Trump Keeps Contradicting Himself on Iran

“Locked and loaded.”

Chip Somodevilla/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The long-simmering feud between the United States and Iran roared back to life Saturday as the Trump administration pinned blame on Tehran for the recent attacks against crucial Saudi Arabian oil facilities that were carried out with a fleet of drones. The Houthis, an Iranian-backed rebel group fighting the Saudi-led military coalition in Yemen, took credit for the strikes, which “knocked out more than half the kingdom’s oil output for days or more” and sent the global oil market into turmoil, the Washington Post reported.

Suspicion quickly fell on Iran over its alleged role in supplying the weapons. On Twitter, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo faulted the Islamic republic for the “unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply” but provided no evidence for this assertion, which Iran’s foreign minister denied. President Donald Trump hinted at Iran’s involvement in a series of tweets, but he mostly used the burgeoning crisis as another opportunity to attack the media for accurately reporting his past offer to meet with Iran’s leaders without preconditions. That isn’t the only time Trump has contradicted himself on Iran; here are three recent examples, beginning with his preconditions flip-flop:

Trump lies about promise to meet Iran’s leaders without preconditions

On Sunday, Trump lashed out at media reports noting that he’d previously volunteered to meet with Iranian officials without preconditions. “That is an incorrect statement (as usual!),” he wrote on Twitter. This is an easily-disproved lie. Trump has offered to meet with Iran’s leaders. Trump’s advisers, including Pompeo and State Department envoy Brian Hook, have made the same promise publicly. 

In June, days after Trump nearly ordered a strike on Iran for downing an unmanned Navy drone, he sat down with NBC’s Chuck Todd for an an interview in which Todd asked if Iran would have to meet some preconditions before Trump would agree to talks.

“Not as far as I’m concerned,” Trump said. “No preconditions.”

He previously made that same point last July during a press conference with Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy, telling reporters he “would certainly meet with Iran if they wanted to meet.”

“No preconditions,” he said. “They want to meet, I’ll meet, whenever they want.”

Once Trump set this new benchmark for negotiations, the State Department reiterated it. Last week, Pompeo told reporters at a White House press briefing that Trump “has made very clear he is prepared to meet with no preconditions.”

Trump’s lie didn’t go unnoticed on Twitter, where Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, pointed it out. “So when you say Fake News,” Lieu asked Trump, “are you referring to yourself?” 

Trump rushes to Saudi Arabia’s defense, despite previously saying the Saudis should “fight their own wars”

The attacks on Saudi oil facilities not only ratcheted up tensions between Iran and the US, but also cast a further spotlight on the controversial American alliance with Saudi Arabia. A spokesperson for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, which receives support from the US, said Monday that the weapons used to attack its oil installations were Iranian in origin and did not come from Yemen. The Saudis did not provide evidence for this assertion—the spokesperson said results from the investigation would eventually be made public—but Trump indicated Sunday that the Saudis’ portrayal of events would play a key role in determining his response. In a tweet, Trump said the US was “waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we should proceed!”

Since his election, Trump has firmly embraced Saudi Arabia as a preeminent American ally in the Middle East despite the authoritarian state’s troubling history of suppressing dissent, stifling women’s rights, and, recently, ordering the execution of a Washington Post journalist who wrote critically about Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The civil war in Yemen, where the Saudis are fighting the Iranian-allied Houthis, has become the world’s most devastating humanitarian catastrophe. All the while, Trump has described the US as “a steadfast partner” to the Saudis, who he calls “a great ally in our very important fight against Iran.” The Trump administration has repeatedly approved American arm sales to the kingdom and its Middle East allies. 

Five years ago, Trump spoke much differently about the Saudis, telling them in a tweet to either “fight their own wars” or pay the US “an absolute fortune to protect them.”

Trump might pay Iran to remain in nuclear deal he once called “horrible”

Trump has made no secret of his disgust for the nuclear deal negotiated by his predecessor, Barack Obama. He’s called it “no good” and “horrible,” and last year—with the support of then-national security adviser John Bolton—he finally abandoned it. The path toward diplomacy since then has been perilous as Trump has ratcheted up sanctions on Iran as part of his “maximum pressure” strategy. Iran, meanwhile, has begun breaking the terms of the 2015 agreement and is pledging not to negotiate with the US until sanctions are lifted. 

Now Trump is reportedly mulling a significant, and contradictory, change of course. According to the Daily Beast, he “is actively considering a French plan to extend a $15 billion credit line to the Iranians if Tehran comes back into compliance” with Obama’s nuclear deal. The bailout plan would offset a decline in Iran’s oil sales and assist its struggling economy. The idea was originally introduced by French President Emmanuel Macron and Trump appears to have recently come around to it. Trump said at the G7 meeting in France last month that Iran might need a “short-term letter of credit or loan” that would “get them over a very rough patch,” but his aides later said Trump would only consider the idea “after a new agreement” was reached with Iran, the New York Times reported

The Daily Beast’s more recent reporting suggests Trump is closer to accepting the idea than previously thought. “Several sources” told the news outlet that “foreign officials are expecting Trump to either agree to cooperate on the French deal or to offer to ease some sanctions on Tehran.” The arrangement could be figured out this week as Trump and President Hassan Rouhani of Iran are both expected to attend the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate