Trump's White House gaggle Iran, economy and campaigns

Oct 1

Before leaving the White House on October 1, Trump answers reporters on foreign policy, the economy and elections. Asked about Kevin Warsh and a reported TIME interview, he says Warsh should vote as he wants, but that Trump personally would oppose higher rates. He claims inflation is controlled, blames Biden and argues that rates would hinder growth. Asked about a possible Venezuelan base, he describes good relations and shared oil revenue and pledges to begin filling U.S. strategic reserves with inexpensive Venezuelan oil; he gives no amount or timetable. Trump acknowledges the Iran war could hurt Republicans in the midterms, while arguing that emphasizing prevention of an Iranian nuclear weapon should help. He defends campaigning in strongly Republican states to thank supporters, support candidates and encourage turnout. He credits his endorsement for an unnamed Oklahoma candidate's primary victory after an alleged 22-point deficit, later identifying Drummond as the defeated opponent; his confidence about the general election is a prediction. Asked about Ken Paxton's criticism of the Dallas convention, he calls it successful and claims 107 million views against 24 million for the NFL. These are his claims, not verified ratings or election outcomes. Trump gives his government and economy an A-plus assessment, claims record poverty, retirement-account and stock-market performance and $21 trillion in investment over 15 months, and says inflation and costs are falling. He blames unfavorable press coverage, admits he has not explained his case well and predicts that a Democratic victory instead would have produced a depression. He also claims more oil is moving through Hormuz than before the war and predicts further price relief. On the Flydubai incident, Trump says the investigation is ongoing and, based on what he is hearing, he believes the pilot is linked to Iran. He says it could have involved IRGC placement or other radicalization, without establishing either. Asked about retaliation if Iran were responsible, he says Iran would be hit hard but does not explicitly confirm a U.S. operation. His closing remarks claim Iran's economy and military are devastated, U.S. forces control Hormuz and oil movement is at a record level; he threatens that Iran must sign what he calls a fair deal or cease to exist. These assertions and threats do not establish an investigative finding, completed agreement or verified military outcome. Brief exchanges include tentative remarks about a U.S. base in Poland, Iran's nuclear weapons and Hezbollah, a prediction of resolution in Ukraine, an assurance to allies in Iraq, praise for Brazil and its election, surprise at the British suspects' bail release alongside respect for Scotland Yard, and a possible 2028 endorsement without naming a nominee. He says aide pardons are not presently on his mind, mentions a planned Peterbilt ribbon cutting, jokes about press-secretary applicants and says he lacks detail on a Cornell allegation while expressing confidence in the university.

Asked whether the Flydubai pilot is linked to Iran, Trump says the answer, based on what he is hearing, is yes. Fox contrasts Netanyahu's statement five hours earlier that attribution is premature and says Iran's direct involvement remains unknown. Oded Ailam argues that even a lone attacker could be inspired by Iran. These are statements and hypotheses, not investigative conclusions. Kan's October 1 report airs the same White House question and qualified reply, reports a conditional warning of a strong response if Iranian involvement is established, and allows that Trump's assertion may be characteristic speculation. Officials are still investigating. The adjacent short TIME-strike reference remains context in the complete report rather than another supported event connection. The complete October 1 departure gaggle preserves Trump's repeated qualification that the investigation is ongoing. In Doocy's follow-up, Trump allows that the suspect could have been placed by the IRGC or otherwise radicalized, without confirming either possibility. Later, asked whether Iran would face retaliation if it were responsible, he says it would be hit very hard; his answer to whether the United States would act is indirect. No Iranian role, specific retaliatory order or completed strike is established. Kan's October 5 retrospective replays the same qualified Trump question and reply, then calls his initial Iran assessment unfounded in light of its anonymous-source lone-wolf account. Vance says he has seen nothing conclusive about an Iranian role. These are Kan's narration and Vance's qualification, not a new date for Trump's original remark or an established final attribution.