Trump Iran Comments on LA and San Diego Spark Backlash

The Trump Iran comments made at a Nebraska campaign rally on Monday have drawn sharp criticism from California officials. President Donald Trump, speaking about the war with Iran, said the conflict was a small price to pay for safety and added that Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego. The White House says the remarks were misunderstood.

What Trump Said at the Nebraska Rally

The president appeared at the Pinnacle Bank Expo Center in Grand Island on October 5, according to Axios. The event was part of a campaign push before the midterm elections.

Axios reported that Trump framed the economic strain of the Iran war, including high gas prices, as a cost worth paying for national and global security. In the middle of that argument, he said Iran could hit a city and then named two in California.

The crowd cheered, FOX 11 Los Angeles reported. Trump was quoted there as saying, “Let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego.” He also said the conflict would be over very soon.

California Leaders Respond to the Trump Iran Comments

Reaction came within hours. KTLA reported that Gov. Gavin Newsom’s press office answered on social media roughly two hours after the remarks. Mayor Bass also issued a statement Monday night saying the president had suggested a foreign government attack her city.

Newsom: Pointing to Federal Deployments

Newsom linked the comments to earlier federal actions in his state. He wrote that Trump had sent the National Guard and Marines to California and was now saying foreign enemies should strike its cities. CNN reported that the governor called the president “deranged and dangerous.”

Bass: A Safety Concern for Los Angeles

Bass said the remarks could compromise public safety in her city. She added that a president’s role is to protect the country rather than threaten it. ABC7 Los Angeles noted that she called the comments dangerous.

Gloria and Peters: San Diego’s Military Ties

San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said his city is not collateral damage and that residents are not expendable, Axios reported. U.S. Rep. Scott Peters, a Democrat who represents San Diego, stressed the region’s deep military roots. He described the city as home to about 115,000 active-duty service members and their families.

Axios also cited a 2025 San Diego Military Advisory Council report. It said military bases in the county employ more than 136,000 active-duty personnel and civilians. The two figures come from different sources and count different groups.

White House Says the Comments Were Misunderstood

The administration pushed back on the criticism. An administration account on X said Trump meant the United States was fighting Iran to stop it from gaining the ability to strike Los Angeles and San Diego. According to Axios, Communications Director Steven Cheung argued that the president was saying U.S. cities would have been threatened if a nuclear Iran had not been stopped.

Axios described the episode as a product of a meandering speech. An argument that the war was worth the cost to protect Americans, it said, came across to many listeners as an invitation to attack two American cities. Online analysts read the remarks in different ways, and some noted that the president’s circuitous wording could have obscured his intent.

Key Facts at a Glance

Political Backdrop to the Remarks

CNN noted that Trump has often criticized California and its leaders over immigration, state elections and wildfires. It also reported that he told the Nebraska crowd the war is going to end very soon, and that he wanted a tremendous victory that verifies the actions his administration has taken.

Axios reported that the remarks arrived while the war is unpopular and gas prices remain high. It also said Trump told the outlet he expects talks with Iran this week, though no outcome of any talks has been reported yet.

What Is Not Yet Clear

The sources agree on the exact words and on who criticized them. They differ on what the president meant. Critics read the comments at face value, while the White House says they described a threat that was prevented. This article reports both positions without choosing between them.

No source reviewed here reported a specific new threat to either city following the remarks. Coverage is still developing, and further statements from the White House or Iranian officials could change the picture.