The White House has issued a strong rebuttal to criticism from California politicians regarding President Donald Trump’s remarks that Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego. The comments, made during a campaign rally in Nebraska on Monday, have ignited a political firestorm and prompted heightened security monitoring in the state.
California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned the president’s statement as “deranged and dangerous,” characterizing it as potentially treasonous. In response, Newsom directed the California State Threat Assessment Center to monitor the situation, warning that foreign actors might misinterpret the remarks as an invitation to target Californian cities.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass similarly criticized the comments, describing them as threats aimed at encouraging attacks on American lives. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria stated on X that his city was not “collateral damage” and urged Trump to exclude it from what he termed “reckless war talk.”
Trump, who was addressing the ongoing conflict with Iran, said: “It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego.” His remarks drew cheers from portions of the audience.
White House Communications Director Stephen Cheung dismissed the ensuing media reaction as a “freakout” not rooted in reality. In a post on X, Cheung argued that Trump was emphasizing that US cities had been protected from Iranian nuclear threats because the administration had acted to stop Iran’s nuclear program earlier this year. He asserted that America is safer because Iran now lacks a nuclear weapons capability, a navy, and an air force.
The dispute highlights the ongoing friction between the Trump administration and California leadership. The two cities mentioned are home to significant military infrastructure, including Naval Base San Diego, Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, and Los Angeles Air Force Base. This is not the first public clash between Trump and Newsom, who is considering a 2028 presidential run; previous disagreements have included Trump mocking Newsom’s dyslexia and Newsom accusing the president of abusing power during immigration protests.
I find it ironic he mentions safety while using language that feels more like reckless provocation than strategic deterrence. Confusing messages all around.
Newsom is right to be alarmed. Even if it’s hyperbole, normalizing threats against American soil sets a dangerous precedent for international diplomacy.
The White House response felt like a deflection. Calling legitimate security concerns a ‘freakout’ seems tone-deaf to the gravity of the situation.
Wait, does he actually think Iran can’t hit these major military hubs without nuclear weapons? The naval base alone makes them obvious targets already.
It is absolutely chilling that politicians would casually suggest specific US cities as targets, regardless of the rhetorical intent. Terrible leadership.