If what President Donald Trump is now calling the “12 Day War” (twice as good as the Six-Day War!) is really over, few institutions will have acquitted themselves so poorly as “The View.”

With co-hosts Whoopi Goldberg and Sunny Hostin having avouched that being a black person in America is just as bad as — if not worse than — being an Iranian oppressed by your own government (actual Iranians were unavailable for comment, for whatever reason), the panel spent Monday morning’s show hand-wringing about the perfidy of Donald Trump.

It was dumb enough stuff that even ABC News’ Jonathan Karl — no friend of President Trump’s, mind you, or of Republicans — had to play the role of hall monitor, making sure the crazies didn’t run amok.

The segment began with Joy Behar big mad about the fact that Trump said, he “was going to make a decision on Iran within the next two weeks,” then decided to attack the Iranians within that two week period.

“Remember that?” she said. “He was going to give diplomatic negotiations more time to play out, and then less than 48 hours later, this attack was under way. So what changed, and what was he actually trying to accomplish here?”

Karl explained, the “two weeks measure was clearly a bit of a head fake,” before conceding it was “not entirely” that.

“I wouldn’t say the decision was finally made,” he said of the weekend attack.

“All indications are, he didn’t actually make the decision to so-called pull the trigger until Saturday, you know, and then the attack commenced. But obviously all the wheels were already in motion.”

“He was clearly ready to go, but there was a last-minute push for some kind of a diplomatic resolution,” Karl said.

He then noted the big problem with getting yourself big mad over this: “I think he thought he could have a Kim Jong Un moment with the supreme leader of Iran and have a big deal right before the bombs were going to drop. The Iranians were not engaging at all, and he made the decision.”

Oh:

The View’s ABC chief Washington correspondent Jon Karl to keep the liberal ladies on the rails while they discuss the U.S’s strikes on Iran.
Moderator Joy Behar huffs about Trump not waiting 2 weeks.
Karl notes that it was a “head fake” and that the Iranians “were not engaging at… pic.twitter.com/i9QzoKhk6H

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 23, 2025

That makes Donald Trump look a bit better. Well, we can’t have that.

Karl said, “I’ve been covering the Iran nuclear threat, I hate to say it, for literally two decades. And during much of that time, the sense is that Iran was months away from having a bomb,” which prompted co-host Sunny Hostin to claim that this was just a diversionary tactic.

“Since 1995, Benjamin Netanyahu has said Iran is either two years away, three years away, two weeks away. I mean, he has been saying that for decades,” she said.

“What has changed? Nothing!”

Actually, what’s changed is a president not willing to give the farm away for the slightest bit of cooperation on the part of the mullahs (see: Obama, Barack) or allow them to build up their strength.

“What changed here is the opportunity and the belief that the Iranians were weak. That a strike could be effective,” Karl said. “Look, four presidents — and I’ve covered all of them — saw the Iran nuclear program as a severe threat.”

“Four presidents contemplated military action against it and held back. Donald Trump has done what they haven’t done. But these plans have been in the works, have been drilled, have been examined, and they felt there was an opportunity. The Iranian air defenses had been taken out, the Iranian proxies in the region.”

Sunny Hostin sympathizes with the Iranians, falsely suggesting that they weren’t progressing on their nuke program:

“Since, 1995 Benjamin Netanyahu has said Iran was either two years ago, three years away, two weeks away. He has been saying that for decades. What has changed?… pic.twitter.com/TcfZlskE4v

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 23, 2025

OK, then: We moved onto the “constitutionality of Donald Trump’s actions” and “clear violation of international law” feint, put forth by Sunny Hostin. (Hostin, a lawyer by training, should know that “international law” isn’t worth the paper its printed on, given that it’s only obeyed by good actors and ignored by governments like the one in Tehran. But I digress.)

Karl had to start another answer with, “Well, look…,” which is the diplomatic guest’s nice way of saying, “That’s utter nonsense.”

“Well look, constitutionally only Congress has the power to declare war,” Karl said.

“The War Powers Act would make it seem very clear, you need to have congressional approval on this. But, president after president after president has launched military action without the approval of Congress,” he said.

“Congress under Democratic and Republican leadership has complained, the president is violating the War Powers Act. This is not new. I mean, I go back, I covered Bill Clinton and the military strikes against Kosovo back in 1999.”

Hostin then interrupted and said that’s why she thought it was “more of an international law violation.”

“But, you know, look: It’s a Republican Congress right now, and he is not getting any blowback within his own party, with the exception of [libertarian-leaning Kentucky Rep.] Tom Massie,” Karl said.

“So, what’s the good of having it then, if they all violate it?” Behar asked

“Well, that’s a great question,” Karl said.

Hostin whines that she thinks Trump striking Iran’s nuclear sites in unconstitutional and “is certainly a clear violation of international law at the very least.”

Karl points out that “president after president after president has launched military action without the approval of… pic.twitter.com/TSxbPa068Z

— Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) June 23, 2025

It’s not a bad question, but a better question might be, Why does “The View” only seem to have an issue with this kind of thing when the president is a Republican?

Keep in mind, this has been used in much more debatably necessary military actions. There’s no debating this one: Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Period, full stop, put it in size-72 font.

President after president — including Trump in his first term, it must be noted — promised some kind of consequences for continuing to develop a nuclear weapon. Trump was the first to stop it, and the rattlebrains at “The View” are busy wringing their hands over the fact that Trump didn’t give them the entire two weeks (he did say within two weeks, but why should you care? They certainly didn’t) or, to hear them tell it, that he didn’t precisely follow American or international law. (They also didn’t care when Democratic presidents did the exact same thing, which tells you how much they’re legislative absolutists.)

When even Jonathan Karl is pouring cold water on the hand-wringers, you have to believe it’s pretty bad. What’s amazing is that this isn’t even the worst display of ignorance during the “12 Day War.” Thanks, Whoopi!

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.