Some Democrats are now calling for President Trump’s impeachment because he bombed Iran without congressional approval. But were Trump’s actions legal? Former State Department Special Advisor for Iran, Gabriel Noronha, joins Glenn Beck to explain the truth about the strike. Plus, he details what Iran might have had concerning nuclear weapons.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Gabriel, welcome to the program, Polaris National Security President, former State Department special adviser for Iran.

Did the -- did the president need to have congressional permission before striking Iran over the weekend?

GABRIEL: No. He remembers.

It would have been nice to have the strength of the president's hand, when he does have a congressional authorization for the military force. But the Constitution grants him the powers as commander-in-chief, to take all necessary actions, especially in a limited fashion like he just did.

There are no forces being entered into. There's a conflict. There's no boots on the ground.

This isn't us invading Iraq and toppling the government. This is a limited taking out their nuclear program.

And so he's under full legal authorization. The Constitution grants him to do this.

GLENN: And they -- they have never said anything about ISIS when he went after ISIS and shoved them down. Right?

I mean, we didn't hear this argument.

Why, all of a sudden, is this one so different than all of the limited strikes we have seen from all of the presidents recently?


GABRIEL: You know, you go back to Libya, 2011.

You go back to ISIS, 2014, 2015. Same scenario.

They -- actually, in those cases, those were even more intense military conflicts that we were involved in. And Democrats didn't say anything.
Republicans -- a few Republicans said a few things. But the reason here, is because they want to find something to attack president Trump for it. But there's nothing on the policy. Because this went so well. So they're going after the legal crush, just because they don't have anything else.

Here's another thing. I was in Congress for four years. There were votes by tells me, where they said, we want to strip the president of the ability to attack Iran.

And they introduced amendment after amendment after amendment. And they all failed. Not a single one passed. I saw probably a dozen of these attacks over my years there. All failed.

Either in the markup process on the House floor, the Senate floor, Congress. So Congress had the opportunity to stop this if they wanted, and they have always said, no.

We want the president to have the ability to strike Iran, when it's necessary.

GLENN: And, you know, I have to tell you, the world has changed. It's not like I have to send a ship to go sailing across the ocean anymore. Within 36 hours, we can leave, you know, our base here in America.

Be over in Iran. Drop bombs. And be back at home. You know, in time for dinner the next day.
I mean, it is -- it is very, very different.

And I think it's only logical to say, the president should have a limited ability to -- not declare war. But to respond, or to do a limited strike, if it is in the national interests.

And then, if it -- if it turns into something else. You know, Congress can reprimand him if they want.

Or isn't there something in the Constitution, that says, 30 days, or 60 days, they can shut off all the money.

If he hasn't declared war or gone to Congress, they can just say, we're shutting off all he money. So that's not accurate in this particular case.

Because you would have to have ongoing things. But a president just can't start a war. Congress can't. Correct?

GABRIEL: You're right. So back to 1973, at the height of the Vietnam War, Congress had been concerned that a lot of that had been unauthorized. So they passed what was called a War Powers Resolution. That gave two things.

First, it said, within 48 hours of military enforcement entering a conflict, the president needs to come to Congress and basically tell them, look, legal authorization was used.

And so I expect Trump will do that today.

There will be a legal report filed.

The next thing is that, Congress said, they have 60 days, to pass an authorization for force.

Or if it doesn't happen, then the president has to withdraw the forces.

But here's the thing, the Supreme Court has never ruled that resolution constitutional. And every single president since 1973. Democrat and Republicans.

Have all asserted that is an unconstitutional resolution that was passed in the lay.

So Congress has the option. If Congress wants, they have the power of the purse.

At my point, they can defund any war. They can defund the Pentagon, if they wanted to.

And they can force the President to bring (inaudible), and Congress has never done so. Because Congress basically has passed the buck to the President.

GLENN: Right.

The -- the idea that the president has to go to the gang of eight. And alert them, before anything happens.

Does that mean before the decision is made, or right after the decision is made?

I mean, I know he went to, you know, the leaders of Congress. Just minutes before the bombing started.

And, quite honestly, if I were the president, I would have done exactly the same thing.

I can't trust members of Congress. Look at what they're doing.

These members of Congress, they're so radicalized. They're marching in the streets. To the people burning our cities down.

I don't know what I would have done. Other than exactly what Donald Trump did.

Did he violate any laws or anything with how he handled himself, with the members of Congress?

The leadership.

GABRIEL: No, he didn't. So the gang of eight for folks who don't know is the Democrat and Republican, Senate majority leaders, minority leaders. House leaders. And the leaders up in the Intelligence communities.

Now, there's a tradition, that sort of the big secrets get briefed to them, things like Chinese espionage, Russian nuclear war, but there's not any legal requirement on this. And I'll tell you, when president Obama killed Osama Bin Laden.

There wasn't a notification to Congress on that either.

GLENN: Didn't hear anything about that.

GABRIEL: It's more of a tradition of deference to Congress. If you want to tell them, special things, you can.

But there's no legal requirement.

It's really just the way sort of things are often done for big intelligence things.

This is a military operation, more than an intelligence operation.

So I don't even think they're supplies in this case

GLENN: So let me ask you about something like people like Steve Bannon are saying right now.

They suggested that our Intel was Deep State. War informed by Mossad.

What Intel did you receive during the first Trump administration, that would leave you to believe that this is a sincere threat to American interests, not just a -- a justification to help Israel?

GABRIEL: You know, a lot of it, you don't even have to get the intelligence reports from.

It's the fact that they promised at the highest levels of leadership, they promised to wipe Israel off the map. They promised to destroy America.

So they have pensions there.

In terms of capability, what we saw, they were retaining the secret archive of everything needed to build a nuclear weapon.

And they never declared that during Obama's Iran Deal. And so even in Obama's Iran deal, they were breaking that from day one, about having the secret archive.

And then they had a bunch of nuclear scientists working on weaponization activities.

On the kinds of things that you need to actually physically assemble warheads and make something explode. And so all of that has been public knowledge for years. And so with -- you know, with respect to -- our Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard. I think it's ridiculous that any country would get to the 99-yard line of getting nuclear weapons.

But say that they don't intend at some point to cross into the touch down zone that defied logic, frankly.

GLENN: Correct.

You know, I'm hearing from both sides, that Trump was negotiating. I think trying to negotiate.
And the other side, Iran says, they were never serious. In fact, we would show up. And then they would never show up.

Can you give me any insight on what the negotiations were actually like, prior to the strikes, and do you think things are different now.

And if so, how?

GABRIEL: I think President Trump was genuinely interested in solving this the diplomatic way.

I will tell you, he gave them very generous terms. He gave them a lot of what they had asked for.

He came back a long ways from his position of 2018 to 2020. Where he had those 12 demands on Iraq.

Here he only had three or four things that were really essential.

But what the Iranians did. And they have always done this.

They tried to negotiate every syllable point.

They tried to get more and more and more.

Every time they would agree to something, they would come back and renege on it. This wasn't the behavior of someone that wants to solve this. This is a behavior someone that wanted to delay for time, and wanted to try to extract every concession. Not the behavior of someone that genuinely wanted to live in peace with the United States and Israel.

GLENN: I am so impressed with the team around Donald Trump.

Especially with Marco Rubio. I didn't know what to expect from Marco Rubio.

As a secretary of state. I think he's been just outstanding. What had you had his message be to Iran now?

GABRIEL: You know, I think it would be this. You guys have the option to respond logically, or respond emotionally.

The logical path would be to say, look, all our air defenses are gone. Our ballistic missiles are mostly gone. Our nuclear program is gone.

It's time to negotiate the terms of surrender, in a way that gives us sanity. In a way that allows our government to survive.

And to save our people from more destruction and economic misery. That would be the logical step.

And the emotional step is: We're going to go, attack American bases, extract revenge.

And I think what Secretary Rubio should do, is lay out really clearly for Iranian leaders the consequences of that emotional path.

And say, if you do this, you will have your leadership wiped out. You will see the rest of your ballistic missile program wiped out. And you won't get good terms of negotiation.

So if you can box in Iran's leaders, give them a good off ramp, saying, hey. Here's a realistic path that you can take to preserve your interests. And to maintain peace.

But don't take that hard path.

GLENN: Okay. So Rick Grenell said, he spoke to somebody. An Iranian source on the ground.

Who said, things on the ground are really, really bad. They're locking everybody up in their house.

You know, it's marshal law.

They've already rounded up a group of religious dissidents that they say were spies for Israel.

But executed like 100 of them over the weekend.

They've arrested hundreds -- hundreds more. The -- I can't remember the name of the religious police.

It's Iran. Can't remember. Maybe you know.

GABRIEL: That's probably the besiege. Probably the besiege.

GLENN: Yeah. Yes. Exactly right.

And they are on the streets, pretty mercilessly right now, checking everybody's phone, their car. I mean, it's very dangerous.

Do you think there's a chance, that the people can rise up and why hasn't the president encouraged them to rise up yet?

GABRIEL: You know, I think the Iranian people want to get rid of this regime.

But I will tell you, hearing some Iranians myself, I hear, they're pretty afraid for themselves.

They are having to evacuate their teams. They're trying to find a shelter. They don't know what what's going to happen. And so they probably won't take to the streets. And go over to the government right now.

But a month from now, this war is over. That's really the time where they could see their whole leadership crippled. And say, we want a new future.

And one of the things that is really good right now, which is really smart. Is they are destroying the internal government bureaucracy that is used to depressed the Iranians. You know, the gestapo stations, for lack of a better term. All the units which torture people. Arrest people. Murder people. Their high-tech surveillance.

They're showing all these institutions, which used to be the ones that masked the Iranian people. And so they're paving the way, that if the Iranians decide to take to the streets down the road, that they will be empowered. They will be able to gain momentum.

And that they would be actually successful in those efforts to overthrow the regime. Go ahead.

GLENN: Go ahead. No, no, no. Please, go ahead.

GABRIEL: I saw President Trump, I think yesterday, he sort of provided an opening for the regime change.

And he started saying, look, if the government will not do the smart thing, the Iranian people should take control of their own future. And change the regime themselves. So that's the first time we've seen that from President Trump in the administration reviews. Sort of encourage the Iranian people, to overthrow this regime. I think that's a smart thing to do.

I don't think we can get a full resolution, to the nuclear threat, while this regime is in power.

GLENN: Right.

Polaris National Security president, Gabriel Noronha is with us now.

Gabriel, I have hope, that this could be a Poland situation, if the people would rise up and the regime is toppled.

But we have not seen that anywhere else in the Middle East.

Is it possible. Is it probable that the Iranian people would choose to go away, and become more, what they were in the 1970s?

GABRIEL: It is possible, yes.

I would probably only give it a 35 percent chance. Here's why, I put it that low.

It's the Iranian leaders, unlike like leaders in Poland, unlike even Gorbachev, are willing to use as much military force as necessary, to kill those protesters, and stay in power.

And that makes it really tough for them.

What you don't have in Iran, is you don't have a military group, that has power, that has guns.

That is able to overthrow the regime. The regime would basically have to collapse under its own weight.

Under its own corruption. And under its own weakness.

GLENN: And if it did.

GABRIEL: But you won't have it removed.

GLENN: If it did collapse, would it be taken over by other extremists?

Or is there at least an even shot, that the people could have it?

GABRIEL: You know, there's a good shot that the people would have it.

There's a large number of Iranians, who all they really want is a secular government that is at peace with its neighbors.

That doesn't pursue a nuclear weapon.

That allows the Iranian people to thrive, build a future for themselves. That's what I hope happens.

It's a small possibility. But it's what we can work for and hope for.

GLENN: And pray for.

Great, Gabriel. Thank you so much.

Thanks for your service to the nation, and thanks for the update. Appreciate it.