Leavitt insists Americans ignore Trump’s words on Iran and focus on the bottom line after ‘Praise be to Allah’ diss
Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox
Get our free Inside Washington email
Get our free Inside Washington email
A day after President Donald Trump issued a chilling warning against Iran which many took to indicate he might commit genocide against that country’s population, the White House says Americans should ignore his words and focus only on the shaky ceasefire deal that was reached after he made the extreme threats.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Wednesday aggressively rejected multiple attempts by reporters from outlets, including The Independent, to elicit an explanation as to why Trump’s rhetoric was appropriate for an American leader and whether his threat that Iran’s “whole civilization” would “die” if Tehran failed to capitulate to his demands by Tuesday evening risked eroding America’s standing as a beacon for the rest of the free world.
When pressed by one reporter on the appropriateness of Trump’s threat and a prior social media post in which he mocked Iran’s Muslim clerical leaders by writing “praise be to Allah” as he threatened attacks on the country’s infrastructure a day earlier, Leavitt told reporters Trump was focused on “results” and claimed his “tough rhetoric” and “tough negotiating style” led to the ceasefire deal announced just hours before the deadline.
Asked whether the world should take his words “seriously,” Leavitt said it should.
But she also added the caveat that Trump “is always most interested in results” and that his words and actions are on behalf of the United States’ interest over all others.
Karoline Leavitt dismissed concerns that Trump’s threat to destroy Iran’s ‘civilization’ risked America’s moral standing (AP)
“He said that they would face very grave consequences …if they did not agree to reopening the Strait of Hormuz. And what did they do last night? They agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz,” Leavitt said in a response that emphasized that the ends justify the means.
‘Why is it appropriate for the president of the United States to use that kind of language when talking about civilian targets? And was the president mocking Islam by signing off his post over the weekend ‘Praise be to Allah?’ Wouldn’t that antagonize Muslim allies across the world?” a reporter asked.
“Well, I understand the questions about the president’s rhetoric, but what the president cares most about is results, and in fact, his very tough rhetoric and his tough negotiating style is what has led to the result that you are all witnessing today. Iran publicly acknowledging last night that they have agreed or that they wanted this ceasefire with the United States because they no longer could tolerate being bombed by our very powerful and lethal military, and that they have committed to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which the president will hold them accountable for,” Leavitt responded without answering the question directly.
“And it’s something that is closely monitoring in real time. Should the world not take his word seriously? The world should take his word very seriously, and understanding that the president is always most interested in results, and it was the Iranians who backed down, not President Trump. He said that they would face very grave consequences, as you just laid out by the 8 pm deadline, if they did not agree to reopening the Strait of Hormuz. And what did they do last night? They agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.”
Trump threatened that ‘a whole civilization will die tonight’ in one truth Social post this week … and taunted, ‘Praise be to Allah’ in another vulgar post, after which his press secretary told reporters not to focus on his words so much. (@realDonaldTrump/Truth Social)(Truth Social)
The president’s threat against Iran’s “civilization” was a stark departure from how previous American leaders described hostilities between the United States and other nations in the past.
When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, then-president George W. Bush took pains to stress that the U.S. was at war with the government led by then-dictator Saddam Hussein rather than Iraq’s population.
In a speech announcing the invasion that was translated and broadcast across Iraq, Bush said: “If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you.”
But when The Independent asked Leavitt on Wednesday about the contrast between Bush’s remarks and Trump’s threat against the Iranian population and civilian infrastructure — and whether such threats risk America’s standing in the world, she argued that Trump’s “actions” and not his words gave the him the “moral high ground over the Iranian terrorist regime.”
“For you to even suggest otherwise is frankly insulting,” she insisted.
