Transcript of Top Trump Official Under Fire During War Testimony New

Donald Trump's ambassador to the United Nations just collapsed under cross-examination by Democrats in the House of Representatives in a hearing over Donald Trump's catastrophic and unlawful war in Iran. Let me show you as Democratic Congressmember Ted Lieu is cross-examining Mike Waltz, Donald Trump's ambassador to the United Nations, and Lieu calls for Waltz's resignation. Let's play this clip.

Iranian missile strikes and drones. You don't even know how many US troops were wounded and did not in this Iran war. Shame on you for not even know basic facts. You are the US ambassador and you don't even know how many US troops were wounded in Iran war. You got that wrong. You should be shameful. You don't know basic facts because you should resign. You don't even care about the number of US troops that were wounded.

More from this exchange between Congressmember Lou and the United States Ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz.

Let's play it.

So I'm gonna ask you again. Are US troops— That's not my married son. Are US troops currently stationed? Are US troops currently stationed in Jordan? Oralized in me. Go back and read the— Are US troops currently—

Let me show you as Democratic Congressmember Ted Lieu exposes that Mike Waltz does not even know the amount of US service members who were injured. Let's play this clip.

US service members are in the Middle East, risking their lives in the war with Iran. How many US troops have been wounded in the Iran war?

My understanding from the Defense Department's latest numbers is, uh, over 100, but about 70% or 90% of those have immediately returned to duty.

Okay, that number is wrong. According to Defense Casualty Analysis System, 482 American troops have been wounded. Now, it's not surprising to me that you did not know the answer to that. The reason you are here today and in your position is because you were fired by the president from your former position as National Security Advisor.

You disclosed—

you disclosed classified information that harmed American pilots and put them at risk.

About me, that's your spin, I guess, for your next campaign commercial. I don't know.

More from this powerful cross-examination. Let's play it right here.

How many American troops have been killed in the Iran war?

In these ongoing operations, 18.

Okay.

Now, President Trump has repeatedly stated that Iran's military was obliterated on March 16th. President Trump stated that Iran's military was, quote, literally obliterated, end quote. How is it possible that 482 American troops have been wounded and 18 service members killed by an Iranian military that's been purportedly obliterated?

The Iranian Navy, Air Force, air defense system, and industrial capacity have been massively damaged, if not completely ineffective. But this is a state that is trying to reconstitute. This is a state, a regime that is obsessed with a nuclear weapon, and it's a regime that still maintains some missile and drone capability that it's firing on all of its neighbors, including our bases. I think that's a pretty common sense evaluation, but if I need to explain it to you further, I can.

You need to explain to American people how an Iranian military that's been purportedly obliterated killed 18 U.S. service members and wounded 480.

As you know, 7 of those service members died in a plane crash.

Let me finish my question. And has struck multiple U.S. facilities in the Middle East repeatedly.

Wow.

How utterly horrific that you have Mike Waltz try to downplay the deaths and say because 7 of them died in a plane crash, how How utterly horrific is that? Let me show you more of that first exchange that I played at the beginning of this video. I'll give you the full context right here. Let's play it.

I'm here as the UN ambassador, but I'm happy to refer you to Pete Hegseth, Secretary Hegseth's testimony yesterday. Of course, you still have—

in your opening statement, you bragged about doing a Security Council resolution on Iran. So yes, Iran is in your job responsibility. Focus on it and focus on the troops that have been wounded and killed. Do not be so callous with the safety and lives of American troops. I'm going to ask you again, are US troops currently stationed in Jordan? Are US troops currently stationed in Jordan?

Try to get reelected.

I will.

You should try.

November is coming for you and this administration. Are US troops stationed in Jordan? It's not even a trick question.

Are they?

Of course they are. Okay, with a great ally.

And if Donald Trump doesn't trust the Jordanians to protect US troops, do you trust them? Who are we going to have protect US troops? They are exposed right now in the Middle East, repeatedly being exposed to Iranian missiles, missile strikes, and drones. You don't even know how many US troops were wounded in this Iran war. Shame on you for not even knowing basic facts. You are the US ambassador and you don't even know how many US troops were wounded in the Iran War? You got that wrong. You should be shameful. You don't know basic facts. You should resign. You don't even care about the number of US troops that were wounded. You did not know how many US troops were wounded. You gave false information to Congress. You should be ashamed of yourself for not even knowing how many US troops were wounded in the Iranian War. The gentleman's words should be taken down. You should not use such derogatory language for the distinguished ambassador. Seriously, I know you're upset, but you've—

Nothing in the last administration. Zero politics and the worst of it.

He lied to Congress, gave a flat-out false number minimizing the number of US troops wounded in Iran. Mr. Chairman, that's what he did in his first answer to my question. It should be recognized that the ambassador is a 26-year veteran of the military.

Thank you, Mr. Smith. Do you have a point of order?

Then we had Democratic Congresswoman McBride cross-examining Mike Waltz. Let me show you what went down here. Let's play it.

Farah votes no votes. Only send a message to Vladimir Putin that we are not there. But I want to say, while you're treating Vladimir Putin with kid gloves, you are insulting American allies, including our longstanding ally Denmark, whose soldiers fought and died alongside U.S. soldiers. Have you gotten any positive feedback from your colleagues at the United Nations about the president's desire to seize Greenland?

Uh, as one of the soldiers who fought alongside Danish soldiers in southern Afghanistan, they're a fantastic ally. Um, at the same time, they were paying very little to zero attention to the Arctic, and they now are. And we are in meaningful negotiations, uh, to secure our northern border.

I'll take that as a no, you haven't gotten any positive feedback. Thank you.

I yield back.

I've actually given a lot of positive feedback to the ongoing negotiations, to answer your question.

Sure.

If you're looking to feel your best this summer, don't just think skin deep, think cell deep. That's one of the reasons I like Prolon's 5-day fasting mimicking diet. It gives you a structured, science-backed way to target fat loss, support lean muscle, and help reset your metabolism, all in just 5 days. What I like is that everything is prepackaged for you, so you get plant-based soups, snacks, and beverages labeled by day, so there's no guesswork, meal prep, or planning. It's designed to nourish your body while keeping it in a fasting state to support cellular rejuvenation.. No matter the season, when I'm craving a real reset, Prolon is the nutrition program that works for me. It's convenient, backed by decades of scientific research, and it delivers real results. Ready for your own reset? For a limited time, Prolon is offering Midas listeners 15% off sitewide, plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe to their 5-day program. Just visit prolonlife.com/midas. That's P-R-O-L-O-N-L-I-F-E.com/midas. Prolonlife.com/meidas to claim your 15% discount and your bonus gift. Again, that's prolonlife.com/meidas, P-R-O-L-O-N-L-I-F-E.com/meidas to get 15% off sitewide plus your $40 bonus gift.

Then Congressman Olszewski, here's what he had to say. Let's play it.

You think it's wrong for elected officials and their families to profit from positions of power.

Do I think it's wrong?

Just generally speaking, your personal values? Yes, sir. I'm pleased to hear that. So I guess the question then is, how do you square that circle working for a president who just last year made 20,000 stock trades, including companies who benefit from markets that he is actively manipulating, whether that's through announcing ceasefires reversing course and allowing chip exports, or simply promoting these firms on his social media? How can you say it's wrong but be silent as the president's sons benefit from mining deals paid for by US taxpayers? As one of America's top diplomats, both as a former member of Congress, does that not conflict with your values, sir?

Well, let's not talk about Congress and the stock trading that I support.

A full ban. I think it's wrong for any member to trade. That wasn't the question, though, sir.

I hope to see that bill.

Sure. I'm on the discharge petition.

Number one.

Number two, a full ban, not, not the joke that my colleagues are trying to pull.

Members of his cabinet have all complied with the Office of Government Ethics, as have myself. We have ethics rules in place. We have an agency that oversees. So you think it's all subject ourselves to the Senate and to this office and receive that clearance before we come for confirmation. So you're okay with the president's stock trades in accordance with Transparency and in accordance with the rules of the Congress, we, we publicly put our finances out there every year in our financial disclosures.

So you're comfortable with the president buying stocks and companies like Energy before he announces a ceasefire?

You're comfortable with the president is complying with the ethics rules as they sit on the books?

Under questioning from Democratic Congress member Pocan, UN Ambassador Mike Walls admitted that he hasn't even read the State Department's report about Cuba, but that he says he knows a lot about it because he lived in Florida. Let's play this clip.

Have you ever been to Cuba?

I have not.

You have not?

Okay.

Did you get a chance to read the report that came out this week from the State Department on Cuba? 95 pages.

I have not read the, uh, entire report, but as a native Floridian, I'm familiar with the, the, the antics and adversarial, uh, gotcha.

Can you explain to me, on July 7th, there was a vote in the UN to continue debate about the U.S. blockade of Cuba and we opposed that. We kind of had an embarrassing defeat, 136 to 9 with 30 abstentions. But given what this report said, why are we afraid to have that debate if there's so much information we want to share with the world about Cuba? Why did we not extend—

That's a mischaracterization. What we opposed was Cubans, or, or others for that matter, abusing the General Assembly to have the same debate over and over again.

It just seems that we had such damning information that this report claims to have that would be a great venue to have that. I guess my question is— It's been over 65 years—

If you use this as propaganda, that's what we oppose.

Yeah, no, thank you. It's been over 65 years that we've had essentially this blockade, this embargo on Cuba, and have we moved closer to a democracy, steered them towards human rights? Has, as the other ambassador said, you know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. That 65 years brought us to where we want to be.

I would encourage you to read that, uh, to read that report.

I did.

I did.

And you didn't, correct? Yes.

Oh no, I, I've, I have not read it word for word, but I am very familiar as a native.

I did too. I read it, I've highlighted it. I felt like, you know what, I put on the Kinks and the Who because everything's about the '60s and '70s in here, and then there's a giant jump to today.

A blockade is a ring of ships A blockade is what we have right now.

This is a blockade of fuel, of medicine, of food, of supplies. Even in war, we allow medical supplies to go through. We don't allow medical supplies to go through to Cuba.

So more from Congressmember Pocan's cross-examination, where Waltz refused to take off the option that the United States will soon be invading Cuba. All of these Trump regime officials are war criminals, and they deserve to be tried in The Hague. Let's play this clip. Cuba.

Are we going to have a military action against Cuba? It seems like that's what this report is setting up.

I am not going to take options off the table for the president of the United States, but I would hope that you would not allow your visits to be used for Cuban regime propaganda that has oppressed.

Yeah, I'll tell you, I wish people— I understand, but I would strongly urge you, Marco Rubio, who's never been to Cuba, so many others who have strong opinions.

His entire family is from Cuba and they left before the revolution.

That is decades ago. That's a ridiculous answer.

It's Cuban Americans who have fled the regime.

To be fair, that is a ridiculous answer for being oppressed. It's worth going there. If you're going to have such strong opinions, I think you'd maybe look at it a little differently. I yield back.

Congresswoman Jacobs had a powerful cross-examination as well. Let's play it right here.

And while they willingly make the sacrifices for our country, it's our job on both sides of this dais to make sure that those sacrifices are worth it. So I wanted to ask you a simple question. Are we better off now than we were before we launched the war in Iran?

I will answer you very directly. Yes, the world and the American people are safer.

Okay, let me get— let's get into some more specifics. Before the war, the Strait of Hormuz was open. Now the Strait of Hormuz is closed. Are Americans better off when the Strait of Hormuz is open or when the Strait of Hormuz is closed?

The American economy is largely unaffected by the Straits of Hormuz. We fortunately— I find it a little bit rich to hear this kind of clamoring for oil and gas when, frankly, your side of the aisle has been at war against the American fossil fuel industry for quite some time. In fact, we had an LNG export ban just under the last administration. But fortunately, because of drill, baby, drill, because of fracking, we are largely self-sufficient. In the energy space?

Well, uh, my constituents who are paying on average thousands of dollars more a month in costs because of this war would beg to differ that our economy is not impacted by the Strait of Hormuz being closed.

But California imports much of its oil and gas, unfortunately, because of its own regulations.

Yeah, I want to talk about the national average of gas, actually. Um, the national average of gas before the war started was $3 a gallon.. It is now once again over $4 a gallon. You said actually in saying that the war was getting better on June 21st on Face the Nation that it is now below $4 and falling to show that we're making progress, but it's back up at $4 a gallon now. So are Americans better off when they're paying $3 a gallon nationally for gas or $4 a gallon nationally for gas?

I think Americans are better off than not paying the highs of over $5 under the last administration.

Because that happened for 2 weeks during the Ukraine war. It's been over $4 for more than 3 months just this year.

There you have it, folks. Let me know what you think. Hit subscribe. Let's get to 7 million subscribers and also check out the book WTF America. Preorder it right now. It helps if you preorder versus wait for October. It's helpful for the for the book and for the planning of everything. So if you could preorder it, that would be great. Breaking news right now.

My brothers and I wrote a book. It's called WTF America.

And well, doesn't that just say it all?

It comes out officially this October, but you can preorder your copy today. Just scan the QR code or click the link in the description below.