The Trump administration is facing new questions about the intelligence used to justify the strike that killed a top Iranian military commander.
ABC’s Karen Travers reports.
President Trump on Twitter defended the U.S. strike that took out Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, writing on Twitter:
The Fake News Media and their Democrat Partners are working hard to determine whether or not the future attack by terrorist Soleimani was “imminent” or not, & was my team in agreement. The answer to both is a strong YES., but it doesn’t really matter because of his horrible past!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 13, 2020
Since the night of the strike there have been shifting explanations from the administration.
Senior officials early on said Soleimani was planning an imminent attack, but would not say when, where, or how.
Then, the President cited Soleimani’s past actions, including attacks on American soldiers in Iraq.
Last Friday on Fox News, the President said this about a future attack, “I can reveal that I believe it would have been four embassies.”
Several Democratic lawmakers and some Republicans have slammed the administration for inadequate classified briefings, saying this embassy threat was not mentioned by senior officials.
Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on CBS’s Face the Nation Sunday said he didn’t see evidence to back up the President’s claim.
National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien was pushed by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on why the U.S. didn’t evacuate embassies if they were targets.
“We’re not going to cut and run every time someone threatens us,” said Robert O’Brien, National Security Advisor.
The continuing controversy comes as a new ABC News IPSOS poll shows 56% of Americans disapprove of the President’s handling of the situation with Iran.