Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump: U.S. Intel Since Strikes Shows Nuclear Sites "Obliterated"; Trump: Fordow Nuclear Site "Totally Inoperable" After U.S. Strike; Trump Says U.S. Will Meet with Iran "Next Week" But Doesn't Believe Nuclear Deal "Is that Necessary"; Trump Invites GOP Lawmakers to White House to Push His Legislation; Colorado Firebomb Attack Suspect Charged with Federal Hate Crimes. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired June 25, 2025 - 15:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:01:24]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: President Donald Trump insisting that Iran's nuclear sites were obliterated despite a leaked preliminary intelligence report suggesting the strikes did not destroy the core components of Iran's nuclear program. He also says the U.S. will meet with Iran next week to discuss a potential nuclear agreement.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Plus, Invitations and Negotiations: President Trump asked Republican lawmakers to come to the White House to try and shore up support for his huge domestic policy agenda, but several key senators say they are still struggling to get behind it.

And then later, a Political Upset in New York City: Former Governor Andrew Cuomo is conceding the city's Democratic mayoral primary to political newcomer Zohran Mamdani.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: Thank you so much for spending part of your afternoon with us. I'm Boris Sanchez alongside Brianna Keilar in our nation's capital. In just a short time from now, President Trump is due back in Washington after an extraordinary moment involving Iran at the NATO summit. The President facing new questions as he repeatedly diminished a leaked intelligence report that found that Iran's nuclear sites may not be as damaged as he and his administration have been presenting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They said it could be limited or it could be very severe. They really didn't know other than to say it could be limited or it could be very, very severe. And you didn't choose to put that because it was very early after.

Since then, we've collected additional intelligence. We've also spoken to people who have seen the site and the site is obliterated.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KEILAR: Just hours after the U.S. strikes on Saturday, the President told the American people the sites were completely obliterated as well. The next morning, his joint chiefs chairman said it was too early to assess that. CNN's Erin Burnett is live for us in the Middle East region. She's with us now.

So, Erin, the President also said the U.S. would be meeting with Iran next week. Major questions now about what they will be discussing and how these talks will be taking place.

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST, "OUTFRONT": Yes. I mean, Boris and Brianna, isn't it amazing? That's what we thought would be happening next week prior to the strikes, because that's when the President, of course, had announced the two-week time for discussion, which was really just a ruse so that he could go ahead with the attack. He wanted to sort of deflect from the Iranians knowing what was going on.

But now those talks are about to happen. And a lot is unknown about them, but a lot is riding on this. The President's message to Iran and the rest of the world, though, obviously at this point is very clear. He does not think it is necessary for these talks to secure a nuclear deal with Iran. His words were, quote, "I don't care if I have an agreement or not."

Now, I guess it's easy to say that if you're saying you've already destroyed the program that the agreement is about. And that's the context that matters.

And here in the Middle East, you know, as we've been here, you know, as those strikes - the strike happened against the U.S. military base in the Gulf in Doha. Not even two full days have passed since the Israel and Iran missile strikes themselves stopped. It was in the morning of the ceasefire, the missile started coming again as we were watching to see if that ceasefire would hold. The region very much on edge. As the President says, he believes that the war itself is over.

Let's bring in Kevin Liptak live in the Netherlands where the NATO summit was held. And Kevin, what more are you learning about the President's thinking on this, right?

[15:05:02]

Because these talks - you may say it doesn't matter if anything happens with them. But of course, it does. It does. The piece of paper is a very significant thing in the context of Iran's program.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, and certainly when you talk to officials who are involved in all of this diplomacy, they don't necessarily think that some kind of handshake agreement with Iran is going to do it. They are fully prepared to try and proceed with these discussions to come up with some sort of deal.

And remember, there had been talks before Israel began its campaign - mediated by the Gulf state of Oman - between the U.S. and Iran to try and curb its nuclear ambitions. It's not precisely clear what the format of these talks will be next week. The President says that the U.S. and Iran are meeting for some kind of discussions.

We know that back channels have been underway between the U.S. and the Iranians, including through the President's foreign envoy, Steve Witkoff. And we know that the U.S. had been preparing to meet Iran before Israel began its campaign. They had been set to meet in Rome. All of that, of course, scrapped when the bombs started falling. But now the President's suggesting that these talks could be back on.

We also heard from the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, saying that the U.S. preference, at least, is that these are direct conversations with the Iranians. And we heard from the President that his red line in these conversations remains the same, that Iran not be able to achieve a nuclear weapon, and in fact that Iran not be able to enrich nuclear material.

And that, at the end of the day, had been the enormous sticking point between these two sides. Iran had not been willing to back off that condition. Now the President's saying that it's still his condition as he works to get this diplomacy on track. But certainly, very interesting, as we will seek to learn more of what these talks will look like precisely as President Trump continues on this diplomatic track, Erin.

BURNETT: All right. Kevin, thank you very much. And on the issue of enrichment, at the center of all of this, Vice President Vance has already acknowledged that they believe that the majority of Iran's already highly enriched uranium stockpiles were not destroyed and may have been moved to other, perhaps still unknown locations.

So, the enriched uranium issue is crucial and they still have a lot of it, never mind future capacity. So, let's bring in Jeremy Diamond. He's live in Tel Aviv.

And Jeremy, you are learning new details from the Israeli military. What can you share?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's right, Erin. This builds off of what we heard earlier today from Israel's Atomic Energy Commission, which said that Israel and the United States strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have set back that nuclear program by years. And now we've also heard directly from the Israeli military's top general, the chief of staff, Eyal Zamir, who says that according to Israel's early military intelligence assessments, the damage, he says, to Iran's nuclear program is not that of a pinpoint strike, but rather a, quote, "systemic blow."

He says that Iran's nuclear program has suffered, quote, "severe, broad and deep damage, setting it back by years." And that, of course, lines up with what President Trump has been claiming about the extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear program. Although it does seem like this is an early assessment as a lot more information still needs to be gathered on the ground and further assessments will likely emerge in the coming days and weeks about the extent, the specific extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities.

But as you rightly point out, Erin, this does not address the issue of where Iran has these stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and how much of that highly enriched uranium do they still have.

It is, however, important to note that even as the Israeli prime minister seems on board with the ceasefire agreements with Iran, he has made clear that should Iran try and reconstitute its nuclear program in the future, that Israel will take action to prevent that from happening again. President Trump was also asked a similar question earlier today. He said, sure, when asked whether the U.S. would take action. But ultimately, he said that he doesn't believe that will be necessary for many years in the future. But again, the jury is still out on exactly how long, how far back this has set Iran's nuclear program and the specific extent of the damage to these facilities.

BURNETT: All right, Jeremy Diamond.

And, of course, Boris and Brianna, you know, now the perhaps most crucial question of all, which is what is the buy-in in Iran from those even who had been so loyal to the regime, to the nuclear program itself just in these past couple of days and it's hard to know whether it sticks or doesn't.

But, you know, I've heard from some people who were all in questions and frustration about the nuclear program that I've never heard before. You know, sort of a - we gave everything up for this and now where are we? The question is, does that does that kind of fester or does that go away and they get back in - on track to what they were pursuing. We just don't know.

[15:10:05]

KEILAR: Yes, very important questions. Erin, thank you so much for us from the UAE.

And let's discuss a little bit more about this with Beth Sanner, former Deputy Director of National Intelligence. We're also joined by retired U.S. Army Major General James "Spider" Marks.

Beth, just - if you can - because we're hearing different and competing assessments, there's this early DIA assessment early. We should stress that. Yes. Then you're hearing what we're hearing from Israel. We've heard from Iran. We're hearing from the IAEA. What should we be putting stock in? And what should we be questioning - based on whether it's, A, it is very early or also, B, something might be tainted by politics?

BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes, I think that first I will just say that the DIA leak, it is illegal and it was completely unhelpful because it confuses people based on low confidence, meaning that they base that probably only on the BDA, maybe a little bit more, but low confidence means you only have one source, basically a couple sources you can't corroborate very early. And I think, you know, what the President said about it, I couldn't disagree with.

So, I would say that we actually have to have patience and allow the community and the intelligence community here and in Israel to put together a very comprehensive look that is not just about the bomb damage assessment, but also would include, for example, what is the state of the nuclear scientists and the people who are running the nuclear part of the program and then the weaponization part of the program. Tens of thousands of people, a dozen, two dozen were eliminated. What about the covert sites?

We have to put all source analysis and information together before people can really make a judgment. And this leak has now like driven the administration into this obliterated and nothing else is acceptable. And in fact, there's so much nuance here that is being lost in this he-said-she-said debate.

SANCHEZ: General, what does that sort of ambiguity do to the overall mission of finding a peaceful resolution to this dispute about the enrichment of uranium and the possession of Iran of nuclear capacity?

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, Beth nailed it. She's lived this in this world. There is nothing but nuance, as it's been described, probably overstated. This really is BDA. And the effects - big E - the effects that are being - trying to be achieved is more art than it is science.

I think there are - Boris, I think there are three assumptions here that we should embrace. Number one is, let's assume that some of the enriched uranium exists - maybe all of it - someplace else, and that it can live to go do something else. Let's also assume that the global community would embrace the notion that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon unless it is a part of the NPT and it's incredibly controlled.

And in fact, I think the world would say you can't get a nuke, but if you want to enrich to the level of enhancing your commercial capacity, you have nuclear power. Great. We're all for that.

And then the third assumption is Iran and its regime must understand very clearly that if this is only a delaying action, i.e. we've got maybe months or years before the capacity exists to tie it all back together again, they're going to go through a similar type of punishment that they've just been through and that by itself should be sufficient restraint from their doing exactly that. And you'd think they'd open the door at some point and say, we've had enough. Come inspect what we're doing.

But they've made in - the regime has made terribly bad decisions to get to this point. So, we have to be very, very cautious in terms of where we're going forward. We don't know what it's going to look like going forward. But this really is a process over time.

KEILAR: And I wonder, Beth, the President said the U.S. is going to meet with Iran next week. He also said - and I wonder how much you think this may be posturing, but I want to know if you think it's necessary. He said that a nuclear agreement that may not be necessary. Do you think that it is?

SANNER: I do. But I think the reason he's saying that is because it's part of this narrative of we obliterated the program and it was a success. And if we needed an agreement, it would mean that that wasn't a success. [15:14:57]

And I think we need to reframe that completely and talk about the need for an agreement is about sealing that success for a long period of time and creating a verification mechanism. But also to look really far ahead and say, what do we need for - in terms of Iran's role in the region to create the secure, the more secure, prosperous Middle East that he talked about during his Middle East trip. This is actually an opportunity.

And if you walk away and say, I don't need an agreement right now, you're actually squandering an opportunity to create that much more secure Middle East. We need to get the IAEA back in there and we need to have some verification. And we also need to figure out how can we have Iran function in this region in a way that it is not always the destabilizing spoiler.

SANCHEZ: To the question, General, about letting the IAEA back in. It seems like Iran is at the very least hesitant to do that. There was debate in their parliament about leaving the nonproliferation treaty to begin with. Is there incentive that could be offered in exchange for allowing these U.N. inspectors back in?

MARKS: Well, they're not going to get beat up again. That's the incentive. We have to be very frank. If they move down the path that they've moved down previously, if this is recidivist and over the course of months or years, we're back into this, they're going to get punished again. Israel will not allow that to stand in the United States. That's a very strong relationship with Israel. And I would imagine we'll be a part of it again in a very narrowly defined way. There has to be tremendous incentive to do that.

And as we were saying earlier, I mean, the example of North Korea is what we cannot stand for. We cannot allow to happen in Iran, which is a rogue nation that now we assume North Korea has nukes. They haven't necessarily been able to marry them up with missiles or to fully weaponize that. But we can't allow that to happen in the Middle East. Again, as Beth described.

Look, we have a new regional hegemony - it's called Israel. That table's been tipped upside down. So, how do we establish what this going forward looks like? There have to be diplomatic solutions or in this constant cycle that we're seeing played out right now.

SANCHEZ: Major General James "Spider" Marks, Beth Sanner, thank you both for being with us.

MARKS: Thanks.

SANCHEZ: Still to come, President Trump and Republican Senate leaders ramping up pressure on key holdouts in order to pass a sweeping agenda over the next few days. Some senators, though, say they're prepared to sink the multi trillion-dollar measure.

KEILAR: Plus, the man accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at people demonstrating to support Israeli hostages is charged with federal hate crimes. We'll have the latest on that case.

And then later, a stunning turnaround. The S&P 500 has been climbing up and out of big losses and is now back near an all-time record. We'll have that and much more coming up on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:22:24]

SANCHEZ: Resistance to the President's "Big, Beautiful Bill" has led to a big White House meeting with Republican lawmakers tomorrow, according to a person who got an invitation. The President is expected to try and persuade Republican holdouts to back his marquee legislation. Senate Republican leaders are hoping for final passage this weekend so that it can be fully greenlit and on the way to the President's desk by Independence Day. CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju is live for us on Capitol Hill.

Manu, what are the key holdouts saying at this point?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, there are a number of holdouts, both moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans, both in the House and in the Senate. And John Thune, the Senate Majority Leader, can only afford to lose three Republican votes on any party line vote. And already two Republicans are on the conservative side are warning that they will vote against this plan of Sen. Rand Paul, because of his concern of the $5 trillion debt limit increase in this bill, Sen. Ron Johnson, because he believes it does not go nearly far enough in cutting spending.

And then there are more moderate members and some even some conservative members, too, who are worried about the deeper cuts proposed on Medicaid and the impact that they could have on rural hospitals in their states. And that has been a huge part of the negotiations at this critical moment.

I caught up with several of those senators, including some who are difficult reelection races like Sen. Susan Collins and Sen. Thom Tillis, both of whom want changes before they can get behind this plan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): This is still a work in progress, been very concerned about the cuts in Medicaid and the impact on my state, but other states as well.

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): I think that the Medicaid cuts are directionally right, but I think very difficult for the states to absorb. And we've just got to figure out a way to achieve what we're trying to do to bend the curve.

RAJU: But right now, this could have a big negative impact on North Carolina, the Medicaid cuts.

TILLIS: Well, I think current estimates are about $38 billion over 10 years. That's a big impact.

RAJU: Yes.

TILLIS: I don't think anybody believes the current text is final, so I don't believe anybody would vote for it in its current form. We've got a lot of things that we're working on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: But there is so little time in order to get this bill through the United States Senate. The Senate majority that wants this on the floor within the next couple of days, by Friday, it sounds like at the moment. But to alleviate those concerns, that means that it could alienate some folks on the right flank of the Republican conference. And finding that delicate balance has been so challenging for Republican leaders, because even if it does pass the Senate, then they got to get through the House when they have similar issues over there and different issues that have come up as well.

[15:25:09]

All of this is challenging for Republican leaders, because even if it does pass the Senate, then they've got to get through the House - where they have similar issues over there and different issues that have come up as well. All is Donald Trump is demanding members to fall in line and that's what Republican leaders are banking. They think these members will rather fold and get behind what Donald Trump wants rather than stand up to him and endure his wrath, Boris.

SANCHEZ: We'll see what comes of that meeting later today.

Manu Raju, thank you so much. Brianna?

KEILAR: This just in, federal hate crimes charges have now been filed against the man accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at demonstrators in Colorado who were calling for the release of hostages from Gaza. Mohamed Soliman is already facing 118 state charges for that attack that happened on June 1st and wounded at least eight people, including several who were burned severely. CNN's Whitney Wild has details on this for us.

So, Whitney, what does this new federal indictment say?

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: Brianna, this is largely the same fact pattern that had already been presented, but the big question had been whether or not law enforcement is going to move forward with these federal hate crime charges, because according to police and federal officials, Mohamed Sabry Soliman had said as he carried out this act, free Palestine. So, let me just walk you through the day as it unfolded and why law enforcement now says that it was those acts that constitute a hate crime.

It was June 1st that Mohamed Soliman, according to federal prosecutors, had gone to this event in Boulder. He had targeted the "Run for Their Lives" event. This was an event to raise awareness and protest Israeli hostages who are still being held in Gaza. When he approached them, he was wearing a hazard vest. He was carrying a backpack. It was basically a weed sprayer backpack that was full of a flammable liquid. And he also had a black container that had 18 vials of flammable liquid. Many of them had been turned into full on Molotov cocktails with that red rag in the top that he intended to ignite.

He threw two Molotov cocktails at this group, again, according to federal prosecutors, saying free Palestine. And then, Brianna, it was on further investigation that law enforcement found a handwritten note that was recovered. And this is according to this criminal complaint filed today associated with these hate crime charges.

And here's a quote, Brianna, "A handwritten note was recovered and included the following statements: 'Zionism is our enemies until Jerusalem is liberated and they are expelled from our land,' and further described Israel as a 'cancer entity.'"

And then further, Brianna, Mohamed Soliman remarkably spoke with law enforcement after this event and gave a pretty detailed account of his intentions. And here's another quote supporting these hate crime charges, according to federal prosecutors.

"The defendant, Mohamed Sabry Solima, stated that he had 'hoped that he burned them all. I killed them all. This was my dream.'"

Meanwhile, Brianna, the defense has previously argued that he targeted this group because of their political views. That does not constitute a hate crime. But even still, the judge had previously said hate crime charges could move forward. And now we know today federal prosecutors were prepared to actually file those charges formally, Brianna.

KEILAR: All right. Whitney Wild, thank you so much for that.

And coming up, President Trump says the U.S. will meet with Iran next week, but he downplayed the need for a nuclear deal. We'll discuss that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)