Trump sparks outrage for suggesting that Iran could ‘take out’ Los Angeles and San Diego

California leaders have criticized President Donald Trump after remarks on Monday that were interpreted by his opponents as a suggestion that Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego.Trump made the remarks at a Republican rally in Nebraska while defending his administration’s war with Iran and arguing that the conflict was necessary to protect the United States.He told the crowd he wanted a strong showing in the November elections to demonstrate support for his administration, before turning to the potential cost of the war. “It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe,” Trump said.He continued: “They can take out a city. Let ’em take out Los Angeles, let ’em take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay.”The comments immediately reverberated in California, where Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and other elected officials sharply rejected the suggestion that either city should be considered expendable.Newsom, a frequent and outspoken critic of Trump, accused the president of making reckless and dangerous statements about California after already deploying National Guard troops and Marines to the state.“After sending the National Guard and Marines to occupy California, Donald Trump is now saying our foreign enemies should ‘take out’ Los Angeles and San Diego,” Newsom said in a social media post, describing the president as “deranged and dangerous.”The mayors of both cities also pushed back.San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria (D) said his city should not be treated as collateral damage in a foreign conflict.“San Diego is not collateral damage. We are not expendable,” Gloria said, urging Trump to “keep our city out of your reckless war talk.”Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D) similarly condemned the president’s remarks, warning that comments from the commander in chief carry consequences beyond political rhetoric.“The role of a president is to protect the country, not to actively threaten it and encourage attacks on American lives,” Bass said, calling the comments dangerous and warning they could potentially compromise the city’s safety.Trump has previously said that the rising cost of gas is a “small” price to pay in comparison to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon — including on Monday in Nebraska — but given the circuitous way the president talks, particularly during rallies, the soundbite about Iran taking out California cities did not land properly and gave ammunition to his opponents.Trump’s Rapid Response X account said the remarks had been misinterpreted and that he was making a broader point about the potential costs of war.“No, he didn’t, you buffoons. He was saying the U.S. is fighting to STOP Iran from having the ability to take out LA and San Diego with a nuclear weapon — which they would if they had the chance,” the social media post said.Newsom has repeatedly clashed with Trump over the president’s use of federal authority in California, including the deployment of military personnel during unrest in Los Angeles. The governor has portrayed Trump’s actions as an overreach of federal power and has emerged as one of the president’s most vocal political opponents.Trump, meanwhile, has repeatedly criticized California’s Democratic leadership and policies, making the president’s reference to two of the state’s largest cities especially incendiary.DEMOCRATS FEAR EARLY VICTORY TALK COULD MAKE VOTERS COMPLACENT AND HAMPER TURNOUTTrump also told the Nebraska crowd that the war with Iran could be ending “very soon,” although he offered no details about what an end to the conflict would look like or when it might occur.Preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon has been one of the administration’s central arguments for military action against the country.For California officials, however, the president’s comments shifted the focus from the broader conflict to the much more immediate question of why the president of the United States would suggest that attacks on two major American cities could constitute an acceptable cost of war.