Speaker , R-La., described the recent U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran as a defensive measure, saying, “Israel was determined to act with or without us” following a classified briefing on Monday evening.
Johnson told reporters after the briefing that Israel viewed Irans capabilities as an existential threat and was prepared to conduct operations regardless of U.S. participation. He said Israels assessment shaped American deliberations, and it was “determined to act in their own defense here, with or without American support.”
The speaker said administration officials had to weigh risks to U.S. forces, regional assets and interests before supporting the operation.Â
“They had to evaluate the threats to the U.S., to our troops, to our installations, to our assets in the region and beyond. And they determined, because of the intelligence that we had, that a coordinated response was necessary,” Johnson said.
Johnson said he guarantees that if the U.S. had not acted, the Trump administration would have been hauled in by Congress and asked why they waited if they had “existential intelligence, knowing that that would happen.”
“I am convinced that they did the right thing,” he said.
Rubio confirmed that Israel was prepared to act against Iran and said the president “made a very wise decision.” Â
“We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces,” he told reporters. “And we knew that if we didn’t preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties.”
Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., a top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, emerged from the briefing and said he did not believe there was an “imminent threat” prior to Saturdays strikes.Â
“There was no imminent threat to the United States of America by the Iranians. It was a ,” he said. “We equate a threat to Israel is the equivalent of an imminent threat to the United States. Then we are in uncharted territory.”Â
“We have seen the goals for this operation change now, I believe 4 or 5 times,” he went on.
Rubio insisted the operation was not about Iranian regime change but about taking out its capabilities as a threat to the region – focused on ballistic missiles and naval capacity.Â
He did not say whether strikes would extend to nuclear facilities.
“I do believe there is more than adequate justification for our American and Israeli actions,” Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., told reporters he believes there is “more than adequate justification for our American and Israeli actions,” without saying more.
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, R-Fla., told Fox News Digital in an interview afterward that he felt administration officials did a good job of illustrating the threat level faced by the U.S. in the days leading up to the strikes.
“I think that’s largely been very open source. The president laid that out, you know, very clearly. It does go beyond that to what I can’t get into, but it goes beyond that. I’m sure it’ll come out in the administration’s good time, but it’s not for me to say,” Mast said.
“But the more immediate nature of threats â I’m going through the negotiations with [Special Envoy Steve Witkoff], [Jared Kushner], Rubio, others that were a part of having those conversations and throughout that 10-day window of, you know, let’s call it countdown to make a deal, the threats that were going on in that window is probably the high-side information that you have.”
He also said there was a lot of daylight between what Democrats and Republicans in the briefing considered an “imminent threat.”
“It’s like, for me as a soldier, right, if I see an enemy machine gun nest, that to me, given that it’s an enemy machine gun nest, is an imminent threat,” Mast said. “To Democrats, unless that machine gun is burning u
