'Trump Called Me a Piece of S***!’ Iran War, Lindsey Graham & More | With Ro Khanna & Mehdi Hasan

23:39We have our own problem right here at home. That's really probably part and parcel of the with the larger argument, which is it's a difference in where the money should go and where it should be spent on. The Republicans, writ large, want that money spent here in America. Democrats want it spent all over the world to fund all kinds of crazy projects. And so that's the real debate. Can I respond on that specific point? Hogan's right. Of course it's not America's responsibility to feed and provide aid to everyone in the world. That's not the debate. The debate is, should Elon Musk have sent a bunch of 20-year-olds with no qualifications or expertise into USAID to gut the department overnight?

24:18I think Musk's words were, I fed it into the wood cheper this weekend while you were all out partying. To cut off aid overnight, to leave USAID officials and diplomats and aid workers stuck in foreign countries. Some of them had to be, you know, helicoptered out because suddenly all the funding got cut off. Their laptops got shut down. And people did lose access to aid overnight in soup kitchens and in aid clinics all over the world. Nick Kristof of The Times went and got names of children who died. and he gave them to Elon Musk and Musk keeps ignoring it. Musk keeps saying, there are no kids.

24:50Where are the kids who died? Nick Kristof gave him a list publicly and Musk, of course, ignored it. And the academic evidence does suggest from multiple sources, including the Lancet Medical Journal, that millions of kids will die, that tens of thousands of children have already died as a result of these Trump-Musk doge cuts. And that's the real issue. By the way, to say we don't have money for it, Hogan, how much are we spending on this Iran war that you promised we wouldn't have, that your president and you said during 2024, no more wars? We're spending$50,$100 billion, way more than the USAID budget in Afghanistan or Sudan.

25:21So please don't say we don't have the money for it. We always have money for war. Well, first of all, that money goes to support and protect the American people and our interests around the world. And I didn't say we wouldn't get into any wars. What I said was the same thing Donald Trump said. Trump said no more wars. He said he wouldn't get into stupid wars or long-term protecting wars. He said no more wars. Those were his exact words. I have them in front of you. And that's what he meant in the context. And you know that. That's fine. We can debate where that money should be spent and how it should how it should go to different groups.

25:51But what Elon Musk and Doge did was kind of pull back the curtain on the radical leftist woke policies and ideologies of our dollars being spent in these foreign countries to fund all types of radical weird behavior, as opposed to trying to help and prop up the veterans here in this country. No, I would say I would say it was a George W.

26:14Piers Morgan:Bush program. Betty, just to remind you, it's still currently my show. Despite your failing voice, you have a tendency to forget that sometimes. Hogan, you know, the point I think people would make about this is you could make a lot of cuts to obvious waste. Some of the stuff Doge uncovered clearly was waste and should absolutely have been stopped. I saw that multiple times. But I think they went too far. I think the cuts were too dramatic, implemented too quickly, and these things do have real-world consequences. And I guess my point to you about, well, who do you help around the world? I mean, is your position that the United States shouldn't help anybody?

26:54Piers Morgan:And if it isn't, then who should they help and how much should they be spending on helping people that were being covered by USAID? Well, first of all, let me ask you, because you just brought up the point, what cuts were OK? Did you find OK? Well, like I said, there were a number of things. I can't remember the exact ones now, but I remember when they were being done in real time, a number of things being reported, Elon was saying them himself, where I was nodding away going, well, that makes sense, and that makes sense, yeah, that looks like waste. But what about Ebola? Right, so there were certain things in there where I thought, hang on, that seems a risk, a big risk.

27:35Piers Morgan:Why would you do that? Other things seemed a little bit inhumane, a little cruel. but ultimately it comes down to the question I posed to you, which is what is America's moral responsibility to the rest of the world? Because on one level, President Trump and you were taking a very strong position in the run-up to the last election, which was America first, America first, America first, no more meddling in stupid wars, like you put it, and so on. Focus on getting cost of living down, focus on American lives. A lot of people voted for President Trump on that basis, right? But that conflicts with reality, and the reality has been this sudden war with Iran that's proven to be unbelievably expensive, costly to American military lives, is still ongoing, despite what we've been told it was all over in two to three weeks.

28:25Piers Morgan:Here we are four months later. It's still raging. The Iranians, the regime is in place. The IRGC are in control. They control the Strait of Hormuz. They're still firing rockets and missiles at the neighbouring Gulf states. All of this is terrible. All of this could constitute, many people would argue, a stupid war. Well, remember, Americans were taken hostage in the October 7th massacre, as you well know. Americans have been killed by Iranians for the last 14 years in this country, no question. From Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama to Joe Biden to Kamala Harris, they all said Iran can't get a nuclear weapon and shouldn't.

29:05Donald Trump was the first president to say, you know what, I'm going to try and do something about it and prevent that from happening.

29:10Piers Morgan:What has he done to stop that? Because as far as I'm concerned, they've still got every single tiny piece of their enriched uranium, right? We were told last summer in the 12-day war that their nuclear capability had been put back decades, Donald Trump's words, not right. And yet here we were eight months later having to go to war with them because according to Donald Trump today in an interview, they were literally like minutes away from getting one and using it. So none of these things, they can't all be true. But many of them can be simultaneously. Donald Trump and the moves they made at the Fordo nuclear plant and others was one of the most successful military operations, strategic military operations of all time.

29:53But how could it have been, with all due respect,

29:56Piers Morgan:how can that be true and it also be true that only eight months after that incredibly successful operation, suddenly America had to go to war in Iran to stop them doing what we were told eight months earlier had been put back decades. That can't all be true. It's not going to stop them from attempting to gain nuclear weapons, as you all know. In addition, I'm sure there were some sites that maybe weren't struck in that particular military operation. That being said, we know the design of the Iranian leaders. They've been very open about it. The death and destruction of Israel and the death and destruction of America.

30:32That's what they want to do. So if Donald Trump can use our military to prevent that from happening, not just for this generation, but for future generations ahead.

30:41Piers Morgan:Where's the win right now, Hogan? Mehdi, I will come to you. I'm just giving your voice a rest. The vocal cords need a rest. But Hogan, where's the win right now? Four months into a war that Donald Trump severed last two to three weeks. I'm not seeing a win here for the U.S. unless I'm missing something. Well, you know already they've talked about ruining their ballistic missile capabilities with military strikes. The nuclear program's been set back. Their ability to pay for their proxies that commit terrorism all over the world is part and parcel of this, too. But as you said, now we're at a different spot.

31:13And as I've long commented, that if this appears to be a win, it won't really matter to the American people because it will look like a win. Now, how does that look moving forward to accomplish that? Are we going to have to take Carg Island? Are we going to have to take control of the strait? I don't know that. They have military experts that have been deciding these types of outcomes for a long time, gaming this out in the Situation Room, the Pentagon, and other places. So I would imagine in the coming days and weeks what you're going to see is an even further frustrated Donald Trump, because inevitably what we knew was going to happen was that there were some entrenched radical leaders who were committing acts of atrocity, of course, while they were talking to some people in that government that were more moderate.

31:59When I believe they made deals with them, it was the radical side that took over, the radical side that began to fire off missiles, etc. And I think Donald Trump's pretty much fed up with it. He's had enough of it. And that's why you see the retaliatory strikes upward of 90, 150 different installations struck over this past weekend.

32:16Piers Morgan:OK, Mehdi, I mean, the problem is the Iranians are heading back. They still appear to be in control of the Strait of Foremost. Donald Trump is saying it's open and will remain open. He's now going to do this charge on cargo ships and so on. Again, those two positions can't both be true, right? We can only go on what we're seeing, and what we're seeing is a very small number of ships getting through that strait, which we know causes enormous damage to the global economic energy market, right? So this is dragged on and on and on. I do think Trump is frustrated. I do think he's pissed off with all this, and I do suspect that if we gave him his time again, he wouldn't have got into this, but he is where he is with it.

32:58Piers Morgan:What do you think is now in reality happening? So, you know, there's the famous phrase, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results. This idea that Trump is going to start a blockade again, start bombing again, start threatening Cargill Island again, and anything fundamentally will change is absurd. We know that it won't change. We know the two sides are locked into this position. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. We know that negotiations are the only way to deal with the nuclear programme. That was what was on the table on February 28th that Trump and Netanyahu decided to wreck together.

33:31And the war is a disaster. Let me just deal with a lot of things that Hogan has said. Number one, you know, just on USAID, just one last point. The idea this was some woke lefty department. The left were very critical of USAID for many years. One of the programs that the Doge really undermined was the anti-AIDS program, PEPFAR, George Bush's program. Marco Rubio was one of the biggest champions of USAID, as was the late Lindsey Graham, I should say. So this was not some left-wing thing. Even Republicans used to recognise that aid abroad is a good thing for the United States. Number two, on terms of the actual war and how it's going, it's funny that Hogan said, well, what about the ballistic missiles?

34:08Well, according to US intelligence, Iran still retains 70 % of its ballistic missile capability. And the funniest thing about debating Trump people is Trump always throws you under the bus. Hogan's saying ballistic missiles are bad. But I heard Trump say a couple of weeks ago that it's fine for Iran to have ballistic missiles. They have a right to have ballistic missiles. And when a reporter said, wait, hold on, you want Iran to have ballistic missiles? He goes, well, I can't tell them not to if everyone else has them. So Trump is all over the place on this. A month ago, he said the Iranian regime were good people, nice people, smart people, rational people.

34:38Over the weekend, he said they're evil, sick people. This is the most erratic man who has ever held any kind of power in this country. And as for going to war, Hogan says stupid war. It appears you rightly say this is a stupid war. And by the way, he didn't just say stupid war. He said no more wars in multiple rallies. Hogan was the campaign press secretary in 2024. He was there when Donald Trump said, I don't have wars, he said. He said on election night, I'm going to stop wars. I'm not going to start a war. He started this war for no good reason, because Lindsey Graham and Benjamin Netanyahu and others persuaded him to do this ridiculous war.

35:11And now we're in this stupid war where oil prices are up. He also said, by the way, Hogan, you remember, he said, I'm going to end inflation on day one. We're going to bring prices down. Instead, we've got gas prices going up and up and up, because the Iranians know if they hold out for the midterms, it's going to hurt Trump and the Republicans. They have their own incentive for keeping this going. And Piers, I don't know if I said it on this show or another show, but I said, this war is not over when the MOU was signed, when the so-called ceasefire was done. Yeah, I don't think anybody thought it was.

35:36Piers Morgan:I honestly think Donald Trump is scrabbling to find an exit ramp, and he's finding it really hard, because the Iranians... Well, escalating to exit is not a good move. But you don't think 47 years of terror in October 7th was a good enough reason to... So why didn't he say that on the campaign trail, Hogan? Why didn't he say, I'm going to become president and I'm going to go to war with Iran to punish them for 1979? Well, actually, I would say... I would look at it differently. Look, you know, you've got a lot of bad actors around the world. You've got North Korea, you've got Russia, you've got China, you've got others, right?

36:05Piers Morgan:And America doesn't march in and attack all those countries for good reason, right? Simply being a bad regime, as we learned... Also, they have nukes, please. Well, as we learned... They have nukes, conveniently. I know, that's the point. But surely... But the principle should be the same. You know, I remember with the Iraq war debate in 2003, I opposed that very vociferously because I just thought this makes no sense. And it backfired horribly and had 20 years of mayhem and led to the rise of ISIS and so on. You don't necessarily have to march in and attack bad actors in regions. Now, you know, I will never defend a thing this regime has done in Iran.

36:41Piers Morgan:They're a despicable, awful regime that appreters its people and they've clearly supplied arms and resources to a bunch of terror groups in the Middle East. All of that is inarguable. But my concern from day one, and I said it on day one, is what is the war objective here? Is it to get rid of the regime? And if it isn't, the very last thing you should want to do at the end of this war is empower the regime. And I have a horrible feeling that by working out the unexpectedly huge impact of being able to control the Strait of Hormuz, this Iranian regime now feels more emboldened and more powerful than it did four months ago.

37:18Piers Morgan:That's my honest problem with this. Foreign policy, as you know, is fraught with a whole bunch of different issues. I've traveled with the president all over the world. We went to North Korea, actually, China, et cetera, to deal with some of the geopolitical threats that this country faces. Now, they're not eminent threats. They're more economic. They're not military in nature in that they're not doing kinetic activity in the moment and funding terrorism to try and kill Americans, which Iran, as you pointed out, clearly has done. But most news reports pretty clearly have pointed out different pockets within this Iranian regime.

37:54And as Donald Trump said, we kind of did get rid of the regime because we killed everybody in line for control of Iran. However, there are two basically competing groups. One, very militant. I'm going to use the word old school to define, use the words old school to define them. They're the ones who really want to continue down the path of death and destruction, stated goals of killing Americans, killing Jews, et cetera, versus ones who may be a little bit more moderate. And I guarantee you this administration has spoken to both factions in both groups. It appears that when we do move toward a memorandum of understanding, it's because we've had conversations with those who tend to be a little bit more sensible and maybe care about the well-being of their own people.

38:37And then, of course, those who don't, who have killed many tens of thousands of their own people, tend to take control by striking targets, killing civilians, and then Donald Trump has to change. This reminds me, you know what this reminds me of, though? Hogan,

38:52Piers Morgan:it reminds me of the scorpion and the frog tale, which I won't repeat because everybody knows it, but it reminds me about the scorpion. Scorpions tend to behave like I just want to end very quickly, Mehdi, because we've run out of time. Hold on, hold on. I've got to say very quickly. No, no, you can't. You can't. You can't because I've got another guest waiting. Well, I waited half an hour to come on this show and then you'd save my vocal cord. So let me just say this. The Iranian regime, to say there's been regime change in Iran, is gaslighting of the highest order. We've replaced Ayatollah Khamenei with Ayatollah Khamenei, a more radical hard drive version, who has much more of an incentive to get...

39:27Piers Morgan:Mehdi, I agree with you 100%. So let's forget that. I just want to ask you very finally, Mehdi, are you sad that Senator Lindsey Graham has died? No, I'm not sad. I'm not celebrating it either, as you suggested in your introduction. I think it's a bit of a straw man to say everyone's celebrating his death. I think as journalists, Piers, you and I, we hold power accountable. We speak truth to power. I'm not of the school that says when a politician dies, a public figure dies, we treat them like a private figure and just shut up. I don't think journalism should turn into hagiography. at Zeteo, for example, we published a list of what Graham said and did.

40:00We just let the facts speak for themselves. He was a man who said awful things, genocidal things, racist things. And we put that on the record for people to see. That doesn't mean he didn't also do, I'm sure, good things in Congress as well. But overwhelmingly, he argued for wars, including this Iran war that outlives him, that killed 100 schoolgirls on day one of the war. He argued for the Iraq war that you and I opposed that killed over a million people. He never met a Middle East country he didn't want to invade. And I think that's how we should remember him. We should remember the full record.

40:29The problem is when powerful people die, people in our media, especially mainstream corporate media, want to just do hagiography and say, what a wonderful person they were. Weren't they lovely? And I'm sure many of those powerful people were lovely and they have families who love them. But as journalists, our job is to say, here's what they did. Here's the truth about their life and record. Here's an accurate obituary. And with Lindsey Graham, the man has a ton of blood on his hands. We shouldn't just forget that.

40:52Piers Morgan:No-one's asking anyone to forget the record of politicians, but I do think in the immediate aftermath of public figures dying, unless they're genocidal maniacs like Hitler or Mao or Stalin, Hogan, there should be a modicum of respect for the death of a human being. And my issue with this, it doesn't just relate to the left... Tell that to Donald Trump. Well, I was going to make the point. I mean, Hogan, I presume you would be appalled by the reaction from many on the left to Lindsey Graham's death, as I have been. There aren't many on the left. But, of course, there are many, actually. I've seen so much of it online.

41:24Piers Morgan:Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, every prominent Democrat has peaked praise on Lindsey Graham. It was after Charlie Kirk got murdered. It is disgusting. However, my question... You didn't call Donald Trump disgusting, Piers? You didn't call Donald Trump disgusting when he said it about Rob Reiner? If you let me host my own show, I was about to ask... If you let me speak at equal amount of time... I was about to ask Hogan Gidley if, given that we should all be able to condemn the reaction of the left to the death of Lindsey Graham and to Charlie Kirk and others on the right, would you also condemn the way that Donald Trump has talked about Robert Mueller, Rob Reiner, and others that he doesn't like who die when he trashes them in public quite quickly?

42:07Piers Morgan:Because I never like him doing that. I always think it's wrong, particularly given he's the president of the United States. Well, do you condemn what they said and lied about Donald Trump as well, both Rob Reiner and Robert Mueller? Well, I don't think that's a relevant point. Everyone's entitled to criticise the President of the United States. The point is, should the President use his pulpit to attack Rob Reiner when he's just been murdered? I don't think he should. Those people have attacked him. He responded in time. Listen, I was executive director of the South Carolina Republican Party in Lindsey Graham's era.

42:40I've known the man for a long time. Was he right on every issue? Did I agree with him on every issue? No. But he loved his country. He loved his constituents in the state of South Carolina. He loved being a candidate. So did Robert Mueller. You can hate his policies. You can not like some of his votes. I got crossways with him a couple of times. Remember in the first Trump administration, he wasn't on board with Donald Trump's closed border policies by any stretch. On the North Lawn, I said when I was at the state party in South Carolina, he got booed off the stage for supporting George W. Bush's amnesty.

43:11We called him grandnesty for a reason. And his staff called me and said, hey, you know you're off the Christmas card. list, right? We laughed about it. And Lindsey Graham finally came on board with the proper policy, which is to protect the American people first. And he cozied up to Donald Trump because he knew that he had enough power and sway within the United States Senate to get things done for the America First movement. He was a patriot. You can disagree with him, Betty, all you want to. You can not like the wars. I don't like the wars either. But the fact is, the man was a public servant his entire life.

43:40But I didn't say I didn't say good. I'm glad he's dead. I think it would be nice in public life

43:50Piers Morgan:if every time a big American public servant, someone's given their life to public life in America, or the UK, anywhere, actually, if both sides just managed to show a modicum of respect when somebody dies. I don't think it's too much to ask. Then you can get into the legacy stuff. Give it a beat. Give it a day or two. But, Piers, the problem is... The problem is you say you're on... That's my view. Hold on. Let me make this point, last point, then you can cut me off. You say you're in the middle and fair on this. You said the left yesterday. I read your tweet. Despicably cruel, heartless and abusive, the least kind people on earth.

44:24You did not say that when Donald Trump said the same thing to Mueller and Reiter. Actually, I had regularly criticised him. I checked. You said take away his phone. You did not call Trump. You did not call him despicably cruel.

44:36Piers Morgan:I didn't like him doing it with John McCain or Colin Powell or Rob Reiner. No, look, I do think it's despicable. So let me be clear. I do think... OK, good. But there's nothing... I love it when we end on agreement. To me, there's nothing more hypocritical... We both agree it was despicable. Nothing more hypocritical than people with the hashtag be kind in their bio on social media... Do you think it's despicably cruel for Donald Trump to attack the Kennedy family on the day their granddaughter Tatiana Schlossberg died? ..spewing hateful vial at people when they die? That is the least be kind thing imaginable.

45:05Piers Morgan:Anyway, I'm going to be kind and put your voice out of its misery. Thank you, Mehdi. Always good to have you. And, Hogan, I always appreciate you coming on, too. So thank you very much indeed for giving me your time. Thank you. Anytime. Thanks. Well, joining me now is Jonathan Swan, the co-author of the explosive new book, Regime Change, Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump. Jonathan, welcome to Uncensored. Thanks for having me, Piers. As an author, I am insanely jealous of the quite staggering amounts of books you have sold in the previous week. So many congratulations. I appreciate you.

45:37Thank you.

45:38Piers Morgan:For those who have not read the book yet, and there aren't many on planet Earth, judging by your sales, What is your overarching view of Donald Trump, who's now been president for a total of six years, straddling two and a half terms? Well, I think one reason hopefully the book is resonating with a wide audience is we give a nuanced picture of Donald Trump. The book is not a polemic. It's a reported story of how he returned to the presidency and how he's wielding power in ways that we haven't seen for a very long time in this country. In some respects, we've never seen it in some of the aspects of how he's using power.

46:17But we show all aspects of Donald Trump. We show, you know, the incredible charisma and talent for mass communication. You know, I've never seen a movement bond with a leader like I have with Donald Trump. We show his obsession with revenge, which has been a thread throughout this administration. We show what I would describe as a sort of feral instinct for power. No president has wielded power over his own party in the way that Donald Trump did last year. There is no precedent, actually, for that. And we show all aspects, you know, foreign policy. He is taking huge risks on the global stage in this term in ways that make it quite unrecognisable from his first term, and we get into that in the book as well.

47:11Piers Morgan:Yeah, you know, it's interesting because I rang him the morning after his win, so a few hours after he'd been declared president again. I've known him 20 years and I just said, look, he eventually answered the phone, he was pretty tired, and I just said, you know, this is an amazing achievement, putting aside everything else, to win back the White House after four years in the wilderness is pretty well unprecedented in the history of America. So congratulations. And I said, how are you feeling about it? And he gave me a little reply. And then he said, you know, things will be very different this time.

47:40Piers Morgan:We spent four years thinking about what we should have done in the first term and the way that the system could work against you and so on. And it's going to be very different. We're going to hit the ground hard because we're very prepared. And, of course, he hit the ground with a blizzard of executive orders. And, you know, for a while, I thought this was a very pumped-up, dynamic Trump who had a massive mandate from the country, bigger than he got first time, and I thought maybe we might see a very different character. But then reasonably quickly, he moved into, I guess you would say, classic Trump, you know, behaviour, but also manifesting itself with some odd decisions.

48:19Piers Morgan:For somebody who campaigned on, we're going to keep out of, you know, stupid wars, as he put it, we're going to focus on America first, getting cost of living down and so on. To then launch this war on Iran, particularly given the way it's played out in the last four months, seemed to me the complete antithesis of that and a massive, gigantic gamble with his legacy. Why do you think he did it? I've asked this question of so many advisers of his and you get different. It's not it's not a simple answer to it. But there's an answer that a lot of his, I would say, more isolationist, anti-interventionist advisers don't want to hear.

48:58But it's the truth, which is that Trump has always been more hawkish, specifically on Iran, than they would like him to be. In the first term, he pulled out of Obama's nuclear deal against the advice of some of his advisers. He also killed Qasem Soleimani. That was a big risk that some warned against. During the four years out of power, which we get into in the book, it became more personal for him. The FBI briefed Donald Trump that Iran was plotting to kill him. You can imagine that might have had an effect. And when Ron Durma, who's one of Netanyahu's top advisers, went and visited Trump after the election, he left that meeting and told associates he thought there was an 80 % chance that Trump would join Israel in that war.

49:41Obviously, Netanyahu played a huge role, very aggressive campaign. You know, we document in the book him going down to the White House Situation Room and giving this big pitch.

49:49Piers Morgan:Yeah, I've quoted that many times, that piece. Yeah. But I think, above all, it's a story of hubris. I think it's a story of hubris. All presidents, to some extent, overestimate their power in certain ways and their ability to control events. And for someone like Donald Trump, you know, one reading of his life, I was talking to one of his advisors who made this description, it's a story of moral hazard. You do one thing that's risky, you get away with it. You do something that's even riskier, ultimately you get away with it. You know, 2024, my lord, you've been indicted four times. You essentially defeat the whole US justice system.

50:27You come back in and your biggest enemies are basically on their knees. You know, the titans of big tech, you know, Tim Cook is bringing golden tributes to you in the Oval Office. You then have, in what is, in your view, a very successful campaign against Iran last June. And then you pull off this incredible, no matter what you think about the policy, incredible military operation to seize Maduro. And I just think that, you know, he overestimated the capacity of the US military and the Israeli military to essentially conduct a regime change war from the air.

51:03Piers Morgan:Yeah. With no ground component, unprecedented in human history, Nothing in the intelligence reports to support this. And I think that's really what happened. And do you think the Iranians realised just how consequential controlling the Strait of Hormuz would be? And do you think American intelligence had worked that out either? Because it seemed to me everybody was slightly running blind about how big that could be. And it turns out it's the biggest weapon that the Iranians have, and they now know that. And you could end up with a situation where this ends with the Iranian regime not only still in place, but actually feeling more emboldened than they did at the start of all this, because they've now got this extraordinary weapon with this stretch of water, which can dictate the global energy market.

51:49It's such an interesting question, because obviously it had been contemplated, right? It's in every Pentagon war plan. You know, we have reporting in our book. Trump was briefed on this possibility of the threat of Hormuz closing. But, you know, it's it's always it's theoretical until you see it in action. Right. You know, probably I can't speak for the Iranians, but my guess is they knew that it was a possibility. But until you actually do it and see that you can do it, that's something quite different. But this gets back to the sort of magical thinking that defined the planning that led up to this war.

52:23Trump himself did not think that this was a possibility, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, because he thought the war would be over so quickly that this scenario wouldn't play out. And again, there was no intelligence to support that. But the other aspect of this, which I think is something that people don't really understand about this Trump administration versus the first one, is their secrecy is so intense when it comes to matters that they really want to protect, that it means that you don't have certain subject matter experts in the room. So what we show in the book is the two people that would be forced to handle the biggest global energy shock in history, the Treasury Secretary Scott Besant and the Energy Secretary Chris Wright, they weren't even in the room for the planning meetings that led up to the Rani war.

53:11They weren't in the loop. So you're not getting those perspectives in the room. Yes, you're limiting leaks, but, you know, there are other costs too.

53:20Piers Morgan:you've had amazing reviews for the book all over the place probably the most, one of the most memorable was of course from Donald Trump who over the weekend posted on True Social the book was a joke, 90 % of its contents were fake news if she, Maggie Haberman, your co-author ever wrote the true story about me it would actually be quite boring but loaded with lots of success he added also I just finished a perfect physical at Walter Reed I do it every six months. I requested another cognitive test, the only president to do so three times. I aced them all, got every question right. Few people in Washington, D.C.

53:57Piers Morgan:could do so, including Maggot, as he called your co-author, and her flunky associate, Jonathan Swan. I'd be willing to bet they couldn't get 50 % of the questions right. Anyway, don't buy their book, It's Garbage. I mean, I would take that bet. I would imagine that you and Maggie would probably get 50 % or more of the cognitive test questions right. But putting that aside for a moment, A, obviously entirely predictable that he would rage against your book. B, I imagine it will just add to your coffers and sell many more copies. But on a human level, you've always, I think, straddled that line of dealing with Trump very skilfully.

54:36Piers Morgan:It's not easy. You know, I've learned how to do it over the years, fallen out with him, fallen back in with him, maintained a cordial relationship with him personally, but not afraid to criticise him and so on. I think he respects people that at least afford him respect when they deal with him, even if they want to criticise him. But when you see him calling Maggie maggot, for example, and he goes after a lot of female journalists in quite an abusive manner like this, what do you feel about that? The honest answer, Piers, is I don't have an emotional reaction. I've covered him now for so long.

55:09This is my 11th consecutive year of covering him. and the amount of insults thrown. You know, I'll give you an example. I remember back in 2019 I did a story that he really didn't like and I was meeting with one of his allies and they said to me, you know, the president has a message he wanted me to pass on to you. And I said, oh, what's that? I said, he wants you to know that you're a piece of shit. I said, oh, okay, you know. It's, you know, like I don't think he knows. There is not a person on earth who could be less concerned about being called maggot than Maggie Haverman. If the idea is deterring her or whatever, it's so absurd.

55:50And I'm more concerned about colleagues of mine getting the FBI show up on their door, which is what happened the last few days, getting subpoenaed. A couple of our stories over the last year have been under investigation for leaked stuff. That's the stuff that concerns me. He can call me whatever he wants. It has zero effects.

56:06Piers Morgan:What do you feel about those subpoenas that have come against the New York Times? I mean, they're just naked intimidation. I mean, it's not how you conduct... There's no historical precedent for conducting a leak investigation this way. Subpoena's usually the last resort. This is, like, two days after the story, FBI shows up on your front door. I mean, it's very clearly designed to intimidate. And we just completely reject it. The New York Times is defending the reporters. They're just doing their jobs. It was a news... If there's ever a newsworthy story, It's about the security of Air Force One, which, by the way, is not just the president who rides on it.

56:42It's staff, journalists. It's taxpayer-funded, despite what he's saying about the gift. So, you know, legitimate story, and we completely oppose any efforts to stifle First Amendment protective journalism.

56:55Piers Morgan:For somebody who's covered Trump for 11 years, you look remarkably fresh-faced. A lot of the journalists on the Trump beat tell me they're completely exhausted because the guy just never sleeps, even on Air Force One. How have you managed to avoid exhaustive collapse? Well, he sleeps now sometimes in the afternoon during these long press availabilities. So that gives you a little opportunity to... Look, as I say to some of... When I'm whining to myself or to others, we're not in Fallujah. We're simply not in Fallujah. You know, we're just reporters. There's been a lot of... I would say that there's a temptation to kind of build up journalists into some sort of white night type figures.

57:41And I just, it's not my DNA. It's not Maggie's either. The culture I come from, which I think is similar to the culture you grew up in, you know, my first job was as a copy boy at a tabloid in Sydney as a teenager, where the amount of, you know, I was cleaning under desks and getting printouts and whatever, you know, we don't take ourselves. It's pretty hard to be a peacock in environments like that. So, yeah.

58:08Piers Morgan:I mean, I would say to Maggie that, you know, on the theme of maggots, I remember Trump getting on a rally stage after we'd done an interview where I said, look, I just don't believe the election was stolen. And he went off on a rant about me. And he kept ranting for a whole week about it afterwards. And then he went on stage and said that I was so dead I was catching flies, was his exact quote about me. And as you can see, Jonathan, I am very much alive and well. And there are no flies on me. And Cristiano Ronaldo says you've got good abs. Well, thank you for noticing that clip. You're improving, right?

58:40Piers Morgan:Thank you for noticing the tweet, which I have as my pinned tweet, precisely so that everybody notices it. Yeah, thank you for spotting that. Jonathan, it's a fascinating book. I love your journalism, Maggie's. I think I've quoted the piece you guys did a few weeks into the war about that extraordinary meeting at the White House Situation Room with Netanyahu, with the head of Mossad, joining remotely and so on as one of the probably most consequential meetings that's ever taken place in modern times. And the consequences I felt at the time when I read that piece for Trump could be enormous and the consequences for his legacy could be enormous.

59:18Piers Morgan:And we'll just have to see how that all plays out. But it's a terrific book. So thank you very much indeed for joining me. Thanks so much for having me, Piers. Appreciate it. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain. And we'll do it all for free. Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical and we couldn't do it without you.

59:55Thank you.