On the campaign trail as a Senate candidate a few years ago, JD Vance pointed to what he saw as a key contradiction between Joe Biden and the Democratic president’s team about a sensitive geopolitical issue. “Joe Biden went to Europe and advocated for a nuclear power’s regime change, and then 10 minutes later, his own White House had to contradict him,” the Ohio Republican said. “Seems like a big deal.”

Keep that in mind when considering what unfolded the day after Donald Trump ordered U.S. military strikes in Iran.

There were some nuances to administration officials’ rhetoric, but there was one point that key figures spent Sunday emphasizing: The United States struck Iranian nuclear sites, but it is not pursuing a policy of regime change.

“Our view has been very clear that we don’t want a regime change,” JD Vance said on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.” The vice president used similar language on ABC News’ “This Week,” adding, “We don’t want to achieve regime change.”

Around the same time, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said during a Fox News interview that regime change is “certainly not the goal of what we’re working on here.” On CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” he added, “This wasn’t a regime change move.”

At a Pentagon press conference, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth similarly told reporters, “This mission was not and has not been about regime change.”

The administration is often accused of pushing muddled messages, but on this issue, Team Trump spoke with clarity — at least until their boss weighed in. As Politico summarized:

Recommended

MS NOW Opinion

Israel’s fight with Iran could end up drawing the U.S. into a regime-change war

Nicholas Grossman

Analysis

Iran’s people deserve better

Caroline Modarressy-Tehrani

President Donald Trump’s top national security officials spent much of Sunday insisting his administration doesn’t want to bring about the end of Iran’s government, only its nuclear program. Then Trump left the door open for exactly that.

One day after ordering military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, and just hours after top members of his own team tried to assure the public about the scope of the U.S. mission, the president used his social media platform — for reasons that remain unclear — to cut off his Cabinet secretaries at the knees.

“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change???” Trump wrote. “MIGA!!!”

The following morning, instead of walking that back, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt leaned into Trump’s “regime change” missive. “If the Iranian regime refuses to come to a peaceful diplomatic solution … why shouldn’t the Iranian people take away the power of this incredibly violent regime?” she asked.

For now, we won’t dwell on the fact that Trump still doesn’t know what “politically correct” means. Let’s also, for now, skip past the point that Iran already did agree to a diplomatic solution related to its nuclear program, and Trump abandoned the agreement for reasons he’s never been able to fully explain.

Instead, it’s worth marveling at the fact that just one day after Trump launched a pre-emptive attack in the Middle East, the president, the vice president, defense secretary and the secretary of state are not on the same page about whether regime change in Iran is part of the administration’s vision.