Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Middle East On Edge As Iran Vows Response To U.S. Strikes; Trump In New Post Suggests Iran Could Have "Regime Change"; Impact Of Strikes On Iran's Nuclear Program; Interview With Representative Mark Alford (R-MO) On U.S. Strikes On Iran; Interview With Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO); Iranians Demonstrate Against U.S. Strikes; MAGA Movement Divided Over Trump's Move To Bomb Iran. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired June 22, 2025 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:00]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Good evening and thanks for joining me on a Sunday. I'm Erin Burnett, live in New York.

The breaking news, regime change. Tonight President Trump posting on social media something that shifts this story, writing, "If the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be regime change?"

The president's stunning suggestion, putting regime change on the table, swiftly contradicts his closest aides, who even a few hours ago were saying this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JD VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change.

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: This mission was not and has not been about regime change.

MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: This wasn't a regime change move.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: I mean, clearly they all had the talking points, right? So they all knew to make that point. And now he has come out and seemingly contradicted his entire team. It comes as world leaders expressed grave concern that one of the words used over what they have called an alarming situation after the U.S. bombed three of Iran's key nuclear facilities. President Trump, of course, has declared the operation a, quote, "spectacular military success." And he added this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: The question, though, whether that is true, what that really means. The Israeli prime minister has said they need more information to assess the situation, and CNN is learning that early assessments raised questions over whether the United States destroyed the bulk of its enriched nuclear material.

Our Natasha Bertrand, with new reporting on that. She'll be with us in just a moment. Tonight, though, of course there is now around the world, a desperate call for diplomacy. A top aide to the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, warning that the game is not over meantime, and the foreign minister of the country is accusing the United States of launching a dangerous war against the country.

Well, as promised, we're going to go to Natasha Bertrand in just a few moments. First, though, I want to go to our chief international correspondent, Clarissa Ward, because she is in Tel Aviv tonight.

And, Clarissa, you know, as these hours go by, I know you have a chance to speak to your sources, it's a dynamic situation of what Iran might do and when it might do it to retaliate.

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Erin. I mean, the expectation certainly is that Iran will do something, if only to try to project strength both internationally, but crucially to its domestic audience as well. And the question is, what kind of a tactic will it take? Will it invoke on its number of proxies in the region? You have Hamas, you have Hezbollah, you have the Houthis in Yemen, you have Kataib Hezbollah in Iraq.

Hamas and Hezbollah have obviously been severely degraded after months and months of fighting with Israel. But still possible that it will use one of its proxies to try to launch an attack. Possible as well that it will focus on U.S. military assets throughout the region. We heard Iran's state media earlier saying that there is a vulnerability of U.S. forces, some 40,000 of them across the Middle East.

And you may remember, our viewers may remember, after President Trump ordered the killing of then IRGC chief Qasem Soleimani back in 2020, the retaliation from Iran came in the form of ballistic missile attack on the Al-Asad Airbase in Anbar Province in Iraq. I've been talking to a number of officials in the region who say that Iraq is definitely a focus at the moment because it is perceived as being particularly vulnerable.

We know that the State Department has evacuated some 500 personnel from Iraq, but I should add that there are other possible avenues as well for Iran to explore, whether that's cyber, whether that's terror, whether that's economic through some kind of a closure of the Strait of Hormuz. So everybody now watching and waiting to see what they will do -- Erin.

BURNETT: Clarissa, thank you very much. And before I let you go, if I may, Clarissa, I know you've also had a chance there to talk to Israelis, right? Who maybe I know in recent days had thought, well, there's going to be a, you know, I'm not talking about maybe those inside the government but had thought regular Israelis, this is going to be a two-week waiting period. And maybe Israel really is in this alone that they were stunned to see the United States step into their war. What are you hearing from Israelis?

WARD: Well, it's interesting, Erin, there's a large poster that has been erected across a number of buildings near the train station in Tel Aviv that says, "Thank you very much, President Trump." And I think that probably speaks to the broader sentiment here. But there's also a recognition that this conflict is not over. We heard from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently who talked, as you mentioned, about the fact that they're still assessing the full scope and scale of the damage that has been done to Iran's nuclear facilities.

But he also said that, you know, they're getting closer to achieving their objectives, but they still have certain goals in sight.

[19:05:05]

And once they clear those goals or carry out those goals, then they will end their operation. As recently as today, we heard the IDF chief spokesman talking about an operation to take out a missile engine building facility. More than 2,000 kilometers from here. And tomorrow they have announced, the Israelis, that they will be starting some flights again from Ben-Gurion Airport, just 24 flights a day.

They're only allowing 50 passengers on each flight. That's to try to minimize the number of people in the terminal, and also the amount of time that those planes spend on the ground -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right. Clarissa, thank you very much.

And let's go now to Kristen Holmes at the White House.

And, Kristen, you know, we've been hearing from the administration since these strikes, not just that they were successful, but also very clearly, as we just played a few moments ago from senior administration officials, that this was not about regime change. We heard that from the vice president. We heard that from the secretary of State. But now President Trump has come out and put regime change on the table.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Erin. That's right. And just to be clear, it's not even just after the strikes, even before the strikes, when there was even consideration of this idea of launching strikes into Iran, Karoline Leavitt, the press secretary, was asked specifically if the Trump administration supported regime change, and she sidestepped the question, talking about how this was not about regime change. This was all about not granting Iran access to a nuclear weapon.

But now you have President Trump posting on social media, which seems to be a loose, supportive post about a regime change. This is what he said. He said, "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?" And then he wrote, "MIGA," which is clearly a spinoff of MAGA, which is make Iran great again. This is going to be something that now his top officials are going to

have to answer for. It's also something that we have heard from Israeli officials and even some U.S. officials talking about what's going on between Israel and Iran as something that the Israelis wanted as an unintended goal at the end of this war, the end of this conflict, but something that the United States had largely stayed away from.

But, Erin, I do want to focus on one thing because this is what the administration is focused on. This is what the White House is focused on, and that is any kind of retaliation by Iran. There are a lot of concerns. We've seen the kind of language that has come from President Trump, as well as his senior staff, saying that Iran is going to regret any kind of physical retaliation. But we also heard from his top officials talking about some kind of potential economic retaliation, particularly when it came to, as Clarissa mentioned, the Strait of Hormuz.

Take a listen to what we heard from them today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: I think that would be suicidal, Kristen, for the Iranians themselves. I mean, their entire economy runs through the Strait of Hormuz. If they want to destroy their own economy and cause disruptions in the world, I think that would be their decision.

RUBIO: They mined the Straits of Hormuz, the Chinese are going to pay a huge price and every other country in the world is going to pay a huge price. We will, too. It will have some impact on us. It will have a lot more impact on the rest of the world, a lot more impact on the rest of the world. It would be a suicidal move on their part because I think the whole world would come against them if they did that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HOLMES: Certainly sounds like each of them had been briefed on talking points before they sat down for those shows on Sunday. But it is one thing that they're watching very closely to see how Iran decides if it's going to retaliate. Again, I can't stress this enough because I know that it doesn't necessarily seem like this, given how this has played out.

But President Trump has continued to say behind the scenes that he is hoping for a diplomatic end to all of this. But obviously that's going to be, you know, we're not going to know how this ends until we see what happens over the next days, hours, et cetera.

BURNETT: All right, Kristen, thank you so very much.

And now let's go to Natasha Bertrand in Washington covering the Pentagon.

So, Natasha, I know you're learning some more details about exactly how this operation played out. What are you finding out now? NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, this

was a really, really meticulously carried out operation. It involved deception. It involved the decoy B-2 bombers that we all saw heading over the Pacific yesterday, when, in fact, the actual B-2 bombers that were used to carry out these attacks on the nuclear sites in Iran were heading east towards Iran. And no one knew a thing. And the entire operation essentially took roughly 20 minutes from about 6:40 p.m. Saturday night to 7:00 p.m.

These bombers entered Iranian airspace. They dropped over a dozen of these massive ordnance penetrator bombs on two of the nuclear facilities. Tomahawk submarines attacked the third nuclear facility and fighter jets actually cleared the way for those bombers, suppressing air defense systems and making sure that the Iranians weren't going to be firing upon the bombers. They encountered no resistance, according to the Pentagon, from the Iranians, and they safely exited Iranian airspace again within about 20 minutes.

So it was a really meticulously crafted operation, something that required a really large degree of operational security.

[19:10:05]

But the question now, of course, is what was the actual impact? And we've gotten some conflicting statements on that from the Pentagon, ranging from what Secretary Hegseth said, which was it devastated the Iranian nuclear program. Trump dealt the final blow. Nuclear ambitions have been obliterated to a more cautious reading by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine, who said earlier today that it's simply too early to say what the battle damage assessment is.

But here's a little bit of what they said earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.

HEGSETH: Iran's nuclear ambitions have been obliterated.

GEN. DAN CAINE, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERTRAND: So one of the big questions that we still have is why the U.S. military did not drop one of those massive bombs on the Isfahan facility, which is a very sprawling nuclear facility that Iran has been developing for decades now. And it holds roughly 60 percent of Iran's already enriched nuclear material, apparently, according to open source intelligence, according to satellite images that were reviewed by experts we spoke to, the overground kind of aspects of that facility were damaged, but it's unclear if the tunnels were.

So we're still trying to figure out why the U.S. military didn't actually use that massive bomb on that facility -- Erin.

BURNETT: Yes, and such a crucial question which you've been highlighting.

All right, Natasha, thank you very much, from the Pentagon.

And the real question, of course, you know, as you go into the details that Natasha is going through is whether the strikes did achieve something that diplomacy could not. Did they really set back Iran's nuclear program by even more than the two to three years Israel said it had already successfully done?

We're going to speak to the man who negotiated the nuclear deal that President Trump ended in his first term, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:16:41]

BURNETT: Obliterated. That's how Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is describing Iran's nuclear ambitions after the U.S. military carried out strikes against three key nuclear Iranian sites. The Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also says the strikes left very significant damage to Iran's facility in Fordow. However, and this is important, he's warning the extent of it is yet to be determined.

The attacks coming despite the recent statements from President Trump's own director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who of course, said this this spring.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TULSI GABBARD, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. And Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003. Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency tonight saying he is convening a special session tomorrow in Vienna.

So let's bring in former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and a key negotiator in the Iran deal under President Obama of course.

So I guess just to ask you, Secretary, you know, you and I spoke a few days ago and it was the impression was perhaps there were going to be two weeks and that there was going to be diplomacy. And now you've seen these massive series of strikes. So I guess just to frame this in the way that those who support these strikes are framing it.

Do you believe the world is now a safer place because and after these attacks?

ERNEST MONIZ, FORMER U.S. ENERGY SECRETARY UNDER OBAMA, NEGOTIATED IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL: Well, not really. For the short term clearly the military attack which was very, very well carried out for sure, it certainly eliminated, at least for some time some of the Iranian facilities. But I've seen no indication that it would in any way eliminate the nuclear weapons program.

And furthermore, for immediate concern, I believe it's quite likely that Iran moved all of its highly enriched uranium 400 kilograms and more to a safer place. So they probably are still in control of this material that is very, very close to weapons grade.

BURNETT: OK. That's a very sobering assessment. And I just want to emphasize, Secretary, that it is completely different than, you know, what we heard from the Defense secretary, right, he used the word obliterated to describe Iran's nuclear ambitions. So I would presume, I mean, are there people within the U.S. government who -- I mean, I know we're still assessing the full extent of things, but that would see that the reality may be very different than, you know, the sort of political triumphalism that we're seeing?

MONIZ: Well, it's not in conflict in the sense that it does appear to me that the Natanz facility was probably pretty much obliterated. As the chairman of the Joint Chiefs said, the subterranean damage at Fordow remains to be evaluated. Almost certainly considerable damage. Obliterated maybe too strong, but we don't know. But on the other hand, I think Vice President Vance, for example, specifically noted that the 60 percent enriched uranium may have been moved to hardened secret places.

[19:20:02]

And so if they reconstruct the more powerful centrifuges that they have developed in the last few years, they could enrich that material to weapons grade in pretty short order.

BURNETT: So, and you're right, the vice president did say that he specifically highlighted that, that enriched uranium. So then if that's the case, Secretary, then from -- then where do we go, right? Because it sounds like then you're back to somehow having a diplomatic solution as the only outcome, even as the United States has engaged in what, if we're just going to use the words that anybody would use, is an act of war against another country?

MONIZ: Well, there's no doubt when you bomb, when you bomb facilities on the home turf of a country, it's an act of war. That can't be denied. Now, I think a major question is, and it's a bit of an irony, really, that the ball is in many ways in Iran's court to determine where things go, because the possibility of an expanding regional war is still there. I do think if Iran takes military actions that are overt, as the president has said, there will be a very, very stern response.

And I don't think Iran has the military capability to withstand that, really. But there are other ways of going about their business. They could have -- they're weakened without Hezbollah, without the Syrian government, but they still have some militias in Iraq. They still have the Houthis. They have the issues of potentially mining the Hormuz Strait, which would cause some economic chaos. So I think we need to see where Iran goes on that score. But ultimately, and as we discussed a few days ago, Erin, the real solution in the end has to be a political solution that includes very, very strong verification, for example, within it that can satisfy the United States, Israel, the Europeans, and of course, the Iranians have to agree to something which provides them sufficient economic relief.

BURNETT: And before you go, Secretary, just because you have dealt with so many in the Iranian government because you were actually negotiating this deal. So, you know the layers of the onion and that maybe command and control has been disrupted and people have been killed, but others have taken their place. The ayatollah has named, you know, three people that he would like to be considered to succeed him if he is assassinated.

This is the situation where we are. But President Trump bringing up this issue of regime change again in a social media post. Just as you see it, if there were to be, if there -- if the ayatollah was eliminated or assassinated by the U.S. or Israel, does that really mean regime change?

MONIZ: Well, I'm not going to comment on the, quotes, "regime," what I will say again is that we need, no matter what the regime is, we need serious political change in Iran in order to affect an agreement that brings some peace to the region, allows economic development not only of Iran, but also of their neighbors across the Gulf and so political change is required, however, that is affected.

BURNETT: All right. Well, Secretary Moniz, it's great to talk to you again and thank you so much for taking the time on a Sunday night.

MONIZ: Pleasure.

BURNETT: All right. And next, absent from the decision to strike Iran, Congress. Are American lawmakers OK with that? I'm going to ask the congressman who represents the district where those bombers that carried out last night's strike took off from. He's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:28:06]

BURNETT: The world now waiting to see what happens next in the Middle East. President Trump posting on social media, "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 regime change?"

It comes as the U.S. military launched those unprecedented strikes against three of Iran's key nuclear sites in an operation which involved more than 125 aircraft, including seven Stealth B-2 bombers, refueling tankers, reconnaissance planes and fighter jets.

Joining me now is Republican Congressman Mark Alford of Missouri.

And, Congressman, I really appreciate you taking the time. I know, obviously, you know, you represent where all this started, the district where the Air Force base is located, the home of these B-2 stealth bombers. So just to try to understand exactly how all of this went down, what did you know and when?

REP. MARK ALFORD (R-MO): Well, I was out at Whiteman Air Force Base for a change of command on Wednesday. We knew that something was happening, but we did not know when. It's very important that our leadership, our military, our president carried this out with the utmost secrecy. There are seven bombers that were at risk, multiple refueling jets that were at risk, and the 509th Airmen and women who carried out this great mission.

Erin, this is what leadership looks like. Compare this action to what President Biden did in late August of '21 when he pulled out of Afghanistan and left 13 servicemembers there to die, this is -- that was not the way to operate. President Trump is putting the world on notice. We are no longer weak. We are strong. And true peace will come through that.

BURNETT: So, congressman, let me ask you, because obviously, you know, you're emphasizing that you see this as a moment of leadership and also that you think that the stealth was the point, right, to protect the lives of those who obviously carried out such a complex and incredible mission.

ALFORD: Exactly.

BURNETT: But not everyone agrees with you. And I don't need to go to the Democratic side to find them. Your Republican colleague from Kentucky, Congressman Massie, posted on social media saying that this is not constitutional. Simple words, this is not constitutional, he responded to President Trump's post going through exactly what happened. Do you think that your Republican colleague is wrong?

[19:32:36]

ALFORD: Well, look, I like Tom Massie. He's a good guy, he has great feelings for this great country that we live in. But he's wrong on this issue, 99 percent of the military actions that have taken place since World War II did not -- the President did not seek approval of Congress. This did not need an approval of Congress.

President Trump notified the leaders of Congress that what was happening, not until after those B-2 bombers were up in the air, but we could not have risked the damage to this great mission that was taking place.

Look, we decapitated the nuclear ambitions of Iran, which has been a thorn in our side, which has been a terrorist state for some 43 years, ever since the Iranian hostage crisis.

BURNETT: So, and I know, obviously, we don't yet know the full extent of what they succeeded at or not. I know the Prime Minister of Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu, is saying its unknown and were awaiting those full assessments. But I am wondering, you know, when you think about, you know, I don't know if you heard Secretary Moniz, who had only good words to say about the military action itself.

But, you know, was talking about how, you know, it's fair to say when you drop bombs on another country, that's an act of war. Are you comfortable with the President going ahead with an act of war that could become a full blown war with American troops' lives on the line without getting the approval of the people -- the American people elected to Congress, people like yourself, sir?

ALFORD: Well, Erin, this is not an act of war. This was a singular strike to decapitate and take out the nuclear ambitions of a regime that has gone rogue, was rogue from the very beginning, and would not negotiate a deal for peace. President Trump wants peace. I'm telling you one more thing. This should really serve as a message to Xi Jinping -- don't mess with Taiwan. A message to Vladimir Putin. Don't mess with Europe or any of our NATO partners. The United States of America is open for business once again, and that business is making America strong again, making America first so we can be strong for other nations.

BURNETT: All right, Congressman Alford, I appreciate your time. And thank you very much tonight, sir.

And right now, U.S. forces are on high alert as were waiting to get the assessment on exactly what was accomplished in last night's mass strikes on Iran. I'm going to ask a former high ranking military leader when he thinks we will actually know what the U.S. accomplished and what's next.

And anti-war protests breaking out in New York City tonight and Washington, D.C., this hour.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(PROTESTERS chanting "One, two, three, four, we don't want your racist war. We don't want your racist war. Five, six, seven, eight...")

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: And also demonstrations happening in Iran, an important development. Our Fred Pleitgen there in Tehran, his report is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:37:55]

BURNETT: Iranians are speaking out against President Trump's decision to strike their country's nuclear sites. The Iranian President joined protest demonstrations in Central Tehran today, where our senior international correspondent, Fred Pleitgen, was. He was the first western journalist to enter Iran after the conflict with Israel began. He is on the ground in Tehran tonight covering the protests there this Sunday.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: There still is a lot of public anger unloading here on the streets of Tehran. Thousands of people have come here to Revolution Square. First and foremost, to criticize U.S. President Trump and to vow revenge for those strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.

One of the interesting things that were seeing on the ground now here is that it's not only conservatives and hardliners who are here, but also people who say they're normally quite critical of the Iranian government.

(UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE speaking in foreign language.)

PLEITGEN: "Even if missiles rained down on my head, I will stay here," she says. "And I will sacrifice my life and my blood for my country."

(UNIDENTIFIED MALE speaking in foreign language.)

PLEITGEN: This Member of Parliament says, "A lot of those standing here chanting slogans against the United States may have been critics of the policies of the Islamic Republic, but today all of us are standing in one line behind the Supreme Leader."

PLEITGEN: People now chanting "Death to America" here at Revolution Square, and you can really feel how angry a lot of them are towards President Trump. Of course, the Iranian government has said that it reserves the right to retaliate for those strikes on the nuclear facilities, saying that it is their right to have nuclear enrichment. It is their right to have a nuclear program, and it's not something that they're going to allow the Trump administration to take away from them.

And that is certainly also the sentiment that we're seeing here on the streets of Tehran.

Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Tehran.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BURNETT: All right, our thanks to Fred Pleitgen for that incredible reporting in Tehran.

Well, this comes as the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, says the strike did very significant damage at Fordow. Those are his words. That, of course, is Iran's most heavily fortified, as in, deep down that mountain, nuclear enrichment facility. But the extent of the damage still must be determined and the Prime Minister says overall, still needs more information to assess what the U.S. achieved.

U.S. Officials say it's too early to know for certain whether the strikes totally obliterated Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities. That, of course, is what the Defense Secretary and the President have claimed.

I want to bring in retired Navy Admiral James Stavridis, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and partner of The Carlyle Group, the investment firm. So, Admiral, I appreciate your time.

[19:40:38]

So, obviously, no one knows for sure quite yet the damage given these facilities are buried in underground tunnels. Given that we know and Vice-President Vance said today, even that maybe 60 percent of the enriched material may have already been moved to other sites, right?

So, we don't yet know. But based on what you're learning, is the President right when he uses the word obliterated to describe Iran's nuclear program tonight?

ADM. JAMES STAVRIDIS (RET), CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST: Well, I'd say that's enthusiastic and extremely optimistic, but not yet accurate. And I think you're going to see more and more of the assessments, kind of hedge about how far we've gone here.

And look, I have, over the course of my career done, decades of different battle damage assessments, you can't do them in an hour. You can't do them in a couple of days. Typically, it's going to take weeks. Because, Erin, you know this, it's the confluence of what you can see from the overhead satellites, what you can hear electronically. What are our opponents saying about what has happened? What does our human intelligence on the ground have to say?

Let's face it, the Israelis clearly have penetrated Iranian society. There's a lot of data that has yet to come in. So, I am hopeful that we have obliterated the Iranian nuclear program. Put me down as skeptical at this point. Let's see what happens over the next few weeks.

BURNETT: So, and interesting that you're giving that time frame on it.

Now, again, J.D. Vance saying that 60 percent of the enriched material may have been moved to other sites. So, there's other sites and other places known and unknown aside from the ones that the U.S. struck, but on the ones that the U.S. struck, we have a couple of animations, admiral, of exactly what happened.

And when you look at some of these powerful bombs that were used to penetrate deep down into the mountain, for example, at Fordow. Do you do you think that we will be able to get an answer? You know, now you can see the satellite images and you see kind of six big craters on the satellite, but will we be able to really know? Because it seemed like even coming into this, there was uncertainty about how much they had under there and how deep it really was.

STAVRIDIS: Yes, I think eventually being weeks, not months or years, we will have a pretty clear idea. It's funny, you use the words knowns and unknowns. I worked for a couple of years as chief-of-staff to Don Rumsfeld, who talked an awful lot as you'll remember, about known unknowns. I think that's what we're dealing with here. What we know is that some amount of both the enriched uranium itself, some level of the machinery, probably bled out of these sites before those big, beautiful B-2s you're showing showed up. Some of it has been dispersed around the country.

We need to remember Iran is a huge country, two and a half times the size of Texas, it's got plenty of places to hide everything from centrifuges to hundreds of pounds of enriched uranium.

And oh, by the way, those scientists, you can't kill them all, that knowledge is going to continue. So, to simply obliterate this program, boy, it may not be mission impossible, but its mission really difficult. We ought to be looking at it with a healthy dose of skepticism and recognize we may have to conduct further strikes, or perhaps better yet, conduct some real diplomacy to end this program.

BURNETT: You know, you talk about known unknowns. I mean, we you know, in a sense, you know, we know we're in a whole new world. It's unsettling and disturbing for many and yet nobody knows what that means. So, you know, you talk about further strikes, those strikes to the country receiving them is a war, right? They're being struck by the most powerful country in the world. No one seems to have any idea what to expect from Iran at this point. What do you think, Admiral, retaliation looks like from Iran?

STAVRIDIS: I think the Iranians have essentially three options. One is, and it's not going to happen, but simply capitulate to say, you know what, you crushed us, you destroyed our nuclear program, we're now ready to have talks with you, unconditional surrender. It's an option. highly unlikely they will take it.

Option two, far more likely, they'll launch a series of kind of face saving strikes. Some ballistic missiles, perhaps against American forces even in Iraq, in Syria, not big concentration areas. They'll continue to launch against Israel, face saving means. But then let's hope they'll be willing to come back to the table and negotiate. And that's what the Trump administration, I think correctly, has articulated and queue up Steve Witkoff, Marco Rubio, let's do a deal.

[19:45:55]

And then option three, which worries me, and I don't think is impossible. And you're showing those B-2s flying across the ocean. What if Iran decides to go big, meaning close the Strait of Hormuz, conduct targeted assassinations against American officials, American businessmen, perhaps throughout the region, activate sleeper cells in the United States, launch concentrated ballistic missile attacks against pinpoint targets like Haifa or Bahrain, the headquarters of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet. Iran could take that option three and go big. I hope they don't, I hope they go with option two. I hope there's some diplomacy ahead, and I hope Steve Witkoff can get on a jet and talk us through this situation.

BURNETT: All right, Admiral Stavridis, thank you so very much on this Sunday night.

Well, after deciding to strike Iran, President Trump is now taking aim at a member of Congress, a Republican. So, how much of the MAGA base is actually falling in line behind these strikes? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:51:42] BURNETT: MAGA divided, today, President Trump attacking the Republican Congressman Thomas Massie in a scathing social media post threatening to personally campaign against him. Why is he doing that today? Well, he is doing it because the Kentucky Republican, Mr. Massie, criticized the decision to strike Iranian nuclear sites without Congressional approval as unconstitutional. Trump writes, "Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky is not MAGA, even though he likes to say he is. Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him. He is a negative force who almost always votes no, no matter how good something may be."

Our senior correspondent Donie O'Sullivan joins us now. and Donie, you have spent obviously just, you know, incredible amounts of time with Trump supporters understanding the MAGA movement. So, what are you hearing across MAGA-verse?

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, I thought it was notable last night, shows like Steve Bannon's podcast, they went live last night as the news was breaking. And as somebody who was very much a, you know, against the -- "forever wars" and very much trying to keep America out of further wars. He was rather measured last night, really kind of saying, well, let's wait and see. Hopefully, this is an in and out. But was talking though about how this was could become a distraction to Trump's domestic agenda. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE BANNON, FORMER TRUMP CHIEF STRATEGIST: Two weeks ago it was in Los Angeles focused on the mass deportations. I still argue that as important as it is and higher priority it is to stop the nuclear program at whatever stage it is for the for the Iranians. For us, you know, if you've got a rank order strategic concerns, the vital National Security interests of this country lies with us making sure that the 10 to 12 million illegal alien invaders that came here on Biden's the illegitimate regime Biden's watch have to be deported. That is the big fight.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O'SULLIVAN: Now, I will say, folks like Bannon all throughout last night we're saying, well, look, this is hopefully this is just the one operation and were not going into regime change territory. So, I suspect that things could be very different tomorrow morning given Trump's post in the last few hours.

BURNETT: Given that he's posted about right, about being open to regime change. So, you know, you look at some of Trump's most ardent backers, people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, who have backed him but have not been supportive of going into this conflict in Iran. What are they saying?

O'SULLIVAN: Yes, and well, as you said, they're treading carefully here, of course, because you don't want the President to respond --

BURNETT: You don't want to become Thomas Massie. O'SULLIVAN: -- like Massie, yes, and Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote a very long post on X last night. I think we have it posted overnight. A part of in this, she says, "I can also support President Trump and his administration on many of the great things they're doing while disagreeing on bombing Iran and getting involved in a hot war that Israel started. That's not disloyalty, critical thinking and having my own opinions is the most American thing ever."

So, that's the folks that are, you know, Trump backing members of Congress who have issues with this. That's how they're playing it right now.

BURNETT: Okay, but then there's Congressman Massie where he says its unconstitutional. What Trump did and Trumps response is MAGA -- I mean, they don't want you. They don't know you. They don't respect you. I'm a campaign against you. I mean, DEFCON.

O'SULLIVAN: And this is this is what Bannon and others have been warning about for leading up to this right, was that this could create this sort of MAGA civil war, a massive split in the base. And so, I think that's, you know, if you're in the Trump administration and if you're in the MAGA movement, you're nervous about this right now because, you know, this is a group that has disagreements internally. But normally, remarkably, all stay lockstep. This might be -- could be the thing that really splits the coalition.

[19:55:39]

BURNETT: Even on a day, on a day like today, to take the time to say all that about Massie obviously is something as well. Donie, thank you very much. And thanks so much to all of you for joining us tonight for this special coverage.

Anderson Cooper picks up our special breaking news coverage after this short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:00:00]