Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Assessing Damage to Iran's Nuclear Sites; Rep. Adam Smith is Interviewed about Iran; DHS Warns of Heightened Threat Environment. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired June 23, 2025 - 08:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[08:30:00]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: Kim, I just spoke last hour with the former spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces, who said there are a couple of things here, when I asked whether or not they would stop striking Iran if indeed the U.S. and Iran were able to come to the table. And Conricus (ph) said two things. He said, yes, if Iran decides that it will admit that it was trying to enrich uranium to create a nuclear weapon, and that it would stop forever trying to do so.

What do you think the chances of that, and is there any room for diplomacy now?

KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: The chances of Iran doing either of those things, slim to zero. The Iranian foreign minister is headed to Russia right now to plot a response with the Russian authorities. And I think what you're going to see is a strengthening of the Russia, Iran, China, North Korea alliance after these attacks. And they may say, we will help you rebuild your nuclear program. Iran may feel the need to do some sort of a symbolic strike across the Middle East, but not take major casualties, at least not plan to take major casualties while it plots a return to nuclearization.

And also remember, under the Biden administration, the Biden DOJ said that there was an active plot to kill President Trump over a previous assassination of a high ranking Iranian general. I think they're going to plot to kill the president again. And they may take years to exact their revenge.

SIDNER: Wow.

All right, Kim Dozier and General Wesley Clark, it is always great to have your expertise at a time like this. Thank you both.

Ahead, a U.N. nuclear watchdog says the U.S. attack on Iran likely caused, quote, "significant damage" at one of Iran's nuclear sites. The latest information on that ahead.

And, a church livestream capturing the terrifying moments as a congregation ran from gunshots, outside, a gunman. How a deacon of the church used his truck to stop a mass shooting.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:36:29]

BERMAN: All right, this morning, President Trump claims the U.S. strikes on Iran totally obliterated their nuclear facilities. But as the U.S. works to assess the extent of the damage, officials at the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, says it's too soon to judge the extent of the damage, and they're not sure where Iran has stashed its stockpile of enriched uranium.

With us now, CNN's Matthew Chance.

Matthew, what have you been hearing? What are you seeing in terms of reaction from around the world?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, obviously there's been a lot of condemnation around the world of these attacks, certainly from the supporters of Iran and -- and at the same time there's been, you know, kind of, you know, more positive words coming from, you know, the other side.

But look, in terms of, you know, the -- the damage that was done, you can see the satellite images right there, the before and after images of the three nuclear sites that were attacked by the United States with those, you know, seriously powerful bunker buster weapons.

The images give an indication of the kind of damage that was done. The IAEA, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, of course, has -- has indicated that it believes the damage was substantial. There's been -- you know, if you look at the -- the satellite images, you can see various, you know, kind of craters that were -- that were -- that appeared afterwards, which are evidence of the effectiveness of these bunker busters, of course, which -- which carry out much of their explosive activity deep underground so you can't see the impact on the surface. The nuclear facilities in -- in -- in several of the facilities are buried, you know, deep underground in heavily fortified locations.

But, you know, when it comes to a full and proper battle assessment, a full picture of how much damage was done, it's very difficult. It's very hard and depends on a number of sources, including computer modeling, to -- to -- to predict exactly how this kind of weaponry would perform in these particular circumstances. The satellite images we've mentioned, communications intercepts as well from Iranians on the ground. Perhaps you might talk about what damage has been done, as well as human intelligence.

The real problem is that there aren't boots on the ground from the United States. There aren't weapons inspectors. There aren't U.S. troops. And so, you know, it's very difficult for a, for a, for a very solid picture.

The bigger issue, though, I think, sort of pulling back from this, is that even if those nuclear sites have, in the words of Donald Trump, been totally obliterated, it doesn't necessarily move the -- remove the nuclear threat. You know, there have been voices in Iran, hardline voices for many years calling for a deterrent, a nuclear deterrent, to protect against exactly this kind of strike. And -- and, obviously, you know, those voices are likely to have been bolstered in the aftermath of those U.S. attacks.

John.

BERMAN: All right, Matthew Chance for us in London.

Matthew, thank you very much.

Sara.

Oh, I should say, we are standing by for the opening bell on Wall Street, whether Sara is here or not.

SIDNER: I'm here.

BERMAN: Sure. It's not her fault, it's mine.

Global markets. You can see, global markets are flat right now in reaction to these Iranian strikes, which tells you something. The markets not feeling the jitters right now that they might. We'll see if that changes.

This morning, there is a new warning from the Department of Homeland Security over possible cyberattacks and lone wolf violence in the U.S. in response to the strikes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:44:29]

SIDNER: All right, congressional Democrats are pushing back after President Trump ordered this weekend's strikes on Iran. Both Democrats and Republicans on the Gang of Eight, which includes congressional leaders from each party, typically would be briefed before significant military engagement. Sources telling us that key Democrats were not told of the plans until after the bombs had dropped.

Joining me now is Washington Democratic Representative Adam Smith, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.

Thank you for being here this morning.

First, I just want to get to the details of this. Were any Democrats informed of the U.S. strike on Iran before it happened?

[08:45:07]

REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): Not to my knowledge, no. And I've spoken to most of them. I do believe that four Republicans were. So, yes, no, it's part of a pattern of President Trump ignoring Congress and, in many cases, the Constitution and the law.

It's not unprecedented for presidents to use their military authority. It is unprecedented for the president to do it in this partisan way in terms of notification.

Now, that's not the most concerning aspect of this, as we've discussed a little bit. The most concerning aspect of this is we've started a war with Iran and we're not sure where that's going and created an incredibly dangerous situation in the region and I think for our country.

SIDNER: I am curious, because you just brought this up, Trump certainly not the first president to fail to get approval from Congress in order to do a strike. Obama didn't get approval for strikes in 2011. I was there in Libya when that happened, which he argued did not fall under the War Powers Resolution. So, do you think this juncture that President Trump and Obama violated the Constitution by not coming to Congress for approval for something like the strike in Iran?

SMITH: I think the answer to that question is probably yes. And I'm not saying it's not an important conversation to have. But again, the most important thing is the ongoing conflict right now in Iran and where it goes from there.

But -- but, yes, I think you look at the War Powers Resolution, you look at the Constitution. I think both presidents, and other presidents for that matter, have exceeded what the Constitution contemplated their executive authority should be. And I think it would be helpful for Congress to bring back our authority over this type of military action, without question.

SIDNER: Where do you go from now? Where does Congress go from now if the president, as you said, was bipartisan in this -- was not bipartisan in this, did not inform Democrats? What can you do?

SMITH: Yes. Well, I think what we do is we press for answers. And mostly we go to the American public and -- and ask them to press for answers.

And I've seen some of your reporting. I mean, Trump comes out and says that we've obliterated Iran's nuclear capability. Let me just say categorically, that's not true. It's been damaged. How much it's been damaged, we don't know. It's -- in some sense it's a pretty simple calculation.

How much weapons grade uranium did Iran have before the strike? How much do they have now? Has it been eliminated? Most experts I talk to say, no, we don't even know where it is. Iran had like 18,000 centrifuges before Israel and now this attack. How many do they have now? What is their capacity to rebuild that?

And I don't think anyone would argue at this point that Iran's ability to build a nuclear weapon has been destroyed. It hasn't. They're probably still at most months away from being able to develop the weapon.

So, what now? What's the plan to stop Iran from taking that step going forward? What's the plan to end the war? What do we do if and when Iran strikes back against U.S. forces, which is highly likely. But even if they don't, even if Trump's gamble that somehow he can just cow Iran with one strike, which is highly unlikely, the war between Iran and Israel goes on.

Now you've got Russia and China talking about supporting Iran. This has really created a problem that I do not think President Trump fully thought out, which is part of the reason, by the way, why it's a good idea to consult Congress and other people before you make rash decisions like this.

SIDNER: I do want to ask you about this because President Trump posted a social media message about regime change in Iran. Then you have this morning's strikes by Israel hitting Tehran, saying, look, we're hitting the heart of Tehran, particularly Evin prison, which houses dissidents, which houses political prisoners, as well as those who enforce Iran's rules on the population.

And how concerned are you when you hear the president talking about regime change when his whole cabinet has been saying this is only about trying to stop Iran from being able to create a nuclear weapon?

SMITH: Right. Yes, I'm very concerned for two reasons. First of all, if his own administration isn't sure what the mission is, that is deeply, deeply troubling. And a regime change mission is not a small thing. It is a massive undertaking if, in fact, you're going to do it and you can't sort of do it, you know, if you're not sure what you're doing and if people aren't on the same page at the top of the decision making chain.

But second of all, regime change would be an enormous mistake. We should be out of the regime change business. We should have learned the lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan. And look, it's incredibly seductive. I remember. You know, I was there when those wars started, when we had the conversations for Iraq and Afghanistan. It's seductive to imagine, gosh, Saddam Hussein is terrible. The way he's leading the country is terrible. If he was just gone, wouldn't things be better? And most people would answer, yes.

[08:50:02]

If the Iranian regime was just gone, you know, wouldn't things be better? And you'd think, sure.

But, a, how do you remove them? And what is the cost of that? What is the conflict of that? And that's what we learned in Iraq, the conflict is enormous. And the second thing we learned in both Iraq and Afghanistan is, you don't know what's coming next. You know, this isn't like moving pieces on a chessboard where you can say, well, I don't like that one and I'm now going to put this one in. You know, this is a lesson that we should have learned. Post-Cold War, we got into this thinking that somehow the U.S. was so powerful that we can just move the world around again like our own personal chessboard. And we've learned we can't do that. This was part of what Trump ran on. You know, no more foreign wars. We're going to negotiate. I'm going to make deals.

So, he has gone directly against what he said he was going to do, and I think created a very, very dangerous situation. We should not be lulled into thinking that somehow regime change is some easy option to make the world a better place to be. It would be a grave mistake, in my opinion.

SIDNER: Representative Adam Smith, I do appreciate your time in these difficult hours. And as you learn more, we'll be checking back in with you. Appreciate it.

Still ahead, video capturing terrifying moments during a church service as a gunman opened fire outside. How police say a deacon of that church helped stop a mass shooting.

Plus, any moment now, testimony to resume in the sex trafficking trial of Sean Combs. Who we expect to take the stand as the prosecution expected to wrap up their case finally today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:56:04]

SIDNER: All right, on our radar for you, you got to see this, a potential mass shooting thwarted by a deacon yesterday as shots rang out at the Detroit area church.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Go to the back. Run to the back. John (ph), they got to come. They got to come. Come on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Come on. Come on. Come on. Come on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Go!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: You can hear the fear in those parishioner's voices. The CrossPointe Community Church live stream showing the parishioners running as shots were fired outside the church. Police say a deacon hit the gunman with a truck and then a church security guard shot and killed him. About 150 people were inside. Just one person was injured.

All right, minutes from now, Sean Combs' federal racketeering and sex trafficking trial set to resume again in New York. Last week, the prosecution indicated it planned to wrap up its case probably today. First on the stand today, continued testimony from a special agent from Homeland Security investigations who was not involved with the Combs case, but is testifying as a summary witness called by the prosecution to attempt to make evidence more clear to this jury. Last week, the jury heard from one of Diddy's former assistants, who testified he wore gloves to clean up after wild king nights, as it was called, in court.

All right, thousands of fans packed Fort Lauderdale Beach to celebrate the Florida Panthers' back to back Stanley Cup championships. There they all are. The Panthers knocked off the Edmonton Oilers for the second year in a row and kept the party going yesterday with a big old parade. After three straight trips to the final and two consecutive titles, Florida may have now officially reached, let's see what John thinks about this, dynasty status. Florida, hockey, never a thing that you put together.

BERMAN: I know. I think the issue is, does back to back make you a dynasty? Not quite. I think it takes a third. Just saying.

All right, this morning, law enforcement agencies across the U.S. are on heightened alert following U.S. airstrikes on Iran. The Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin warning of a heightened threat environment, raising concerns about possible cyber-attacks and lone wolf violence. While there are no credible threats at this time, officials are monitoring pro-Iranian groups for potential retaliation. Increased security is in place around major U.S. cities, including New York and Washington, D.C., especially near religious and diplomatic sites.

CNN's cybersecurity reporter Sean Lyngaas joins us now for the latest on what you're hearing and what we're seeing around the country.

Sean.

SEAN LYNGAAS, CNN CYBERSECURITY REPORTER: Yes, John, the -- the Iranian threat to -- to U.S. critical infrastructure has always been a hybrid one where sometimes they use cyber means to then enhance the physical threat to -- to U.S. officials or infrastructure. So, that's the main concern right now is the use of cyberattacks that could -- could also heighten the -- the risk of -- of potential violence.

On the cyber front, there's a lot of low level concerns about nuisance, kind of psychological attacks. If you'll recall, after the October 7th terrorist attack in Israel, Iranian hackers used their access to U.S. water facilities to sort of disrupt them a little bit. Something like that is very much possible, but we haven't seen any credible threats at the moment, but it's very heightened alert right now. I've been talking to folks in the energy and financial sectors who are doing their drills, doing things that they would do when there's normal heightened threat, like what we saw after Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine.

The reason there's concern is that cyber is a asymmetric tool that obviously you don't have to be on the homeland to execute an attack. And it's something that Iran and others have tried to use in the absence of -- of access to some of these facilities in person, John.

BERMAN: How sophisticated are the Iranians in terms of their capability in cyber?

LYNGAAS: You know, in general, they're not at the level of Iran -- I'm sorry, of China and Russia, but that doesn't mean they can't cause an impact. They're certainly very aggressive.

[09:00:01]

They've conducted ransomware attacks that lock computer systems in the health care sector here.