Trump Criticizes Oil Profits From Iran War as Cruz Pushes for Regime Collapse

President Trump said big oil companies are “making too much money” from a shortage tied to the ongoing US-Israel conflict with Iran, days after ExxonMobil and Chevron reported sharp profit jumps for the second quarter. Separately, Senator Ted Cruz publicly urged Trump to arm Iranian protesters and push for the collapse of Iran’s government, arguing the US should escalate pressure rather than pursue a negotiated deal.

What did Trump say about oil profits, and why does it look contradictory?

On Monday evening, Trump told reporters at the White House that oil companies “ought to give some of that back to the public,” saying “they’re making too much money based on a shortage. I don’t like it.” This came right after Chevron reported second-quarter earnings up nearly 400% to $12 billion, and ExxonMobil reported profits more than doubling to $14.5 billion.

The comments sit awkwardly next to Trump’s own past statements and policies. In March, he wrote on social media that “when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money.” He also downplayed the economic risk of Iran shutting the Strait of Hormuz, claiming it wouldn’t much affect the US because it’s the top global crude producer — a claim experts have disputed, since oil prices are set by global markets. Since returning to office, Trump has rolled back environmental restrictions on fossil fuel production, exempted oil producers from certain environmental rules, and directed the attorney general to prioritize blocking climate lawsuits against oil majors. In 2024 he reportedly sought $1 billion in campaign donations from more than 20 oil executives in exchange for promises to cut environmental regulation, and while he didn’t hit that figure, he did receive record industry contributions.

Who is calling for a windfall tax, and what do they want?

Environmental and consumer advocates argue that if Trump genuinely believes oil companies are overcharging, he should back a windfall profits tax rather than just complain. Tyson Slocum of Public Citizen said Trump’s own policies enabled the industry’s “price-gouging,” calling the Iran conflict “a disaster of a war of choice” while allowing that Trump is right, even if inadvertently, that the companies are making too much money. Lena Moffitt of Evergreen Action pointed to the reported $1 billion in campaign support from oil executives, saying it’s no surprise those companies are now benefiting from what she called Trump’s “anti-consumer agenda.” Neither Trump nor the companies have responded to the windfall tax proposal, and no formal legislation is reported to be in motion.

What is Ted Cruz proposing on Iran, and how does it differ from the administration’s approach?

Speaking on the “School of War” podcast with CBS News national security analyst Aaron MacLean, Cruz said “our objective should be regime collapse” in Iran. He called for the US to arm Iranian protesters directly, saying he has urged this repeatedly to both Trump and Israel, so that “it’s not American boots on the ground, it’s Iranians fighting for their own country.” Cruz first floated arming protesters in late January, after a crackdown on Iran’s largest wave of demonstrations in years reportedly killed at least 12,000 people, according to CBS News sources.

A month after that crackdown, the US and Israel began joint strikes on Iran, officially aimed at degrading its military and nuclear program; Trump also urged ordinary Iranians to “take over” their government. Since then the conflict has swung between strikes and diplomacy. A June memorandum of understanding sought to halt fighting, restore shipping, and open nuclear talks, but it collapsed within weeks. More recently, reports suggest Iran is moving toward a shipping arrangement with Oman for the Strait of Hormuz, which could restart US-Iran talks — a diplomatic direction the Trump administration is reportedly still pursuing, even as Trump has otherwise backed off earlier calls for regime change.

Cruz opposes the diplomatic track. He called the collapsed memorandum a “disaster” and “terrible deal,” warning it risked giving Iran billions in sanctions relief and access to roughly $300 billion in economic development funds, plus a “permanent role” over the Strait of Hormuz. The Trump administration said in June that the $300 billion would be voluntary funding from Gulf states and private investors, not the US government. Cruz instead wants continued military strikes on Iranian targets, an ongoing blockade of Iranian ports to cut off oil sales, and escalating economic pressure.

Why do these two stories matter together?

Both stories turn on the same six-month-old conflict between the US, Israel, and Iran, and both expose friction between Trump’s rhetoric and his administration’s actual posture. On oil, Trump is criticizing profits that flow directly from a war his administration launched and from policies his administration enacted. On Iran policy, one of his own party’s most prominent senators is publicly pushing for a harder line — arming protesters and seeking regime collapse — than the administration itself appears willing to pursue as it explores a diplomatic opening through Oman.

Sources

• The Guardian
• CBS News — Sen. Cruz calls for Trump to arm Iranian protesters: "Our objective should be regime collapse" · Cruz calls for Trump to arm Iranians: "Our objective should be regime collapse"

Featured photo: Mark Taylor from Rockville, USA via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0)