This is an opportunity for the Republican Party, an expert says.

We hit him hard last night. We took out all of the new equipment that they tried to build. He's given five different goals. He's achieved none of them. This is a disaster. We are applying sanctions like have never been seen before that are going to asphyxiate the regime. The only way we're going to stop them is either militarily or economically. They need to agree to denuclearize in their best interest, make a deal. Even if you do negotiate, they're not going to comply with it. A lot of different takes about Iran, what the next steps are, the president getting questions about that, also getting questions about the Iranian people. Will you send the CIA in to arm Iranians? I'd love to tell you that, but it wouldn't be appropriate to say, but I mean, I understand their plight. They're being shot. The regime is getting weaker and weaker by the day, and at some point they're not going to be able to shoot so easily because I think the people aren't going to take it. And speaking of answering questions, the White House just putting out that Vice President J.D. Vance will take the podium tomorrow, 1 p.m., for the first White House briefing since Caroline Leavitt has left her position as White House press secretary. Probably a lot of questions on Iran there. Let's bring in our panel. Roger Zekai, Washington, director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, Wall Street Journal reporter, White House reporter Philip Wegman, and Democratic strategist Megan Hayes. Okay, Roger, obviously he's not going to say what exactly they're going to do about arming the Iranians, but there is this sense that this economic pressure may push something to happen, whether it's Iran firing back, as they've tried to numerous times, or that some other effort happens on the ground. Yeah, we've talked about the possibility of covert operations. There's precedent for that. That was the Reagan doctrine. And, you know, it was interesting when Secretary Besten announced Operation Economic Outcast, he said specifically that he won't appeal to those in the Iranian army, distinct from the IRGC, to say, hey, turn your weapons against the regime, not against the people. So there's this mindset that there are elements within Iran that, prior to the outer ring of security, that are gettable. So we'll see that. The economic pressure, for sure, is moving the people and creating great strains on that regime, and you're going to have divisions within the regime, particularly the political class and those hardliners that are part of the IRGC. And of course, President Trump is ratcheting up with his rhetoric, talking about it moving from the Strait of Hormuz today to the Strait of Trump. And as we know about any Trump property, he is not going to allow anybody to menace his property. So that perhaps is an indication of where his mindset's going. Yeah. He eventually said he was joking about that one. But the Secretary of State, Phil, was on with Brian Kilmeade on his radio show, asked about next steps. Take a listen. They keep shooting at ships. So we will continue to target those things that pose an imminent threat to our forces and to global shipping in the Straits. They also have a president who came out and essentially said, we'd like to go back to the MOU. Well, look, I mean, that ship in many ways has sailed, no pun intended. Yeah, it doesn't sound, Phil, like they're in the negotiating with Iran phase at all anytime soon. No, not at all. And the president said that this was going to be a war that lasted a matter of a few weeks. Instead, this has stretched out to more than six months. What we heard from the president in the Oval Office and also from the Secretary of State in that interview is very much a continuation of things. President Trump, he offered this forecast where he said that we were going to hit them very hard, but that the attacks wouldn't last very long. We've heard that before. Meanwhile, as the Journal reported just this week, lawmakers were telling us that they heard from Admiral Cooper that there would be an escalation. So again, you know, the calendar has changed, but we're in the same place. The unescapable fact here is that Iran has not capitulated, let alone changed their nature. They very much seem that they're dug in for the long haul, despite the escalation in rhetoric or even that talk about the Strait of Hormuz. Yeah, Megan, the politics, obviously, Democrats have focused on affordability, the cost of gas, which has fluctuated, largely stayed in the 80s, but moved up to the 90s today. And they are managing to get ships through the Strait of Hormuz with U.S. military escorts. There's also this deal with Venezuela. The energy secretary was out talking about that from Venezuela. The catalyst for transforming Venezuela is energy, the catalyst for improving the life conditions of Americans, our hemisphere and everyone in the world is to massively expand energy production around the world. We got a lot more specifics, if you look at the specifics of the deal summary, the partnership with private operators, developments of 17 fields, a 25 year deal. And you're looking at a lot of investment and also a lot of barrels of oil. Chevron specifically over the next five years, seven billion dollars they're putting in 600,000 barrels a day. And they're saying, well, it doesn't affect gas prices right now. Megan, this could be something that in the long term shores up the U.S. oil situation. I mean, I think that the American people are wondering why we're making a deal for Venezuelan oil and why we're now going to be owning 35 percent or something of oil fields in Venezuela. I think that there's a lot of real questions there of why we are doing that. But also, it's not going to take effect today or this week or this year. And so this gives no immediate relief to the people who are suffering and can't pay for their gas or can't pay for their electricity. And so I think that part of the problem here is that there is no end in sight to the war in Iran. There is no actual way that we are going to open the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before this conflict started. So we can make all the deals across the world that we want to try to bring more barrels and barrels of oil in. But the fact of the matter is, that's not helping the American people now and no one is doing that. And so the president's going to pay the price in the midterms or the Republicans are going to pay the price in the midterms for not being able to solve this conflict sooner. Yeah, I the administration obviously sees it different. Roger, I don't see a long term play. They see a long term play that helps the United States. Absolutely. And I think even in the short term, the president has the blockade on right now and they're getting the barrels out. The price of oil we had the doomers saying would be over five dollars a barrel. It's not. And the conflict is basically a warm conflict. It's not a heart, a hot conflict at the moment. The president, I don't see him boxing a corner here. I think the pressure is fully on the regime. And this regime has not a lot of options before them. They chose not to escalate the latest round. And I think we have many answers in the toolkit. And I think Venezuela is actually part of it. I want to talk about the politics on Capitol Hill. We're getting close to the midterms. Obviously, a lot of people trying to go to their sides and their corners. Phil, the Hill says two Democrats in highly unusual move cross the aisle to save GOP bills. The vote adopted 210 to 208, five Republicans voting in opposition, two Democrats voting in favor and basically denouncing socialism and also about the Supreme Court. And there was a lot of pushback from Democrats saying there might be consequences here. Yeah, the question is whether or not Representative Hakeem Jeffries is going to rule his caucus in the same way that Nancy Pelosi did with an iron fist. And right now you have Democrats who really feel that they are within grasp of that House majority. This is not the unity that you would expect of a party that is about to take power. Ultimately, though, will this present some type of electoral speed bump? I strongly doubt it, but it shows at bare minimum that Jeffries has work to do in the same way that Republicans like Speaker Mike Johnson and before him, Kevin McCarthy had to do to shore up their party before they picked up the gavel. But the socialism vote, you know, a lot of people looked at it, Megan, like a show vote. But, you know, there were some Democrats just felt uncomfortable about the whole thing. Right. But I think that we need to be realistic here. I think that even even at best case scenario, there are going to be seven or eight DSA members that could win their election. That's less than one or two percent of the entire Congress. So I think we're over cranking on what the socialism in the Democratic Party here. But I agree with Phil that I don't think this has any bearing on whether Jeffries becomes speaker when Dems take back the majority. I don't see it that way. Brett, you have a preview of what's to come for Leader Jeffries. Take a look at what happened to Kevin McCarthy. I see it happening on the Democratic side. And actually, it's an opportunity for Republicans. Speaker Johnson, take a look, because with the Democratic socialists moving in, there's an opportunity for Republicans to get some Democratic pickups on key votes. It's happened before and it could happen in the coming Congress. All right, panel, there's some interesting polls coming out. We're going to be looking at them. It's just a snapshot. But things are closing in. People are starting to pay attention on both sides, both parties. And each race is going to be interesting. We'll be all across the country ahead of the midterms panel. Thanks. Tomorrow on Special Report.