessels or put mines in [38:49] the water. Both of these things are illegal. And so we're going to take it to the UN and we're going [38:53] to give it another chance to be a forum in which we're not even asking people, like, commit troops [38:57] to the region and help blow up their Iranian boats. All we're asking them to do is to condemn it, [39:01] to call on Iran, to stop blowing ships, to remove these mines, and to allow humanitarian relief to [39:08] come through because there's humanitarian aid that's trapped. That's it. This is a very modest request. [39:12] And if you're telling me that the international community and hundreds of countries cannot rally behind [39:17] that, then I don't know what the utility of the UN system is, if it can't even solve something as [39:22] straightforward as that. And I think to both the Chinese and the Russians, I would argue and have [39:26] argued that it is in their interest for that resolution to pass and for pressure to be brought [39:30] on Iran, because it is in their interest not to see international waterways, including the Straits of [39:35] Hormuz, be closed down and cause economic chaos to dozens and dozens of countries around the world. [39:40] Okay, back to that. [39:47] Secretary, CBN News, you've had a deep faith for God and country. At the end of the day, [39:54] with all that you've been involved in, you've been extremely busy. [39:58] Go ahead, I'm sorry. [39:58] As we all know, I got to ask you, what is your hope for America at a time such as this? [40:04] My hope for America? [40:06] And how do you personally deal with that? [40:08] Yeah, look, I mean, my hope for America is what it's always been. I think it's the hope I hope we all share. [40:13] We want it to continue to be the place where anyone from anywhere can achieve anything, [40:17] where you're not limited by the circumstances of your birth, by the color of your skin, [40:21] by your ethnicity. But frankly, it's a place where you are able to overcome challenges and [40:25] achieve your full potential. I think that should be the goal of every country in the world, frankly. [40:28] But I think in the U.S., we're not perfect. Our history is not one of perfection, but it's still [40:32] better than anybody else's history. And ours is a story of perpetual improvement. Each generation [40:37] has left the next generation of Americans freer, more prosperous, safer. And that is our goal as well. [40:43] But it is a unique and exceptional country. And as we come upon this 250-year anniversary, [40:47] I think we have a lot to learn and be proud of in our history. It is one of perpetual and continuous [40:52] improvement, where each generation has done its part to bring us closer to fulfilling the vision [40:56] that the founders of this country had upon its founding. So thank you. [40:59] All right. I have time for two more questions. Right there in the pink. No, no, no. You, right there. [41:11] No, that lady. No, the one right next to you in the pink. No, no, no, no, no. The pink. I'm sorry, [41:16] but I pointed at her. I need to get a laser pointer. Just go ahead. Now you in the pink jacket. The lady [41:22] right there. Thank you. Thank you, Secretary. I have a question on Iran-China relations. [41:27] Okay. What's your reaction to Iranian foreign minister's visit to China? Also, Beijing instructed its [41:34] firms to ignore U.S. sanctions. Could you also address that? Well, I'll direct you to Treasury on that front. [41:40] There are options that we have. If you ignore our sanctions, you're going to face secondary sanctions, [41:44] and I don't have an announcement for you on that today, but we don't do these things, you know, [41:48] for symbolic purposes. On the first point about the visit, it's fine. I hope the Chinese tell him [41:53] what he needs to be told, and that is that what you are doing in the Straits is causing you to be [41:57] globally isolated. You're the bad guy in this. You guys should not be blowing up ships. You should not be [42:02] putting mines. You should not be holding hostage the global, trying to hold hostage the global economy. [42:07] I hope the Chinese bring, whether it's done privately, but I hope it's done directly, [42:10] that that's the message they deliver to them. As I outlined earlier today, China is an export-driven [42:16] economy. Okay. I'm not here to speak on behalf of what's in the best interest of China, but it's in [42:19] the best interest of China, but it's obvious. China is an export-driven economy. That means they [42:24] depend on other countries to buy from them. Well, you can't buy from them if you can't ship it there, [42:29] and you can't buy from them if your economy is being destroyed by what Iran is doing. So it is in [42:33] Iran, it is in China's interest that Iran stop closing the Straits. It's harming China as well. [42:39] The gentleman in the red tie, right there. [42:46] Yes, I'm sorry, what's your name? Liz Landers. Okay. [42:49] Another question about the China-Iran relationship. You said at the beginning of your comments [42:53] at the top that every single financial situation will be targeted. Does that include Chinese banks? [42:59] Would the president... We're going to enforce our sanctions. I don't have an announcement for you [43:03] that will have to come from Treasury, but we have sanctions in place. And sanctions don't mean [43:07] anything unless you're going to do something about them. So I think that's been clear. I think [43:11] that the Treasury will follow up with any specific announcements. Suffice it to say, we're serious [43:17] about our sanctions. A cost needs to be imposed on Iran for what they are doing. Otherwise, if they [43:22] get away with this, guys, if they get away with pulling this thing off without paying a price for it [43:26] and backing down, you're going to see multiple places around the world where other countries are going [43:30] to be tempted to do the same. This is unacceptable. Again, I want to reiterate the point. We keep [43:35] arguing back and forth about the war and the shooting and this and that or the other. These [43:38] guys have shot or shut down an international waterway. The Straits of Hormuz do not belong to Iran. [43:43] They don't have a right to shut it down and blow up ships and lay mines. And that's what they've done. [43:49] That needs to be addressed. Otherwise, and it cannot be normalized under no circumstances. [43:53] Can we live in a world where we accept, okay, this is normal. You have to coordinate with Iran. [43:57] You have to pay them a toll in order to go through the Straits of Hormuz. [43:59] Not only is that unacceptable in the Straits, you're creating a precedent that could be repeated [44:03] in multiple other places around the world. The whole world should join us in this condemnation. [44:07] And the whole world should join us in doing something about it, by the way. It shouldn't [44:10] just be us. We're hoping to get countries. We're going to give them a chance to do something [44:13] about it at the United Nations. All right. And that last question. Right there in the white. [44:24] Thank you. Hold on. Stop this up. Go ahead. Okay. I'll do two more and then I got to go. [44:36] Yeah, go ahead. Iran has shown what? [44:39] Okay. Iran has shown that it's been able to withstand a lot of pressure. And yesterday, [44:44] President Trump has said that they may run out of oil storage in two weeks. Do you believe that that [44:50] will be the thing that gets them to the table to give up their nuclear ambitions? And if not, [44:55] what will be that thing? Well, look, they're suffering devastating damage to their economy. [44:59] You're right. But it's not that they're able to withstand pressure. It's that they don't care that [45:02] their people are suffering. You understand, right? There's a difference between we can withstand [45:05] pressure and we actually don't care. Now, I think there are people in their system that care more [45:10] than others. You know, some of the elected people that you see, some of the people you see on [45:13] television with the suits on, you know, those guys care because they know at the end of the day, [45:17] they have to live in the reality. And then you have an other element of their government, [45:20] the clerical, the clerics, the IRGC types, who probably are more immune to that and care less. [45:25] They're more interested in regime survivor at all costs. But ultimately, the pressure points are what [45:30] they are. Are they divided now than they were before? Because the administration has said that the [45:35] Iranian regime is divided, making it very challenging. Well, it's been challenging to deal with [45:39] them diplomatically because, for example, an offer will be made and then it takes five or six days to get a [45:43] response because you have to get it through the whole system. They have to find the supreme [45:46] leader wherever he hides. They got to get him to sign off. And that's their system. Their system [45:50] has always been multi-layered in this way. It's obviously become more complex because of the damage [45:54] they suffered during the war. But look, suffice it to say, Iran has to pay a price. They're not going [45:59] to change their position out of the kindness of their heart. There has to be a pressure point on them [46:03] that causes them to realize they cannot continue to close the straits or they face crushing economic [46:09] consequences, but also, you know, global diplomatic isolation, which they have proven in the past to [46:16] be susceptible to. But you're right, they have a high pain threshold, but they don't have an unlimited [46:19] pain threshold. Nobody does. All right, this has to be the last question. Many people want to know, [46:27] what is your DJ name? My DJ name? Your DJ name. You're not ready for my DJ name. [46:33] I understand. On the war, if the fighting were to resume, because you've said that Operation Epic [46:40] Fury is over. The president also said that the U.S. would bomb them off the face of the earth if they [46:45] tried to go after U.S. ships. So if the fighting resumes, are you saying that it would resume under [46:50] Project Freedom? And I ask, as it relates to the War Powers Act? Yeah, look, the Operation Epic [46:57] Fury is concluded. We achieved the objectives of that operation. I'm not going to, you know, we're not [47:03] cheering for an additional situation to occur. We would prefer the path of peace. What the president [47:08] would prefer is a deal. He would prefer to sit down, work out a memorandum of understanding for [47:13] future negotiations that touches on all the key topics that have to be addressed, a full opening [47:17] of the straits so the world can get back to normal. And he preferred that that be negotiated through the [47:21] route that Steve and Jared have been working and that all of us have been supporting. That's the route he [47:25] prefers. That is so far not the route that Iran has chosen. And so the result has been that the United [47:30] States has to do something about the fact that we're the only nation on earth that can [47:33] do anything to open up a lane within the Straits of Hormuz to get product and to rescue these people [47:38] that are trapped in there. And that's what we're undergoing now. What that may lead to in the [47:42] future is speculative. I'm not going to speculate about what it would take or what it would do. [47:45] But look, the message to Iran, these guys are facing, they are facing real catastrophic destruction [47:52] to their economy, generational destruction to their economy, generational destruction to the [47:56] wealth of their country imposed on themselves by the actions that they're taking. They should check [48:00] themselves before they wreck themselves in the direction that they're going. But does the White [48:03] House believe that these votes coming up in Congress are a moot point then? Look, guys, I love [48:08] talking about this topic. He's about the War Powers Act. Okay, I love it. I was hoping somebody would ask. [48:12] All right, hold on, hold on. No, no, you don't let me answer. I got to answer the question. [48:16] Okay. And I love it. I'll tell you why I love it. Because even as a senator, I said something. [48:21] The War Powers Act is unconstitutional, 100%. Now, this is not the position of me. It's not the position of the [48:26] president of the United States now. This is the position of every single president that has [48:31] occupied this position since the day that law passed. It's completely unconstitutional. Now, [48:35] we comply with it in terms of, like, notification because we want to preserve good relations with [48:39] Congress, right? And we do that. But even as a senator, I would say that the War Powers Act is 100% [48:44] unconstitutional. And look, I know some of you, whatever you want to say, but this is not [48:49] this president's position. That has been the position of every single presidential administration [48:54] since the day that law passed. It's an infringement on the president's constitutional powers. [48:58] We don't acknowledge the law as constitutional. Nonetheless, we comply with elements of it [49:02] for purposes of maintaining, you know, good relations with Congress. And we want them to be involved. [49:07] And we want them to be informed. I have gone on Capitol Hill, I don't know, four times this year, [49:11] for all senators and all House members and Intel Committee and Gang of Eight. We want them to be [49:15] involved in this. But I want to be clear on the point of the War Powers Act. It's unconstitutional. [49:20] And every president and every administration has taken that position. All right, guys, [49:24] I gave you 50 minutes. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Thank you.