By Paul Cuno-Booth
FactCheck.org
Several Democrats seized on some confusing and eyebrow-raising remarks president Donald Trump made at a rally in Nebraska about the war in Iran.
“Remember, with the war, it’s just artificial. It’s a little bit high,” Trump said, apparently referring to gas prices. “It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They could take out a city. Let them take — let it — let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That’s — this is a very small price to pay, and it’s going to be over with very soon.”
California governor Gavin Newsom wrote on X that Trump “is now saying our foreign enemies should ‘take out’ Los Angeles and San Diego.” Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California posted: “The President says the Iran war will end ‘very soon.’ … And if it means attacks on two major American cities in the process, he is not troubled by the cost.”
But as staff writer Paul Cuno-Booth explains, that’s not our reading of the president’s comments – not once you consider the full context and Trump’s numerous past remarks on this issue, when he’s made the same point in a more coherent fashion. “While his wording is confusing,” Paul writes, “a more plausible interpretation is that he meant the war would prevent Iran from posing a threat to U.S. cities, and higher gas prices are a small sacrifice to make.”
CNN’s Daniel Dale, who has been fact-checking Trump for about as long we have, said on X, “It’s Trump’s fault you kinda have to be steeped in TrumpRallySpeak to know what he was saying last night, and of course you can say it’s inappropriate regardless for the president to casually float the possibility of a city being wiped out, but the context exists and is important.”
The context is important. And you don’t need to be fluent in “TrumpRallySpeak” to get it – though our experience in this area probably helped. (Even some at the rally – who inappropriately cheered – didn’t seem to understand Trump’s comment in real time.)
Some readers weren’t too happy with our assessment. We lost a few thousand Instagram followers over our story and received a number of angry messages. Some accused us of being a shill for the White House. They must not be reading our website.
We stand behind our story. We’re a nonpartisan organization, and we follow the evidence where it leads, regardless of the party or politician making the claim. Any fair reading of the president’s remarks would come to the same conclusion we did.
In his story, Paul points out how Trump has used similar language before to argue that higher gas prices are worth it if the war prevents Iran from posing a threat to the U.S..
Consider Trump’s comments September 28: “The one thing already has happened is, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. That’s a very big thing, because if you want to see turmoil and a travesty, let them take out a city with a nuclear weapon. I’m not only talking about Israel and big parts of the Middle East, but let them hit us with a nuclear weapon.”
There’s also this from Oct. 2, highlighted by another CNN reporter: “But remember about the oil. You’re paying a price, but boy, is that a small price than what it would be if these lunatics were allowed to have a nuclear weapon and used it on Mobile, Alabama,” Trump said. “OK, not going to happen.”
For the record, arms control experts have told us the threat of Iran developing an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the mainland of the United States is not particularly imminent, and they’ve also disputed Trump’s claims about Iran’s nuclear weapon capabilities.
The White House press office responded to the controversy October 6 by saying Trump “was clearly stating U.S. cities would have been threatened if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped,” though Trump himself waved off reporters’ questions about it that day. At an October 7 rally in San Antonio, he revisited the issue, offering a less confusing version.
He referred to gas prices being a little high and “ensuring that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon,” before adding: “But you want to see trauma, you want to see problems, and I said it the other day, let them hit a missile into San Diego or Los Angeles. … Let them hit San Diego. Let them hit Los Angeles, and you want to see some bad things happen, you want to see a country that would be in freefall. We’re not going to let that happen. We protect our cities. We protect our country. We’re not letting that happen.”
FactCheck.org does not accept advertising and relies on grants and individual donations.