In an unusual moment of live TV friction, ABC News chief Washington correspondent Jonathan Karl was put on the defensive Monday as he joined “The View” to discuss President Donald Trump’s recent bombing campaign on Iran’s nuclear sites. Co-host Joy Behar led a barrage of questions and implied contradictions, but Karl calmly batted back the skepticism—often defending Trump’s logic and correcting misconceptions in real time.

Behar opened the segment by pointing out what she called “mixed messaging” from the White House, noting that Trump initially said he’d wait two weeks before making a decision on Iran, only to launch Operation Midnight Hammer just days later. “So what changed?” she pressed.

Karl acknowledged the timeline appeared abrupt but clarified that the operation had been in the works long before. “The two weeks measure was clearly a bit of a head fake,” he explained. “All indications are he didn’t actually make the decision to so-called pull the trigger until Saturday… but obviously all the wheels were already in motion.”

He revealed that Trump was enthusiastic about the Israeli-led strikes the prior week and began embracing U.S. involvement shortly after. “I spoke to him that morning, and he said, ‘This is excellent.’ He was no longer saying the Americans weren’t involved.”

When Behar claimed there was no new intelligence justifying the strike, Karl rebutted. “That’s what Tulsi Gabbard said in testimony in March—that Iran had not made the decision to restart their weapons program,” he said. “They had stockpiled the fuel… and the belief was that could be something they could do within a matter of weeks.”

As Behar tried to draw parallels to the Iraq War and faulty WMD claims, Karl interjected, reminding the panel that the bigger difference this time was the strategic opening. “What changed here is the opportunity,” he said. “The Iranian air defenses have been taken out. Hezbollah and the Houthis have been weakened.”

Pressed about the operation’s effectiveness, Karl admitted, “We don’t really know the full effect.” He referenced a recent interview with Vice President J.D. Vance, who described the sites as “severely damaged,” even as Trump declared them “completely obliterated.” Karl added, “One big question… they had about 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium. Where is it? Was it destroyed? They don’t know.”

The exchange grew tense when co-host Sara Haines asked whether Iran could retaliate inside the U.S. Karl responded that while Iran still had dangerous capabilities—including sleeper cells and cyber warfare—an attack on American soil would likely trigger a regime-ending response.

“Iran is the weakest they’ve been since the early years of the revolution,” Karl said. “Their missile programs have been destroyed. They can still do damage, but anything they do will trigger a U.S. response.”

The panel then shifted to the political firestorm surrounding Trump’s bypassing of Congress for the strike. “I believe this is certainly a clear violation of international law at the very least,” Sunny Hostin claimed.

Karl didn’t deny the controversy but did contextualize it. “Only Congress has the power to declare war,” he said. “But President after President has launched military action without approval. This is not new.”

Karl concluded bluntly: “There are consequential, frightening times.” But for once, even in the lion’s den of daytime TV’s most liberal panel, the facts—and Trump’s strategy—got a rare moment of air cover.