Former CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr returned to the network on Tuesday to imply on The Source that the Secret Service getting President Trump out of Turkey in July was illegal because it put civilian members of the press at risk.
Host Kaitlan Collins wondered:
I mean, just when you think about that, and Barbara Starr, when you hear this new reporting tonight from The New York Times, about how specific this threat was. I mean, the resident there was saying, his response is, whatever, and he just does what the Secret Service tells him. But The New York Times is saying that U.S. intelligence knew there was a specific of a—a specific threat of a surface-to-air missile against Air Force One, whichever plane was carrying the president, and someone in the vicinity of the NATO summit had been spotted with a shoulder-fired missile. What do you make of that, Barbara?
Former CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr returned to the network last night to suggest Trump's flight out of Turkey was illegal, "Because my question is this: If it was not safe for the president to be on that flight, how was it safe for the media to be on that flight and… pic.twitter.com/wKihcgTEHC
— Alex Christy (@alexchristy17) August 12, 2026
From the media’s perspective, the story includes two controversies. The first is that they were not told what was going on. The second was that they were left to fly out on the original plane. When it comes to the first, the media are not entitled to know the details of secret Secret Service or military operations. Nevertheless, Starr went on the attack, “Well, first, what I want to say is my former colleague, when I was at ABC, Ann Compton, how amazing what she is telling the world tonight with this very plain, simple language, which is, truth is paramount. Don't lie about it. This is history. And I think this is where the administration has gone wrong.”
Starr continued:
Yes, the President had to be protected at all costs in the face of the Iranian threat that we now know that they felt they had on hand. But look, they got him safely, thank goodness, on a third airplane, and they got him away. That's all good.
There's a couple of things, though, that are highly problematic. I don't subscribe to the notion it was a decoy plane. Because my question is this: If it was not safe for the president to be on that flight, how was it safe for the media to be on that flight and to be lied to, not to be told the truth? Yet, again, to be lied to.
Starr then questioned the legality of the operation, as for the idea that reporters were left in danger after Trump departed on the alternative plane, “Because the thing is, it was the U.S. military flying the plane. The U.S. military does not put civilians unknowingly at risk. The president was gone; he wasn't being threatened anymore, presumably, but the civilians on board were still under threat, and the U.S. military under orders flew that plane. Somebody needs to tell me why that's a legal order. Because that's not what the U.S. military does.”
Collins did mention earlier that Secretary of State Marco Rubio was also on the original plane, but she left out that The New York Times also reported that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Stephen Miller, and Steven Cheung were likewise on the original plane.
The New York Times also got several quotes for its stories, and one of them was from former Bush and Trump 1.0 staffer Joseph W. Hagin. Hagin told The Times that such risks are part of the job description, “I understand there is concern for those flying on what was assumed to be the primary aircraft, but when you go to work at the White House or travel with the president, you are accepting a not-insignificant degree of risk. Telling everyone what’s up in an operation like this would have obviously jeopardized the president’s safety.”
Starr also took an emotionally complicated question and grossly oversimplified it. One can understand the emotional reasoning behind Starr’s complaint and still recognize the Secret Service made the logically correct call.
Here is a transcript for the August 11 show:
CNN The Source with Kaitlan Collins
8/11/2026
9:26 PM ET
KAITLAN COLLINS: I mean, just when you think about that, and Barbara Starr, when you hear this new reporting tonight from The New York Times, about how specific this threat was. I mean, the resident there was saying, his response is, whatever, and he just does what the Secret Service tells him.
But The New York Times is saying that U.S. intelligence knew there was a specific of a—a specific threat of a surface-to-air missile against Air Force One, whichever plane was carrying the president, and someone in the vicinity of the NATO summit had been spotted with a shoulder-fired missile. What do you make of that, Barbara?
BARBARA STARR: Well, first, what I want to say is my former colleague, when I was at ABC, Ann Compton, how amazing what she is telling the world tonight with this very plain, simple language, which is, truth is paramount. Don't lie about it. This is history. And I think this is where the administration has gone wrong.Yes, the President had to be protected at all costs in the face of the Iranian threat that we now know that they felt they had on hand. But look, they got him safely, thank goodness, on a third airplane, and they got him away. That's all good.
There's a couple of things, though, that are highly problematic. I don't subscribe to the notion it was a decoy plane. Because my question is this: If it was not safe for the president to be on that flight, how was it safe for the media to be on that flight and to be lied to, not to be told the truth? Yet, again, to be lied to.
Because the thing is, it was the U.S. military flying the plane. The U.S. military does not put civilians unknowingly at risk. The president was gone; he wasn't being threatened anymore, presumably, but the civilians on board were still under threat, and the U.S. military under orders flew that plane. Somebody needs to tell me why that's a legal order. Because that's not what the U.S. military does.
