Jeffrey Goldberg: Midterm elections are often trouble for the party in power, even more so when the party in power keeps stepping on a rake.

President Trump's war against Iran has significantly depleted U.S.

munitions, and his threats to hunt down leakers of this bad news don't do anything to help the war's cause.

Trump's pick for attorney general has struggled to convince the Senate that he will be at all independent of the White House, and ethics issues in the Republican caucus only underscore the idea that Washington is a dysfunctional circus.

Tonight, can Republicans get their house in order before the setbacks really pile up, next.

Good evening, and welcome to Washington Week.

There have been very disturbing reports this week that the U.S.

has severely depleted its stock of crucial missiles in its war against Iran.

Patriot missile stockpiles are down by two-thirds, and the number of THAAD missiles is down by half.

And mind you, this has occurred in a war against a third-tier adversary.

Quite obviously, war planners in Moscow and Beijing and Pyongyang are watching what's happening with a kind of happy disbelief.

How did this happen?

We're not getting answers, straight or otherwise, from the Trump administration.

Mostly we're getting anger and threats directed at reporters who are telling the American public about these shortfalls, and some hints that the White House may be unhappy with Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, for misleading them about the state of the American military and its readiness.

Tonight, we'll discuss this mess and other messes with Carl Hulse, the chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times, Jonathan Karl is the chief Washington correspondent at ABC News, Missy Ryan is a staff writer and Pentagon correspondent at The Atlantic, and Zolan Kanno-Youngs is a White House correspondent for The New York Times.

Thank you all for being here.

Zolan, let me just start with you.

You cover the White House on a daily basis.

Is President Trump aware that the war on Iran is not going well?

I mean, in a story, let me just mention this because it's very, very relevant, a story this week, you point out that none of the promises that he made to the Iranian people have come true, for starters.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs, White House Correspondent, The New York Times: There are plenty of signs that he should be aware that this is not going his way.

Right now, President Trump, increasingly the reporting shows that he sees this just as a headache, a political liability.

He's searching for ways to get out of a war that he started and that has gone on far longer than he initially at least said that it would go on for.

The goals, as you noted, just have shifted, right?

Really, when you hear the conversation now and you hear the president speak, he mostly talks about success in this war as reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

That -- let's go back to the start of this war.

Strait of Hormuz was open.

That wasn't part of the goals that he initially laid out when he initially made the case, belatedly, to go to war with Iran.

Rather, it was he said that the Iranian people should actually rise up and overthrow their government.

He at one point said, save the names of those in the Iranian regime that had actually been targeting protesters in January.

I just reported a story with colleagues, and we found that 20 -- Iran has actually executed 26 people in connection to those protests from January that this administration was spotlighting.

That's according to Amnesty International.

We talked to Iranians in Iran who were saying that they feel betrayed, particularly because they listened to those promises that President Trump laid out when he started this war, and have now found themselves watching as the Trump administration negotiates and talks about respecting, in some ways, this new regime and this new leadership, saying they are easier to work with than the past leadership, even though we know that the same structure, the same leadership structure is still in place even if many of the former officials in the Iranian regime have been killed.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Right.

Missy, I want to read you something that President Trump just said on Thursday about the munitions crisis.

He wrote, the U.S.

has massive amounts of munitions, he put munitions in scare quotes for some reason especially of certain types.

Additionally, large amounts are being manufactured and shipped to the U.S.

as needed.

Defense companies are building the largest number of plants and factories in our country's history.

The leakers, again in scare quotes, of these treasonous statements are being hunted down.

Long-term jail sentences will be sought.

Give us an overview of what's going on here in terms of manufacturing and depletion.

Missy Ryan, Staff Writer, The Atlantic: Sure.

Well, the one thing that he, that rings true in his hi- his tweet is that there is an effort to replenish these stockpiles.

But what I'd like to talk about a little bit is the fact that this is a problem actually decades in the making, and it's going to take years to solve it.

These munitions just were not a priority in the post-Cold War era.

We were fighting counter-insurgent wars that had different requirements.

The munitions were known as a bill payer for the military, so that was if there was a shortage in another area, they would, you know, shorten the -- reduce the number of munitions that they were going to be buying.

The defense industry also went through a big consolidation starting in the 1990s, and that really led to an inability to produce anything quickly in our defense industry, not just munitions, but that's important here now.

And by the time we got to Ukraine, there were already significant shortages that -- so much so that the Army, for example, warned the Biden administration that it shouldn't provide some of these more exquisite munitions that it provided to Ukraine, warning that it was going to endanger their ability to conduct the O. plans, these operational plans that they thought that they wanted to be able to do in the case of an emergency.

The United States also expended a lot of munitions against the Houthis, some in Nigeria and Venezuela.

And by the time we get to the Iran war, you know, I think it really goes back to the rashness of the planning here and the fact that the Trump administration was not planning a five-month war, now going into its six months.

You know, it was supposed to be weeks.

And I think it goes to the flawed assumptions that it had about the pain threshold that Iran was willing to bear, overconfidence coming out of Venezuela, and the strikes on Iran the previous year, and here we are.

It's a serious problem.

As you say, one-third or more expended in Patriots, in THAADs, JASSMs, all of that.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Right.

Jon, I mean, to add onto this, one aspect of national defense credibility, obviously, is letting your enemies, adversaries know that you're a potent military machine, right?

But it seems like the president has squandered this deterrent capability, among other things by constantly threatening Iran and then never following up.

I mean, watch this with me just for a second.

This is what he said on Wednesday.

Donald Trump, U.S.

President: We've hit them very hard for the last few months.

But we were all set for the biggest attack since World War II, and they called me and they said, please don't do it.

Let's talk.

Jonathan Karl, Chief Washington Correspondent, ABC News: I mean, I've counted seven times he's done this, seven times since the start of the war where he has threatened to escalate majorly and then backed off, claiming progress on peace talks.

Look, on the munitions question here, you know, I can understand his being upset about leaks of classified information.

This was hardly a classified information.

CSIS did a comprehensive study on this earlier this year and found at that point -- I believe the study came out in May -- found out at that point that it would take three years to replenish the defensive missiles that were used in this war.

So, we're talking about Patriots and THAADs, defensive missiles.

And these are missiles -- keep in mind, you know, a Patriot missile costs roughly $4 million and a long production cycle to create.

And you fire not just one, you fire two, sometimes more against a single missile coming in.

And we're at a very dangerously low level of Patriot missiles.

Right.

Jeffrey Goldberg: So, talk about this deterrence problem and how it's being interpreted around the world.

Jonathan Karl: I mean, you know, when you have the President of the United States repeatedly threaten and then back off, threaten and back off, not once, not twice, not three times, seven times, he'll probably do it again, it creates an obvious credibility problem.

You don't believe the threat that a U.S.

president makes.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Right.

One of his predecessors famously said, great nations don't bluff.

Jonathan Karl: Yes.

Jeffrey Goldberg: And it's -- this has been a bluff game.

Carl, what are people saying on the Hill about the state of the war?

I mean, we talk about the Democrats.

But talk about Republicans.

Carl Hulse, Chief Washington Correspondent, The New York Times: It's caught up in all the other messes that are going on, and they don't -- J.D.

Vance came up to talk to Republicans this week, closed door, reassure them that the war is going great.

Well, they don't really believe that, and it's particularly not going great for them.

You mentioned political liability.

They see this as a real liability going into November and, you know, hitting with gas prices, that sort of thing.

But it's also a budgetary issue.

There's a real fight on Capitol Hill about how much to fund the war.

Some of this among Republicans themselves like how to fund it.

Do you do it through this process that skirts the Democrats, or do you do it in the typical appropriations process?

So, even though it would take years and years to replenish these stocks, even getting the money to do it is proving to be very, very tricky.

As for Trump, right, it wasn't the saying TACO, right, that Trump always chickens out.

Jonathan Karl: But think about this.

I mean, we have this year a trillion dollar defense budget.

Carl Hulse: Of which they want to make a trillion and a half.

Jonathan Karl: A trillion -- and they want to go to a trillion and a -- I mean, this is staggering.

13 -- more than 13 percent of every dollar that the federal government spends going to defense.

It's hard to say that we're not spending enough on these munitions.

Carl Hulse: And it's also easy for the Democrats to say, listen, we've got a lot of problems in this country.

People are paying a lot for their food and you're going to spend this much on defense?

It's an easy hit.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: There's also a concern about among elected officials and national security experts on military readiness when you talk about other conflicts in the world.

Munitions are low here.

How does that impact your readiness for China, for Taiwan, South China Sea.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Yes, and much less what the Taiwanese are thinking, the South Koreans are thinking, the Lithuanians are thinking, so on, going this year.

Missy Ryan: Now, going back to the money, I think this is why you're seeing such pushback from -- even from some Republicans about it's not just the amount.

There is support for increasing defense funding.

I think there's a debate about how much it should be.

But it's about the process.

They've given very few details.

Even to the appropriators out on the Republican side are mad about it.

And it's basically Pete Hegseth saying, trust me.

Give me this unprecedented amount of money.

And now this is coming home to roost as he went up on the Hill last week to have this closed-door session with Republican lawmakers to say, we need to do this now.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Speaking of Pete Hegseth, how is his reputation holding up on the Hill among Republicans?

Carl Hulse: You know, I think they're biding with it.

They're okay.

I think they see him as, you know, the person who's in charge right now, also kind of a scapegoat for things that go bad.

They don't have to blame Trump directly.

You know, that hearing that he had, the public hearing, got pretty -- it seemed like he had been told, don't get in too big of a fight with these folks.

But by the end, he was really fighting with them.

Jeffrey Goldberg: He has a hot temper.

Carl Hulse: Yes.

And he controlled it for a while, but it did go off.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: Yes.

Congress also hasn't exactly like established a trend of pushing back on some of Trump's picks for these past like nearly two years in office.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Right.

I simply just don't understand.

It's just like that old joke about you had one job, you know?

And this is a situation where the U.S., as the dominant military power in the world, cannot afford to ever be known as a place that runs out of ammunition.

It's sort of like if you ran a McDonald's and you ran out of McNuggets, you know, the corporate headquarters would be like, you're not doing a good job of running your McDonald's.

I mean, this is the very serious version of that.

I just don't understand why there's no accountability.

Carl Hulse: Pentagon, it turns out, is a very serious, big business, and that you need to have some experience to be running it.

And some of these guys didn't know -- Missy Ryan: And that's what even the Republicans who do support Hegseth overall will complain about is his management skills and his lack of management experience.

You know, Steve Feinberg is the deputy secretary of defense.

I think there's a lot of support for him and more trust in him.

But at the end of the day, Pete Hegseth is the guy at the rudder.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Right.

Let me move to another mess, this Max Miller mess.

Congressman -- I mean, everybody's familiar with this sad drama that's going on, very sad for an ex-wife, very sad for a child, obviously.

The story won't go away, Carl, in part, because he won't go away.

And what I'm trying to understand is when does the speaker of the House say, you know what?

This is not -- we're in enough trouble already leading up to the midterms.

We don't need this kind of drama.

Carl Hulse: Yes, it doesn't seem like Speaker Johnson is going to do that.

He has a very, very small majority, and doesn't want to give away any seats.

I have said that past speakers would've -- Republican speakers would've totally eased him out by now.

I mean, it is sort of ugly and sad, but he seems to want to stick it out.

And I will tell you, another midterm issue.

This sticks to Republicans, these kind of things.

There was another sexual-related scandal involving another congressman from North Carolina who's decided not to run.

I mean, this is just part of the image that they're going into the midterms with.

It's like who's in control of the place, and what's going on with these people?

Jonathan Karl: I mean, it's a bipartisan issue.

You had Swalwell obviously forced out of the governor's race.

You had Platner forced out of the Senate race.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Yes, but you just used the term, forced out.

Jonathan Karl: But they're gone.

Yes.

And now we've had -- we have three Republicans that we know of facing allegations like this.

One has dropped out.

Two -- Jeffrey Goldberg: Yes.

I'm not arguing that Democrats have better sexual morals in Congress than Republicans.

I don't even want to get into - - I don't even want to think those words anymore, actually.

I want to move on.

I'm just saying that there's a pattern of the Democrats pushing the people out and the Republicans not pushing.

It kind of goes to the Trumpian never cede ground.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: Yes, there's a playbook here that's been established in this Trump era, right?

And that's to never cede ground, to keep fighting.

I mean, I think it's interesting that when the president did have a call with Max Miller this past week, he did not call -- he did not demand or ask him to step out of the race, the reporting shows.

And Max Miller says that he, in response to the president, who did say, you're going to -- this is going to be challenging, you're facing a tough race, Max Miller responded by saying, I'm almost motivated by how you responded to the Access Hollywood scandal, right?

There is a playbook here that has been established, and Max Miller seems to be following it.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Could Max Miller plausibly win his seat in re-election?

Carl Hulse: He's got a tough opponent.

Jonathan Karl: I think it's a strongly Republican seat, but he could lose.

Carl Hulse Yes.

I think, you know, if the president's popularity stays down where it is right now, I don't think so.

Jonathan Karl: And these allegations are horrific.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: Yes.

Jonathan Karl: I mean, and look, he denies them all.

Carl Hulse: It's the two-year-old daughter.

Jonathan Karl: Two-year-old daughter.

Jeffrey Goldberg: There's also a pattern of other women, including Stephanie Grisham, a former Trump administration official, saying that this is -- Jonathan Karl: I mean, going back to when he was in high school and he allegedly threw a woman down a stairwell, again, he denied it all.

But there's a long series of allegations going back many years with the guy, and his own former father-in-law basically says, you know, he's a psycho.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: And a Republican senator.

Jeffrey Goldberg: And a Republican senator.

Missy Ryan: And, you know, I think that the - - regardless of what happens with Max Miller, the sad thing is that this is going to deepen the perception that many Americans have of politicians as deeply corrupt, as immoral, and here we are right before the midterms.

What impact will this have on people?

You know, will they go out and vote?

Jeffrey Goldberg: Look, Washington doesn't generally look great these days.

I mean, and for the president in particular, I want to bring this up because, like he's having trouble, real trouble getting his attorney general nominee through.

He might very well get him through as we're live on television right now.

But he's dealing with low approval ratings, a weakening economy, the oil prices, the endless Iran -- seemingly endless Iran situation.

And, Zolan, he spends a lot of time arguing about the Reflecting Pool and design and renovation issues around the White House and the National Mall.

What is the strategy -- or let me rephrase that.

Is there a strategy in the White House to lift the Republican brand in the months preceding?

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: It's so interesting you say that, because I remember I'm on my way to Davos to cover the President's trip to Davos -- Jeffrey Goldberg: I can't believe you just said those words.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: He's -- well he was getting backlash too from his American first faction.

And I remember Susie Wiles came out and said, don't worry, the president's going to be traveling every week and talking about the package that he just passed, and talking about policies that relate to the American people.

We have not seen the president traveling every week since then.

We have seen more often him talking about the Reflecting Pool and the ballroom.

Out of all of the challenges that you just listed, by the way, and the setbacks that he's facing, I would say one that probably sticks out to him is the courts also coming out against the ballroom construction today as well.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Right, we just saw that.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs: And even the fact that would command so much attention of him, we're talking about a break between the voters that Republicans are looking to build support with and the president and his attention and his priorities.

Carl Hulse: Well, it's so frustrating to the Republicans on Capitol Hill that they keep trying to talk about their tax package, and he doesn't not only want to talk about that, but he talks about how they're not doing what he wants to do.

So, it's even creating a tougher problem.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Go ahead.

Jonathan Karl: Well, he told Punchbowl News' Jake Sherman today that voters are angry at Republicans.

Voters are angry at Republicans.

They're not angry at me.

They love me.

They're angry at Republicans.

So, I mean, this is the world he's living in.

But, look, when a court -- when the D.C.

Circuit Court of Appeals puts a stop to the ballroom construction above ground, they gave a two-week period for him to appeal it to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will probably bail him out of this.

Trust me, I think at this point, he cares as much about that ballroom getting constructed as just about anything else on the agenda.

Missy Ryan: Just to connect these points about Trump's vulnerability, going back to the Iran war and the munitions, I think one of the reasons this munitions question is so urgent is that there's a particular vulnerability or sensitivity around the defensive munitions and the casualties that the U.S.

military has taken in the Middle East, 20 U.S.

troops killed in action so far.

And the possibility for that number increasing between now and November, I think, is a real political issue that White House has to deal with.

Jeffrey Goldberg: And one could argue that with all of these challenges, the very last thing a president of United States should be worried about is interior decorating or painting the EOB white or fixing the Reflecting Pool.

But your colleague, Maggie Haberman, said the other day that she thinks 70 percent of his brain space is occupied by decorating.

Jonathan Karl: That certainly rings true to me.

And I've seen it just in my own conversations with him over the past year.

Jeffrey Goldberg: My question to you, and we're coming to the end of this conversation, unfortunately, but, my question to you is, the next two years of Trump.

Is he going to become more like Trump the developer, Trump the builder, as he loses control of other aspects of policy?

Is he going to get more -- Jonathan Karl: Yes.

But let me -- and let me slightly tweak the question.

If Democrats take control of the Congress, what does Trump's behavior look like in those final two years?

And there are -- I have talked to two people close to the president who think that on some level, he actually doesn't care and actually prefers the Democrats to win control of the House, because what does that become?

That becomes Trump is the center of every story.

It's Trump versus the Democrats that are coming after him every possible way, the drama between his first meetings with Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries and all.

And whereas if the Republicans hang on barely, it's like what we're talking about who's going to be the -- Jeffrey Goldberg: So, there's more opportunity for dramatic martyrdom?

Jonathan Karl: Dramatic and also just being the center of it all.

But I think that he sees legacy as hugely important at this point in his presidency.

And one of the key measures of that legacy is how he changes that building behind you and Washington, D.C.

So, I think he's going to -- he told me once, what do you think, Jon?

Am I a better politician or a better builder?

I think maybe I'm a better builder.

Jeffrey Goldberg: Well, there you go.

I'm glad we can land on that very, very odd note.

It is quite astonishing, many aspects of this conversation.

Unfortunately, that's all the time we have for the conversation tonight.

I do want to thank our guests for joining me.

I want to thank you at home for watching us.

For more on how the munition shortage have created a crisis for the U.S., please read Nancy Youssef and John Lemire's story on theatlantic.com.

I'm Jeffrey Goldberg.

Good night from Washington.