"Met with some of the sharpest rebukes within his own party"

If the markets were a friend, they'd be the one who texts constantly, updates opinions to just see this all day, every day. Capital.com isn't another voice in that thread. It's the space between the messages, bringing news, charts and economic calendars into one place to give you the full picture in between the noise. Capital.com designed for clarity. 62% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading spread bets and CFDs with this provider. Keep the cuddles and lose the mess with Advantage Chewable. Just one tasty tablet kills fleas and ticks for a whole month. No mess, no stress. Just one tasty chew. Advantage Chewable. Flee and tick protection made easy. Find out more at AdvantageChewable.co.uk. Easy to love, easy to protect. Hi everyone, it's four o'clock in New York hours after taking the country and the world to the brink and being met with some of the sharpest rebukes within his own political party along with calls to invoke the 25th Amendment, including from some members of his political coalition. Donald Trump backed off his threat to take out an entire civilization and agreed to a two-week ceasefire in his war with Iran last night. Trump is now trying to brand that ceasefire as victory, declaring yesterday a quote big day for world peace, as if he did not start the day threatening to order the U.S. military to carry out some of the most serious war crimes. In the 12 hours between his threat and the announcement of a ceasefire, it's not clear that Donald Trump achieved any of his objectives. Here, Pimes reports Trump's deal, quote, leaves a theocratic government backed by the vicious Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in charge of a cow population that has been pummeled by missiles and bombs and finds itself still under the thumb of a familiar regime, even if under new management. It leaves Iran's nuclear stockpile in place. And for the war itself, left Gulf allies reeling, gas prices have soared, and it has left Trump's political base fractured, with one-time supporters now accusing the president and his loyalists of violating their promise not to get America tied up in unwinnable wars in the Middle East. As for the Strait of Hormuz, the pause in fighting was premised on its immediate reopening. But Iran showed today that it still maintains complete control over it. According to the Associated Press, Iranian state media is reporting that Iran has once again closed the Strait of Hormuz because of Israeli attacks on Lebanon. Iran is demanding an end to those strikes, but Israel is claiming that the ceasefire deal does not apply to Lebanon. Heading into peace talks, Tehran is demanding that it not only retain control of the Strait of Hormuz, leaving them with the power to close it, whenever they want, but to also get paid by any ships that pass through it. As things stand, they are unquestionably and deniably in a stronger geopolitical position than they were before the war started when ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz freely. Also included in Iran's Ten Demands for Peace, which Trump initially called workable, is the withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from all bases and positions in the region, the lifting of sanctions on Iran, and the acceptance of Iran's right to nuclear enrichment. Less than 24 hours after the announcement of the ceasefire, the Speaker of Iran's parliament is already calling into question whether it will stand accusing the United States of violating three of their demands already. All of this is calling into question whether Trump can accomplish a lasting end to the war he started. On that, the New York Times writes this, quote, the gap between the Iranian view of a final peace agreement and the American view is so wide that imagining a settlement in two years, much less two weeks, requires some diplomatic jiu-jitsu. It took two and a half years for the Obama administration to negotiate the 2015 nuclear accord, which Trump dispensed with in 2018, and that was in peacetime. This negotiation will be held under the sword of possible resumption of hostilities. A fragile truce to Donald Trump's war with Iran with little signs of lasting peace is where we start today. Lieutenant General Mark Gertling is back with us. He served as the commanding general of the U.S. Army in Europe, also joining us, staff writer for the Atlantic, Missy Ryan's here. She covers the Pentagon and the State Department. And with me at the table, Paul Reikoff is here. He's the host of the Independent Americans Podcast and the founder and CEO of Independent Veterans of America, General Gertling. As I often do, I start with you your thoughts today. Well, we all breathed a sigh of relief yesterday, about an hour and a half before the deadline was not reached, in terms of knowing that there was proposals on the table from both the U.S. and Iran. But I got to tell you, Nicole, last night when I looked at the 10-point plan from Iran, I thought this is never going to happen. These are the same things they've been talking about, and more, since the beginning of the conflict and long before, in terms of what their desires were. The same thing were true in the 15-point peace plan that was submitted by the United States. I thought last night when I read both of them that I wondered how long it would be until both sides were violating the proposals. It didn't take long. In fact, it occurred last night for us early in the morning in Israel when they continued to strike targets inside of southern Lebanon. So the question now for me, Nicole, is what happens next? Are we going to make that two weeks as David Sanger implied we wouldn't in his article in the New York Times today? Or is something going to happen more closely? We had the Secretary of Defense, Secretary Hegses, say we're just hanging around the area to see what's going to happen. Again, that's not quite doctrinal proposals or what the military is preparing to do, because I've never seen a force be ordered to just hang around. So those are the kind of questions I continue to have about the strategic end state and how the operational and tactical methods that the military is using potentially along with government intervention could contribute to a true end to this conflict. I hate to say this, but I think we're going to be breathing heavy over the next two weeks to see what the President's going to do. He was relieved yesterday to be sure, but this morning when we had different press conferences, both from the Secretary of Defense in the Pentagon and from Caroline Levitt at the White House, it seems like we're taking a victory lap when there's no victory to be had just yet. Let me read you something that Major General Paul Eaton wrote. How Trump lost the Iran War. What we got was a pattern that repeated itself from the first week to the last. A threat followed by bombing, followed by a frantic search for an off-ramp that didn't exist because no one had built one. Deadlines were set and extended. Objectives shifted from destroying military capability to regime change to the nuclear program to the Strait of Hormuz, to threatening to obliterate civilian infrastructure. The President threatened to destroy a whole civilization and then two hours before his own deadline, took Iran's offer and called it quits. That is not a strategy. That is improvisation. And when you improvise a war, people die and families are left to wonder why. There are already 13 Gold Star families. There are hundreds of families waiting for their sons and daughters and dads and husbands and wives who are injured, some of them badly. What is the why as you understand it? Why have we gone to war so far? Well, I'll first say that General Eaton was very good at taking notes because he described exactly what happened. The why is still undetermined. I mean, certainly, Iran was a threat in the Middle East. They live in a bad neighborhood and they've been doing malign influencing over the last four decades. So they are not a good regime. They are a good people. The 92 million citizens of the country of Iran, for the most part, are extremely good people and they have a wonderful culture. It's unfortunate that they have terrible leaders who are trying to exist in a bad neighborhood. But the why, as General Eaton pointed out, as we've all pointed out for the last five weeks, has been constantly changing. And the Secretary of Defense said this morning, we've destroyed their Navy. We've killed a lot of people. They're all dead, dead, dead, as he pointed out in his press conference. But that is kind of a misunderstanding of what the institutions are in a country like Iran because institutions, as we said a couple of times in the call, are much more important than personalities. This is where we are right now. And we've walked into a really bad situation with very little capability to conduct an off-ramp. Lots have been written about Iran's demands. But one I wanted to ask you about, General Hurtling, is removing all U.S. forces from bases in the region, that seems like an absolute non-starter. It is to me, Nicole, just like pulling out of NATO is a non-starter because we have military forces prepositioned in different locations to do the work of the U.S. government. And they partner with allies. They do things that coordinate actions. They build democratic resolve between different countries. And the reason we have folks in all of the Arab nations that have been named over the last couple of weeks, where we have air bases and naval bases and some army and marine forces, is to protect our interest in those areas, the kind of interest that we frittered away when the Gulf was closed. The same thing is true in NATO. And I bring that up because Caroline Leavitt brought that up in the press conference, that the president is now considering eliminating forces in NATO. And that's something he's talked about for a long time. It is destroying our worldwide alliances, our ability to protect our interest in a global environment. So I don't know what we've gained, but you mentioned the demand for us to leave all of our bases in the Middle East. The same is true in Israel, but there's some other things on that 10-point plans, like never attacking proxies within the region who may attack us, are limiting Israel in the defense of their country by saying they can't attack into southern Lebanon. People paying bills to move through the Straits of Hormuz. I mean, you could go through each one of those 10 points and realize that every single one of them issued by Iran puts the United States and the democratic world at a huge disadvantage. Missy, let me read you the Atlantic's reporting on the ceasefire. The headline is Trump made a deal that gives him nothing he wanted. Iran agreed only to reopen the strait at Global Waterway that operated freely before the war began and on terms that could yield substantial financial rewards for the regime. Depending on the outcome of the negotiations over the next two weeks, the regime could actually be in a stronger strategic position than it was before the war. Iran may have lost every military battle, but the war appears to have ended on Tehran's terms. By midday, Iran said it had stopped ships from transiting the strait because Israel launched a heavy barrage of attacks on Lebanon that killed and wounded hundreds, underscoring Tehran's leverage. U.S. military is hanging in the balance. It's hard to come up with ways that disprove the thesis of the peace. I mean, in just about every geopolitical way, in every future-bearing way, and in every way that the negotiations seem to advantage Iran. Yeah, I mean, I think my colleague absolutely correct in pointing out that the outcome here is far from what Trump talked about at the beginning of the war, which was some sort of transformational outcome, the end of the Iranian, the Islamic Republic as we know it. He has, you know, to General Hurtling's point about what the goals are. There have been a number of different things put out there from the beginning, including regime change and then to the nuclear program. But what the administration has really reverted to in making this victory lap this morning at the Pentagon and then at the White House for Caroline Levitt's briefing are these more narrow military goals that they are able to point to progress and success there in terms of eroding the ballistic missile capability, the Iranian Navy, the leadership of the IRGC. There is a lot that they can point to there, but that doesn't amount to strategic success in terms of changing the Iranian state. There's a, you know, the people who are in charge now are not very different than the people who are in charge before whatever Trump may say. And in fact, there's a strong argument for that, you know, be now consolidated in the control of the IRGC and they're going to be more hard-line. And so I think it's a difficult case for them to make, even if this ceasefire does hold together, that it was worth the pain. And going back to the straight up cornmose, it is really, as my colleague points out, cementing Iran's claim over the straight in a way that never existed before. They want to be like Egypt and the Suez Canal. It's not quite that, but it's very different than it was at the beginning of the conflict. I mean, Iran, if given an option on a sort of choose-your-own-Trump adventure, could have selected to lift all sanctions, control from a security standpoint and an economic standpoint, the straight up cornmose, strengthen your wartime relationship with Russia against the United States of America, and set the terms of a ceasefire. I'm not sure they went to Sid Bull rebuild our missiles and keep your, and keep your in rich uranium. Yeah. The good news is he didn't obliterate a society. That's true. Right? The bad news is that he accepted a really crappy deal. He's isolated us even more from the world. We lost 13 troops. Hundreds have been wounded. The American society was disrupted in a way I don't think we've ever seen since the Cold War. And the reality is we might have to do it again in two weeks. And the other reality is he is still all gas, no brakes, and nothing is stopping him except maybe himself and maybe the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Kain. I've said to you for months, the most important story in the world is Donald Trump could do anything he wants with the most powerful military the world has ever seen. Yesterday, the world kind of faced that reality. In this country, finally faced that reality. If he wanted to go forward, Congress wouldn't have stopped him. And the problem now is it's bigger than Iran. He wants forever war. He's already talking about Cuba. So he continues to go forward while everyone else chases him. And I don't think anybody should feel too good today because he's still moving forward on all fronts. And I point to Cuba as the potential next target. This is gut check time for Congress. And Congress failed. Congress failed yesterday to stop him in any way. I think the only significant progress was people finally started talking about how to remove him under the 25th Amendment. And that is gaining momentum. And I think it's more popular in America than people realize. I think the few Democrats, no Republicans yet except for Marjorie Taylor-Green, have put that out there. People understand this won't stop until he's gone. So we as a country have to focus on the strategic priority, which is removing him if we want this to stop. Otherwise, this is going to be our normal. There are going to be no days off and it's going to be something different every day. What does the military do moving forward when it's now so clear that Trump will use the military as a pawn in the things he'll say? When he said, I will, quote, destroy your civilization, his intention must use the military to do that. I think internally they have to pick their spots. And I think we'll find out over the next couple of days what the conversations look like internally. I continue to say that we should pray for and root for General Cain because he might be the lone circuit breaker for our democracy and our military right now. We'll find out if he's a general milli in the weeks and months to come. The other part that's really significant that's still notably quiet is the retired generals and the fired generals. We need to hear from General Randy George. We need to hear from the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, C.Q. Brown. In this moment, one little statement at the council on foreign relations, or one little interview is not enough. This is an opportunity for them to come together and be an external circuit breaker and to potentially move Republicans who need to be moved if we're going to slow him down and stop him. And if they're going to ask for more money, if they're going to ask for more allowances, we need those folks to break glass. They don't want to get in politics. I know. They always say that, but this is a moment that requires them to get into politics and speak directly to the American people. All right, no one's going anywhere. When we come back, how some of Donald Trump's most loyal supporters, those who fully backed his decision to actually go to war, are now voicing doubts that Iran has in fact been defeated in any way and that none of Trump's objectives have been met. Plus, it's not just Trump's loyalists, its leaders from around the world, seeing through all of this as well. It's left a negative impact amongst some of our closest allies and throws into question our future security here at home. Our good friend Sue Gordon will join us as she does in times of crisis ahead and later in the broadcast. Perhaps it's the war that no one asked for or the rising price of gas or maybe just the erratic leader in the White House. Another handful of special elections is causing real concern among Republicans. We'll have all those stories and more when Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Don't go anywhere. Stay up to date on the biggest issues of the day with the MS Now Daily newsletter. Each morning you'll get analysis by experts you trust. Video highlights from your favorite shows. Voters weighed in. Donald Trump's dismissal of their concerns has been weighing on his political standing. Updates on our latest podcasts and election coverage. Plus written perspectives from the newsmakers themselves. All sent directly to your inbox each morning. Get the best of MS Now all in one place. Sign up for MS Now Daily at MS. Now. As news of Trump's ceasefire broke some of the chief influencers in the MAGA movement were less than thrilled about what Trump described as a total incomplete victory. I don't think that it was good at all to try to negotiate with these people because now they think that they have legitimacy that they are you know equal partners at the table and that they are they are equals to our to our negotiators here in the United States. And I think that that is a grave mistake. This is a complete and total U.S. defeat. This is an absolute. There is no ambiguity here. It's not debatable. It's not subject to interpretation. We lost decisively. So we did not achieve any of the objectives that we set out to accomplish. And not only did we not achieve a single objective but we're actually worse off than we were before. Okay. So his faces didn't look familiar. That was Laura Loomer and Nick Fuentes. Very unhappy about last night's developments. But there's another side of the MAGA discontent. Donald Trump's chief cheerleader for the war, Mark Levin or Levin, was over on Fox News. Trump has reportedly urged his followers to watch this person. Mark Levin. Here's how Mark Levin reacted to news of the ceasefire. What about the people of Iran? What are we going to just leave them there? There's nothing that we can do and we're going to wash our hands over that. That to me is morally very difficult to accept. We need to protect our country. We need to protect our homeland and to pretend that this enemy hasn't killed American soldiers and American citizens is ridiculous. To pretend this enemy is executing its people left and right as we speak. This enemy is shooting missiles into not just Israel. I think some of the Arab countries tonight as well we've entered into a two-week ceasefire. We're back with General Hurley and Missy and Paul. Missy, President's Coalition was fractured by this. We tried to show both sides of the coalition, the folks who were against it from the start and the folks who teared it, not happy with the ceasefire. And I want to show you a little bit more sound. This was a reaction over on Fox in France. But I will say that the president's demands, we have not reached any of those objectives. I have full confidence that the president is going to find some way to make this happen. But he said that we want to dismantle all major nuclear facilities. That has not happened. The end of uranium enrichment on the soil, they're still a wrenching. The transfer of the enriched uranium stockpiles out of Iran, that hasn't happened, the acceptance of intrusive international inspections, they're still not willing to do that. And they have not suspended their ballistic missiles program. They're still firing them off. Missy, it's rare I want to build on anything that is said on that program, but I would add they now have control of the Strait of Hormuz as we were just discussing. And Iran seems to be in the driver's seat in every way. That's criticism coming from the far right. Those are all MAGAV coalition members. What is the, what is sort of the rationale for where things are right now? I actually don't doubt that the bulk of the Republican Party, at least in Congress, is going to get behind President Trump because that's what they've done consistently, even in the face of questionable claims. There are elements of the party like Lindsey Graham who are already amplifying the administration's claims of incredible victory here. So I do think that there will be people who are focusing on, as we were talking about in the last segment, the more narrow military goals, the erosion of the ballistic missile capacity and all of that. I do think that those divisions aren't going away and the people on Fox make a great point about their uranium enrichment. That is one of the most glaring discrepancies in the different versions of the ceasefire that we have so far with Iran saying it exclusively doesn't negate their right to enrichment and the United States suggesting that they've somehow maybe behind the scenes accepted to give up their enriched uranium. That was one of the most surprising things for me in Trump attempting to conclude the conflict when he did and that frankly that Israel seemed to be supportive of that at least publicly because the enriched, the stockpiles of enriched rear radium are such an important part of the objectives and that both countries have had in making sure that Iran doesn't have any viable nuclear program going forward. And we don't have any public evidence that Iran is going to give that up, agree to some sort of agreement to ship it out of the country or anything like that. So I think that that's one important point. And you know politically in some ways this isn't different from other foreign policy controversies that we've had under Trump's second administration where he's proving to be much more unpredictable and kind of risk embracing. He'll point to the things that he thinks are arguably successful. You know in Venezuela it's the oil and the lack of an sort of Iraq style chaos and here and you know those claims of success really have been embraced by most of his party. And I think that that's likely to be the case maybe to a slightly less extent, but I think that in Congress at least he'll find allies there. I mean to your point though the voters aren't buying it. Republicans continue to get wiped out every time that voters weigh in. I want to, I played that in part because this also happened yesterday. The FCC's Brendan Carr went after CNN said he wanted accountability for Iran coverage and Brendan Carr's telling the attacks for CNN were because they reported that Iranian officials somehow viewed the ceasefire or deals a victory for them. I mean Fox and Friends would seem to have agreed on that point. I think his comments are a sign of desperation. They're reeling. Nobody thinks this is a victory anywhere in the entire world except for Pete Hexeth and nobody in the world believes anything coming out of Pete Hexeth's mouth so he probably doesn't even believe it. This is not a victory and I don't think they can spin their way out of it. I think it's especially a defeat within their base that now considers this the new big lie. You promised no regime change wars. You promised no new wars and you did it. I mean we failed to achieve regime change in Iran and I think now what most of the world wants is regime change here. I mean they want Trump gone. They want Hexeth gone and most Americans are moving toward wanting Trump gone too and definitely wanting Hexeth gone. The question is how do we do it? Like how do we stop him from continuing this because we have to take a step back and think about the insanity and the danger of what he just put the whole world through. I mean he used the US military and put a gun to the head of an entire country and the whole world saw it and he can't just wave a magic wand and act like we didn't see it. We all saw it and there needs to be accountability and I think that's the question now is where will it come? Will it come? I think you're seeing his overall popularity continue to plummet. People like Megyn Kelly are unloading on him and they're done. The whole world is kind of done with Trump and more and more in America people are done with. The question is what's the strategy? Can the Democrats or anyone else create a strategy to hold him accountable for what he just did because we can't just move past that. That was absolutely unacceptable, insane and dangerous and there's more to come if we don't deal with him and hold him accountable. Yeah there's a real sort of reflex to just keep going, keep moving. That's what he wants. Lieutenant General Mark Hurtling, Missy Ryan, Paul Rykoff, thank you all so much for starting us off on this today. After the break for us with the ceasefire already on shaky ground and Trump's many objectives appearing largely unmet, world leaders are wondering, as Paul Rykoff just said, what was this about? Our dear friend Sue Gordon who we turn to for questions like that will help us answer it next. Donald Trump is claiming victory today as we've been discussing but he's doing that after saying things that can't be unsaid after making reckless, cruel, irreversible threats against a whole civilization bringing the world to the brink. It's in stark contrast to the reality of what's happening, the ceasefire deal that doesn't seem to have accomplished any of the things Trump has said he wanted to accomplish with the war. The future of Iran's enriched uranium program remains totally uncertain. We mentioned earlier the Associated Press as the Strait of Hormuz is already closed again, not even 24 hours. Now Iran's biggest leverage point is opening and closing it as it wants to. Five weeks ago, one-fifth of the global energy supply flowed to the Strait of Hormuz freely. Now Iran might actually charge a fee for passage. Today the rest of the world sees all of this as well. Denmark's foreign minister said this this morning, quote, is the world a better place today than yesterday, undoubtedly, than 40 days ago, more than doubtful. And from Spain's prime minister, quote, this momentary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, the destruction and the lives lost. The government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire just because they showed up with a bucket. Wow. Joining me now, former principal deputy director of national intelligence, Sue Gordon. Go Spain. Yeah, I think the president, you know, at seven o'clock last night, I predicted this outcome and I think that was a hopeful prediction. So, I mean, we got time. So, that's good. But that's about it. The world is decidedly a worse place today, decidedly. And we can talk more about that. You know, I talk in intelligence all the time about, not about headlines, but about signals. And the signals here are pretty profound. What did we learn? Number one is the world learned that the leader of the free world, upon whom so much of the world order and world security has depended, is unreliable. And when a leader is unreliable, when our partners and allies and adversaries cannot count on what it says, then they have to make different decisions. And there is no putting that genie back in the bottle. So, to the Denmark's comments, yes, the world is decidedly a worse place today, even if we got some time. And the immediate risk of escalation is over, but none of the underlying issues have been resolved as you articulated. And even more than that, Iran has unbelievably gained leverage. Unbelievably, they have leverage. They understand things about this. They see the limits of our power. You know, they understand that they have economic leverage. That what they did with the straight-of-form moves and what that caused, and then the reaction that it engendered from our president, who was trying to find a strategic reason, just buckle on it. So Iran has not only learned things, but they demonstrated leverage. And it's clear that China and Russia learned that lesson as well. Totally. Russia is one of the big winners before Iran started being able to charge money. And if you recall, I think people forget this, one of the big reasons that President Trump and his first administration said that he ended JCPOA was the money that was being given that funded the missiles that allowed the proxy wars. That money is going to be dwarfed by the money that they can receive just by charging for passage. And if we also relieve sanctions, so, you know, they have gained. And countries of the world are going to study this, and they've learned things. They understand that we have massive power militarily, and that doesn't yield outcome. And that they're also understanding that we aren't the best negotiators in the world. Who's worse? I mean, who's worse than us? Not and. And then just the irresponsibility. And that sounds like such a light word. I can't think of a different one than the irresponsibility that has been demonstrated by our leaders by this administration. And I think Mark Hartling has said this, and I wholeheartedly agree. And I need the people to realize that the only power he has is that which we give him. And while it is often comforting to say that he's not my president or that, no, no, no, he is. And for a while, people could think, oh, that's just President Trump, and that's his style. Those allies and partners, the ones who have already started rewiring and making contingency plans, oh, they'll still talk to us. But look at what they were prepared to do when we did this. You started seeing it, Davos, with the comments they made. They are making plans for us not to be there. And they denied us airspace. And they didn't come. And they're not letting us base. And if you want two really good signals here for Italy's president to deny us, win a minute ago, she was kind of a bestie. And for Japan's prime minister, who are always very diplomatic and very careful in their criticism, to make the comment she has, the world has figured out that we are not who we were, and they must make other plans. And while everyone will deal with us because we're rich and powerful and we have resources, it will be a transactional relationship that does not give us the strength that we have benefited from and from which the world has benefited, at least for the past 70-some years. I have to sneak in a break, but I want to ask you when we come back, if Trump ever asked you to do this or his first term team to conduct this war, we'll sneak in a break. We'll have that conversation on the other side. So the New York Times had some reporting yesterday about how this started. And it didn't start with a deputies meeting or a meeting with his national security team. It started with a foreign visit from BB Netanyahu. And after the visit, Trump's own national security team analyzed BB Netanyahu's plan, and John Ratcliffe called two of the four aims, quote, farcical, Rubio translated them for Trump and called them, quote, bullshit. Did Netanyahu try to get Trump to do this in a first term? And do you feel like the first term team was stronger in being able to sway him from doing things that were not wise? So if you've ever been to Israel, you understand the impossibility of their geography, and you understand who they are operationally and their objectives. And they are, at once, a wonderful partner. And they are also problematic because we and they do not have universally the same goals. And so over the course of my whole career, those discussions about our shared and differing interests and trying to manage those so that United States always had its interests front and center. You know, when you talk about America first, we live it when you deal with a partner who you need and with whom you differ. And so I don't think there's anything new about the ask. I think the outcome is one that many of us understand and worked hard to make sure that we never got into a situation that it wasn't our interest that we were advancing even though we were partnering. You know, was the first administration better at this? I think time has, I wish the American people could really understand this, that there was no one there that was trying to impede the president. We were trying to take what the president, who is prescribed by the Constitution, that we swear to uphold and defend. We were trying to help him do what he wanted in a way that was repeatable, transparent, and fair and legal. And that took time. I've talked about this before. Our system depends on that friction between policy and process. And that frustrated the president. He got rid of a lot of us halfway through his first administration. And when he was reelected, he's like, I'm not going to have that friction anymore. And you see who he put in place. And simultaneously, weakened the institution behind those leaders. So now you have kind of a perfect storm of leaders who are the ones who are individually called in meetings with the president because that's who he likes to deal with people he trusts. They are not as experienced and behind them is not the depth that there used to be. So the president, I believe, has gotten exactly what he thinks he wanted, which was speed and his ideas implemented. I think what we're seeing and what I hope the American people see is there's a cost when you decide to go fast and get what you want without the friction. And this is where I come back to Congress. Our founders understood that this friction was important, certainly in matters of war. And we should be looking at this and seeing it and deciding how we want to behave in the future. I can't undo anything that's just happened. And since I wasn't the person making those decisions, I don't want to over rotate on whether I would have been better or worse. But I will say you can look at it and say, oh, I see what caused it. I see the movement over time. I see what we're doing now. And I see this result. And we should say, if that is not who we want to be, if that is not the result the United States needs in order to achieve its aims, and if we are not the nation that free and open societies depend on, then maybe we need to be more insistent that this system works. And if the system wasn't good enough, then change the system, but not pretend that it didn't exist. So I think if you take all the things I've said in too long-winded away, look at what has happened when this is the way we've decided to behave in the interest of, yeah, let's just get what we want. I can deliver it for you. And that's not the way we're set up. And this is a really good case study that we, the people who actually own this country, should take to heart when we make our next decision. Is the next election soon enough? I like to say the world is already worse. And I think unless we see this much more clearly than we seem to be, even on both sides of the aisles, listen, Nicole, we knew that we had some problems during the pandemic and we chose not to fix it. We papered over it. We added some more institutions. We broke down some of others. This is a real moment. So I think the American people have awakened. I think the bedrock has been loosened. I think we recognize that we can't just keep on saying, I want to do it this way and letting somebody else being in charge. So I think there are great signals that we as a country are saying, maybe this wasn't exactly what we want and we should have a say. I think the 2028 election will be a real signal. And then the question is not whether we shake our fists to the cosmos and get mad at these things going on, but what the heck are we going to do to be better the next day and the next day and the next day? And I think that's what you try and do when you highlight these issues. It's what I try and do when I come on and say, let's talk about who we need to be because it's the building next that is the most important part. Yeah, we're going to need you for that conversation. I'm Sue Gordon. Thank you for being here today. It's wonderful to see you. Great to see you. Thanks for what you do. Did the break, did the Pentagon start a fight with the Pope? That doesn't even sound real. We'll answer it on the other side. We all want to work for peace. People want peace. I would invite the citizens of all the countries involved to contact the authorities, political leaders, congressmen to ask them, tell them to work for peace and to reject war always. All your representatives, I was Pope Leo XIV, issuing that call to action, notably in English, before the ceasefire was announced last night. He's become an outspoken critic of Donald Trump's war with Iran, calling Donald Trump's threat to destroy Iranian civilization, quote, truly unacceptable. And now there's some new reporting from the Free Press that back in January, Trump's administration took the extraordinary step of trying to silence the Vatican from that reporting, quote, senior U.S. defense officials summoned a top Vatican diplomat to the Pentagon. What happened inside that room set the tone for everything that followed. Vatican officials briefed on the meeting who spoke anonymously, describe it as a bitter lecture, warning that the United States has the military power to do whatever it wants and that the church had better take it side. That's the reporting. We'll stay on top of that extraordinary story. When we come back, a small blue wave yesterday and a number of elections across our country, signaling trouble for Donald Trump and his political coalition this November. We'll talk about it when Deadline White House continues after a quick break. Subscribe to MSNow Premium on Apple Podcasts.