Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

White House Pushes Back on Iran Intel; Trump attends NATO Summit; Cuomo Concedes in New York Primary; Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI) is Interviewed about the NYC Mayoral Primary; Trump Warns Israel. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired June 25, 2025 - 06:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:32:27]

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. I'm Aaudie Cornish. Thank you for joining me on CNN THIS MORNING.

It's half past the hour, and we're going to go back now to our top story as the White House this morning continues to reject reports that it failed to fully destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities. That's despite an early U.S. intelligence assessment, which concludes it was only set back by a few months. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, in a statement, dismissed the assessment as "flat-out wrong," and described the source as a, quote, "low-level loser."

President Trump, along with other senior cabinet officials, slammed the intel leak at the NATO summit this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You would think they'd want to say, this was an unbelievable success. And the thing that hurts me is it's really demeaning to the pilots and the people that put that whole thing together, the op, the generals. That was a perfect operation.

MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE: You can't even find where it used to be, because the whole thing is just blackened out. It's gone.

TRUMP: Right. It's wiped out.

RUBIO: It's wiped out. Then we dropped 12 of the strongest bombs on the planet, right down the hole in two places.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: All this as the Trump administration vows to find the source of what it calls an unauthorized disclosure of classified information.

Joining me now is one of the reporters behind that story, Zachary Cohen, CNN's senior national security reporter.

Good morning, Zach, and thanks for bringing your reporting here. ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes. Thanks for

having me.

CORNISH: I want to play one more thing from NATO because it's a little different from this clip we just heard when the president was asked about that intelligence and basically said, well, it shows that it's inconclusive, but -- but he says, "the intelligence says we don't know. It could have been very severe. That's what the intelligence says. So, I guess it's correct. It was very severe. It was obliteration."

There's a big difference between very severe and obliteration. What did your intelligence sources say?

COHEN: There is. And I think it's important to also point out that the president and the White House, in all of their responses to this reporting, have really been only disputing the contents of the intelligence assessment that we reported on. But in doing so, also acknowledging the existence of this assessment, acknowledging that the intelligence finding, the first finding on this military operation, does exist. So, it is important to distinguish between what the White House is taking issue with and what they are not. And that's, you know, centered around intelligence assessment.

So, it's really also important to note that this is a very preliminary, early intelligence assessment from specifically the Defense Intelligence Agency. And while that's just one of about 18 intelligence agencies here in the United States, it's also the one that is -- has the experts in analyzing battle damage assessments.

[06:35:01]

That's what this analysis was based on. And it's really the first conclusive but, you know, an official proclamation from an intelligence agency about how much damage these strikes really did. So, obviously, the president -- it's at -- it's at odds with what the president has been saying publicly. It does not line up necessarily with complete obliteration, but also acknowledges and leaves open the idea that this assessment will continue to evolve and change as more intelligence is collected.

CORNISH: Yes. He says low level. You, obviously, say it's preliminary and there are many more agencies to go.

COHEN: Yes.

CORNISH: But what's hanging over this is, to me, the president has, in the past, been doubtful or dismissive of comments from the intel community. Whether that's Tulsi Gabbard or the community at whole. So, do you get the sense these comments are also reflective of that? Does he trust them?

COHEN: Well, Tulsi Gabbard is a good example because when Donald Trump was criticizing her recently over the intelligence community assessment on Iran's nuclear program, our reporting reflected that his main issue with her was that she was off message. It wasn't necessarily that the content of what the intelligence community was saying was necessarily wrong or right, it was that it what -- did not line up with what the president was saying publicly.

And we've learned over the years that that is effectively the most important thing for him and what he looks for in the intelligence community. That's not what --

CORNISH: Which is the opposite of what the intelligence community feels about it.

COHEN: What -- exactly. Yes, their job is to inform policymakers, give them the best information that they possibly can, and then it's up to the policymakers to decide what they do with that intelligence, but it doesn't change the nature of what they're giving those policymakers.

CORNISH: Speaking of which, we know that there are lawmakers who want to hear more. What else are you hearing from them?

COHEN: Yes, there's a lot of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who are very frustrated with the administration, especially after those classified briefings were delayed and not really given -- and they weren't really given a reason for why. And so, again, that's why this reporting does seem to be prompting such a dramatic response from a lot of different corners of Capitol Hill and in Washington, D.C., is because, effectively, lawmakers have not seen and heard from the administration about any sort of evidence from these strikes. And do they line up with what the president? And the administration is saying publicly, at a time when things are moving very quickly with the ceasefire, being so -- or so tenuous with --

CORNISH: Yes. And the justifications matter, right?

COHEN: Absolutely.

CORNISH: Yes.

COHEN: And, you know, they want answers to that. And so far they've not been given them.

CORNISH: All right, Zach, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

All right, President Trump now attending his first NATO conference of his second term as he flies into Amsterdam with a new ceasefire between Israel and Iran. So, the NATO alliance also seems ready to agree to one of his long-standing demands, that they all increase their military budgets. The president also posted what seemed to be a private message from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, which reads in part, "you are flying into a big success. It was not easy, but we've got them all signed on to 5 percent."

So, the president spoke alongside the secretary general just a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I've been asking them to go up to 5 percent for a number of years, and they're going up to 5 percent. And that's a big -- from 2 percent, that's a -- and a lot of people didn't even pay the 2 percent. So, I think it's going to be very big news. NATO's going to become very strong with us. And I appreciate doing it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: Joining me now from that NATO summit in The Hague is CNN political and national security analyst David Sanger.

David, I want to first just ask you about some of the comments that the president has made about the mutual defense aspect of NATO while he was traveling on Air Force One. It's known as Article V. Just to give you a sense of what he was saying.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Are you still committed to Article V of NATO?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Depends on your definition. There's numerous definitions of Article V, you know that, right? But I'm committed to being their friends. You know, I've become friends with many of those leaders, and I'm committed to helping them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: So, David, many definitions there. What definitions are you hearing from some of the other countries?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes. Well, Audie, you'll remember that during the president's first term he kept deleting references to Article V out of the script of his speeches, including one at the opening of the new NATO headquarters, to the frustration of his national security adviser and -- and others at the time. So, in the first term, he didn't want to make a commitment at all. Now by saying it depends on the definition, I think everybody has been reading that as, it commits me to helping in some way, but not necessarily sending troops and -- and so forth. And, of course, he has frequently said that countries that don't pay up to the amount that they've committed on defense, he keeps talking about their dues to NATO, there -- there are no dues to NATO, but those -- those groups he might not come to defend.

But, you know, he gained a little credibility, I think, over the weekend because, obviously, he was willing to commit U.S. forces to help Israel.

[06:40:08]

That's only one reason that he did the attack. But I think this is going to be a lot less contentious. The 5 percent is a little flexible because it includes 1.5 percent of GDP for roads and domestic projects that, by a stretch, you could say are helping in their defenses.

CORNISH: Do you get that -- he also sort of implied the U.S. is going it alone. I mean that's been his approach. Do they feel like they have his ear again?

SANGER: It'll be interesting to see. We -- this is really the first day that this starts up. And, you know, I think that the new NATO secretary general, Mark Rutte, kept this so short, in part because he didn't want to leave time for Trumpian kind of disruption of -- of this. He wanted to deliver the 5 percent, have everybody congratulate each other and leave.

But what you also did here, and this goes back to the conversation that you just had, Audie, was the president, and really Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, and national security advisor, laid out the most detailed accounting of why they think the Iranians will not be able to rebuild their facilities. The president did it just by assertion. Rubio made the argument that -- that wiped out in the -- in the attacks were, as a key conversion facility. This is where you turn the nuclear fuel into a form that you could use in a warhead. And that that was wiped out, and that that's a key bottleneck to this whole system.

So, I think they're beginning to recognize that you can't just send the president to run out and say obliterate and expect that that ends the debate. Angry as they were, of course, about the leak of the report.

CORNISH: That's David Sanger at that NATO summit. We'll be hearing more from him today.

Thanks, David.

We're going to be shifting gears now to a major upset in New York City's Democratic primary for mayor. Former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who was considered the frontrunner in the race, has conceded. And a 33- year-old state assemblyman, Zohran Mamdani, is on track to win.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZOHRAN MAMDANI, DEMOCRATIC MAYORAL CANDIDATE FOR NEW YORK: I will fight for a city that works for you, that is affordable for you, that is safe for you. I will work to be a mayor you will be proud to call your own.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: OK. It's important to note that Mamdani did not reach that 50 percent threshold of the vote. So, the race will be decided by ranked choice votes that begin July 1st.

The group chat is back.

I wanted to talk about this because it is -- even the strikes in Israel and how to talk about Israel came up in this New York race. And it's also a moment where you have a Democratic socialist who's come to the fore. I don't know want a -- who wants to take this first, but what's your initial reaction, Joel?

JOEL RUBIN, AUTHOR, "THE BRIEFING BOOK" ON SUBSTACK: Sure. Well, first of all, candidate quality clearly matters. And this is one high- quality candidate. And he spoke to issues that the base voters of the Democratic Party --

CORNISH: Wait, next to a former governor? I mean, this is a guy who knows how to run.

RUBIN: Cuomo was asleep. I mean everybody watching this was wondering where he was on the stump, whereas Mamdani was everywhere, right? He was very energetic, very effective at messaging, spoke to core issues that people care about.

When it comes to Israel and Jewish issues, though, he did freak out to be -- be -- be, you know, a little -- a little loose in the words about it, but he freaked out the Jewish voters in New York.

And there's a lot of concerns that he's hostile to Israel. And there are a lot of concerns that he's going to sort of look the other way when Jewish New Yorkers feel threatened. And I think he's going to have to address those a lot more directly. He skated around that quite a bit.

MARGARET TALEV, SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR, "AXIOS": There's so many elements here because, on the one hand, you have a 33-year-old Democratic socialist and it feels like this is an AOC, Bernie Sanders, young movement wing of the Democratic Party.

CORNISH: Yes. And she did support him. So, this is not --

TALEV: Absolutely.

CORNISH: Yes.

TALEV: Is it going to have -- does it say anything about our national politics? And I think that's where -- why we are sitting here talking about it.

CORNISH: We're talking about it.

TALEV: Is he going to become a lightning rod that Republicans nationally are going to say, this is the Democratic Party and can Republicans use that in the midterms?

And then, on the other hand, I think there is a candidate quality issue. You have Eric Adams, extremely compromised, now running as an independent. Cuomo, very compromised over the sexual harassment problems. And this young, vibrant candidate who walked the length of Manhattan and is talking about --

CORNISH: Yes. So, just not compromise, basically, is the bar in some ways.

TALEV: Well, he's not those two, but he --

CORNISH: Let me bring you in for the last moment because I --

DOUG HEYE, FORMER RNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR AND REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: He's -- he's compromised because --

CORNISH: Yes.

HEYE: You know, essentially, New York is the largest Jewish city in -- in the world. Bigger than Jerusalem. Bigger than Tel Aviv. More Jews in New York City than either of those cities, maybe even combined. So, Mamdani does have a problem moving forward there.

[06:45:02]

But on the issue of candidate quality, yes, very clearly, Andrew Cuomo had a lot of personal issues. But what was the reason for him to run? What was his real campaign message? It seemed that the only reason he was a candidate was because he wanted back in. That's not a real good selling point to voters. And we saw that.

CORNISH: Yes, and Democrats wanted back in, right?

RUBIN: That's right. Yes.

CORNISH: I mean, there was a lot of big establishment Democrat voices who went behind him.

RUBIN: Yes.

CORNISH: I want you guys --

HEYE: Yes. But Schumer and Jeffries didn't say a word on this race.

RUBIN: Very (INAUDIBLE).

CORNISH: OK, stay with us. We actually have a guest who can help us understand this a little bit more. Still ahead on CNN THIS MORNING, we are going to talk about that upset in New York City. Debbie Dingell is here after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CORNISH: Back now to that surprising primary out of New York City, and what it says about the state of the Democratic Party. Thirty-three- year-old State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani is on track to win the Democratic primary for mayor. Former Governor Andrew Cuomo, who was considered a frontrunner, conceded the race last night.

[06:50:04]

Mamdani did not reach 50 percent of the vote, so the race will be decided by ranked choice voting, which starts on July 1st.

Joining me now to talk more, Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Dingell of Michigan.

Thank you for being here this morning.

REP. DEBBIE DINGELL (D-MI): Great to be with you. CORNISH: One of the reasons why I'm excited to talk to you is because

you are a leader in the congressive -- the congression progressive caucus. And this is a moment where you have a Democratic socialist who has kind of moved to the forefront where establishment Democrats had backed Cuomo. Why do you think those establishment Democrats were backing Cuomo? And was that a misread of the room, so to speak?

DINGELL: So, I -- this is one of the things that I've been saying for years. You're starting to hear more people say it. You will recall that I predicted that Hillary Clinton was going to lose in 2016 and was the bad girl of the Democratic Party and the Debbie downer, and, unfortunately, I was right.

The -- what I noticed about these two candidates, one was out, one was about. They were talking with people. They were using new forms of media. They were using podcasts, social media. And Governor Cuomo ran a very traditional consultant ad, used -- paid -- paid media, and you didn't see him out and about.

So, while I do think some of his ideas are exciting people, people are worried about the -- let's -- let's be clear, people are worried about the cost of living. They're worried about caregiving. They're worried about the -- their job. They can find affordable housing.

CORNISH: Yes.

DINGELL: They -- you know, all those issues were there. And he talked about them. I -- people, I'm afraid, are going to try to turn this into, you know, what does this mean? I think it shows that Democrats have got to start getting out and listening to people.

CORNISH: Is this a New York win or can you see more candidates like this gaining traction around the country?

DINGELL: I think that what we have to look at is how he campaigned and the issues that he talked about and his ability to meet with a lot of people and to be out.

CORNISH: Right. He was talking about free busses, talking about freezing rents, but affordability.

DINGELL: And I don't think -- you know, some people are going to --

CORNISH: Yes.

DINGELL: Affordability is what we need to be talking about. Some people are going to try to pin it -- oh, he's a communist. He's -- what he is, is talking to people about what they care about, and he's talking to people. He's out and about. It's what I'm trying to encourage in my Democratic caucus. I want every member of the Democratic caucus to walk into a union hall or go to a meeting with union workers in the month of August. Get out there.

CORNISH: I want to ask you one more thing. That full House briefing on the strikes on Iran, that's been pushed back. But what questions do you want to see answered by this administration? DINGELL: First of all, I want to tell you how outraged I am that it is

Wednesday, that they summarily canceled that briefing, which should have been held over the weekend. The Gang of Eight, for those who don't know, the senior members of the committees, national security cleared, everything, still have not been briefed. And that's why we started to cause disruption on the floor. And if we don't have a time and place for the briefing today, I think you're going to see some more people demand it. We need to know, why did they -- the Constitution requires the president to talk to the Congress, to tell -- to -- if you're going to use military, if you're -- attack, if you're looking at going to war, you got to talk to us.

CORNISH: Yes.

So, do Democrats disagree with the strikes themselves, or is it just trying to seize back some sort of congressional power?

DINGELL: I think it's -- look, nobody -- I think a lot of people are very worried about a nuclear Iran. But did we -- I think when we can, we want to use every diplomatic tool available. What was the evidence that required them to go in? Obviously, we're all hearing very mixed stories. We've not had any kind of briefing. So, we know what you know. We're reading it in the press.

Did they destroy it? How close are they? There are people that I know that are very smart that are saying, it wasn't all destroyed and we're still very -- they're very close to being able to have that capability.

We want to -- we got to get the facts. We need to -- I've got young men and women in my district that don't -- are already panicking they're going to be drafted. People are worried about -- about an endless war. But we also want a steady and stable Mideast.

It's complicated. You've got to talk to the Congress. You've got to brief the Congress. Here our part, the Constitution was set up, there are three branches of government. And I'll say something else, politics -- famous senator from Michigan, Republican in the '40s, said, politics should stop at the water's edge. We all need to be working together on something that's a threat to American security, at global security and the Mideast.

CORNISH: All right, Congresswoman, we'll see if that briefing happens. Hope we can check back with you. Thank you for being here.

DINGELL: Thank you for having me.

CORNISH: All right, it is now 54 minutes past the hour. I want to give you your morning roundup.

In just a few hours, RFK Jr.'s new CDC vaccine advisers will meet for the first time. Earlier this month, the Health and Human Services secretary dismissed the entire panel. On the agenda today, a presentation about concerns with the flu shot from a former leader at an anti-vaccine group.

[06:55:06]

And today, the man who was previously deported by mistake to a prison in El Salvador will have a federal hearing. Kilmar Abrego Garcia is expected to be released from a Tennessee jail, only to be taken into immigration custody. He's facing charges of human smuggling. A judge decided he didn't need to stay behind bars ahead of the trial.

And just a few hours ago, Axiom Space launched a crew of four people towards the International Space Station from the Kennedy Space Center. The astronauts include a NASA retiree and three crewmates from Hungary, India and Poland. The two-week mission is a first for the countries, who have never sent anyone to the ISS before.

And before you go, you might have heard President Trump pulling no punches yesterday when asked about Israel's decision to strike Iran shortly after the ceasefire took effect.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) they're doing. Do you understand that?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CORNISH: While he was also upset with Iran for reportedly firing back as well. Something Iran has denied.

Trump has since warned Israel not to attack Iran again while this fragile ceasefire remains intact for now. We're told the president gave a firm talking to to Israel, to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu, for his part, says President Trump expressed his immense appreciation for Israel, which achieved all of its goals.

The group chat is back.

I wanted to end here because this is kind of a rare moment of rebuke. I mean if you think about how the president talks about Russia and Ukraine, he clearly, when he wants, can hold his tongue.

Doug, can I start with you briefly, since you were there? This scolding, is it a significant kind of visual?

HEYE: It's a significant visual. But look, the two statements you read are not mutually exclusive, right? Both parties can agree on privately and disagree publicly on where they are. And I think ultimately Netanyahu is going to move forward with what he needs to do. He's a --

CORNISH: But is he not vulnerable in country?

HEYE: Right now?

CORNISH: Yes. HEYE: In -- in the very short term, no. In the medium term, absolutely. Again, last week started with talks of votes of no confidence. That's off the table for now. But that's a short timetable.

RUBIN: But, you know, to Doug's point, building on that. Look, if there were an election tomorrow, Donald Trump would win in Israel as prime minister.

CORNISH: He's very popular there.

RUBIN: He is the single most popular political figure there now. And he could easily push out Netanyahu if Bibi crosses him. And I think the prime minister understands that.

But, you know, this isn't really a lashing in a punitive way. This is a, don't embarrass me. I got a ceasefire. I backed you up, and you need to hold your horses. And I think that, broadly speaking, Israel is --

HEYE: Don't take away my Nobel Prize is what he's saying.

TALEV: Trump wants this to be one and done. And he does not want the dissent in his own party.

CORNISH: Yes.

TALEV: Remember, he ran on the idea of getting out of foreign wars. And this issue splits his base. Even if right now everyone is unified, there are a ton of people in the MAGA movement who really do not want to see the U.S. bombing other countries or getting involved in other wars. And if the ceasefire ends, it throws all that into uncertainty.

CORNISH: OK. I want to talk about what else you are keeping an eye on this week, what you're watching for. We've got so much going on, the NATO summit, the lawmakers talking about Iran. Can I start with you, Margaret?

TALEV: I'm going to bring it back home. As we look towards the July 4th holiday, any of you looking to buy or lease a car probably know that there have been $7,500, in theory, worth of tax credits available on new cars. That may all end with the big, beautiful bill. So, as we are watching the final negotiations happen, this could actually have a real implication for people looking at buying cars.

CORNISH: All right, Joel.

RUBIN: On the lines of what we're talking about, the war powers resolution, a potential vote in the Senate. Senator Kaine leading that. And I want to see the internal Democratic dynamics and Republican dynamics. I bet most Democrats will be unified in trying to prevent future escalation or attacks against Iran. Maybe Rand Paul will join as well. And nothing in the House. But this is really going to split the parties internally, this -- this kind of vote and military -- and action against Iran.

CORNISH: So, symbolic, but revealing?

RUBIN: Symbolic and extremely revealing about the path forward over the next year regarding Middle East policy for the Democrats.

CORNISH: OK, Doug.

HEYE: Back to cars.

CORNISH: Really?

HEYE: We're coming up on -- we're coming back on July 4th and there are going to be a lot of people on the highways. And what they're paying for gas is going to be a critical factor in how they're viewing things. We've seen prices fall just in the very short term with this ceasefire. But does that stay? We don't know. And I go back to, as we talk about Israel and all this, I go back to when bin Laden was caught. Big moment for Barack Obama. Big, tangible moment. Six weeks later, we were back on the economy.

CORNISH: Yes, it's an interesting moment. We were talking about the New York primary earlier. That ended up being kind of an economy race, right?

RUBIN: Yes.

CORNISH: With the -- with the person coming out ahead, talking about affordability and prices. And I think that's something that's not going away.

[07:00:01]

And what was interesting, to your point, Margaret, is that lawmakers have had cover with the Iran strikes, meaning they can deal with the big, beautiful bill and have those fights where we're not all focused on that. So, people are actually going to start to see the reality, right, of what's in the bill.

TALEV: Oh, and instant campaigning about Medicaid. Both sides will be messaging this. The messaging strategies on -- for both parties have already begun. And this thing isn't even out of the woods yet.

CORNISH: All right, you guys, thank you so much. We talked about a lot today. I appreciate you bringing your expertise to the chat.

Thank you for waking up with us. "CNN NEWS CENTRAL" starts right now.