Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump: U.S. Strikes On Iran A "Spectacular Military Success"; Trump Warns Iran Of Future Strikes If Peace Is Not Reached; Iran: U.S. Strikes On Nuclear Sites "Crossed A Very Big Red Line; Israel President Calls U.S. Strikes In Iran "A Decisive Moment"; MAGA World Divided After Trump Bombs Iran Nuclear Sites. Aired 11a-12p ET

Aired June 22, 2025 - 11:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN Breaking News.

[11:00:48]

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning. Welcome to a special edition of "Inside Politics Sunday." I'm Manu Raju in Washington.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Wolf Blitzer in New York.

We're following historic breaking news this morning after the United States carried out an attack last night on three, three Iranian nuclear facilities.

RAJU: The Pentagon's top general said just a short while ago that all three sites suffered, quote, extremely severe damage and destruction. A full review would take more time.

The Defense -- Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters that this was a targeted operation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: This mission was not and has not been about regime change. The President authorized a precision operation to neutralize the threats to our national interests posed by the Iranian nuclear program.

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

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: President Trump called the strikes a "spectacular military success." That's a direct quote. And warned that the U.S. could go after additional targets if, if Iran doesn't make peace and doesn't make peace quickly.

Meanwhile, Iran is accusing the United States of beginning what it's calling a dangerous war and violating international law, saying, and I'm quoting now, we have to respond. Our correspondents are covering the story every step of the way. CNN's Jeff Zeleny is joining us over at the White House. He's got the very latest.

I want to start, though, with CNN's chief international correspondent Clarissa Ward. She's joining us live from Tel Aviv right now.

Clarissa, President Trump said Iran's nuclear sites were completely and totally obliterated, his words.

What do we know about whether that's true?

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, perhaps unsurprisingly, Wolf, Israeli officials here are very pleased that President Trump went ahead with these strikes against Iran's main nuclear facilities. But they are also now preparing for the worst in terms of what could be to come, the home front command after easing restrictions here in Israel has reinstated those protective measures to the highest levels, no schools, no gatherings. Basically saying that people should avoid leaving the house even unless they really need to.

The day here began early with a large barrage of Iranian ballistic missiles. We could hear them. Some -- certainly some impacts, particularly in one neighborhood north of Tel Aviv. About 20 people lightly injured because Israelis have now gotten into a routine here with this early warning system.

But still, the specter also for Americans who are stranded here, who were supposed to be evacuated from here, that they are now left with little options. Those evacuations that were supposed to happen today have been postponed because of the situation.

They are desperately trying to leave the country, and they're concerned about the ramifications across the region for Americans.

Needless to say, Iran's state media has made it very clear that there will be a response for this, that U.S. military bases across the region are particularly vulnerable.

I spoke to one former U.S. official in the region who said that Iraq, particularly, is an area of concern and focus.

Our viewers may remember that after the killing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps leader, Qasem Soleimani, there was a large ballistic missile attack on Al-Asad Airbase in Anbar Province. So really now the focus on trying to ensure that those bases are prepared for any kind of an attack.

Also, diplomatic staff in Iraq, some 500 of them have now departed as people wait and watch to see how Iran will choose to retaliate, Wolf.

BLITZER: And I -- I spoke to a source in Tel Aviv, not far from where you are over there right now, Clarissa, who told me in Ramat Aviv, just outside of Tel Aviv, Iranian missiles managed to reach some targets there. What do we know about potential damage? WARD: Well, the damage we have seen is significant, Wolf, in terms of the structural damage. These are enormous weapons. They are capable of taking out multiple buildings. Our Jeremy Diamond and Nic Robertson were on the scene earlier.

[11:05:10]

This is an area there's a shopping mall nearby. There's a nursing home nearby. But many of these facilities have been evacuated because of the -- the situation here right now.

And as I mentioned, Israelis know the minute they get that alert, they head to a shelter. And so as a result, even though we're seeing a huge amount of structural damage and that's significant, we're not seeing the types of casualties that would commonly be associated with missile strikes of this intensity, Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes. Those images, those pictures are really devastating. The destruction there, it's really, really devastating.

Clarissa Ward in Tel Aviv, we'll stay in close touch with you. You stay safe. Thank you very, very much.

I also want to bring in CNN's chief national affairs correspondent Jeff Zeleny. He's joining us now live from the White House. What can you tell us, Jeff, about how President Trump arrived at this historic, very important decision?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, it was an extraordinary turn of events. We'll remember on Thursday when the president said he will make a decision within two weeks' time. The decision and the action came in two days' time. And it was a variety of meetings behind the scenes, of course, being briefed as well.

But I'm told that one central theme here, the president seized an opportunity when Iran was at its most vulnerable state. Of course, after nearly a week of bombardment by Israel, the president, the U.S. president to realize that he would have the opportunity he believed that many of his predecessors did not have. And that was the ability to fly into Iran undetected.

We heard an extraordinary briefing a short time ago from the Pentagon really going through all the details of Operation Midnight Hammer. And it was the fact that the U.S. B2s were not detected at all as they were flying into to deliver the -- the hammer, if you will, on the nuclear sites there.

But now the White House is on high alert for the potential retaliation, even as though the president spoke here late last night, warning Iran against retaliating.

Certainly, U.S. officials know that is a possibility. So, that is one thing that's happening at this moment.

But we are not expected to hear from the president. He has not spoken yet today, but the officials are working behind the scenes here to avoid any types of a -- of a retaliation.

But Vice President JD Vance said this morning, the U.S. is not at war with Iran, or at war with Iran's nuclear program.

The question is, is there a distinction without a difference in that statement in the eyes of Iran? Wolf?

BLITZER: Yes. It doesn't sound like there's a distinction at all.

Jeff Zeleny reporting from the White House. Thank you very, very much. Manu.

RAJU: Here with us now is our excellent panel to discuss all of this. David Sanger with "The New York Times." Seung Min Kim with "The Associated Press." And CNN global affairs analyst, Kim Dozier. Good morning, guys, or Good afternoon. Nice to -- it's morning still 11 o'clock. It's been a long 24 hours, as we all know.

David, you reported about all everything that was going down, the aftermath of last night. In your analysis, you say, Trump takes a huge gamble by this move. It is a huge gamble because it comes with massive implications.

What are those implications? And what went behind the -- the decision- making process to launch this strike now?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICS AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: So, the first part of the gamble, he won. Tactically, this was clearly a success. You heard from the Pentagon. I know they got in and out without a shot being fired at them. They dropped their ordnance right where they want to drop it.

You know, we're not in a situation where they lost an airplane or had a crew taken hostage or something like that. That's great.

Now the hard part. OK? And the hard part for this is, one, making sure that you can contain the retaliation. You heard a little bit about that just now.

Second, making sure that you've actually accomplished the goal here, because the goal was not just to fly all these airplanes in, all that, it was actually to set back the nuclear program.

And the history over 20 years of the U.S. and the Iranian nuclear program has just been efforts to delay their march to a bomb (ph). So, we tried with a diplomatic agreement. It's tried -- what we tried with sanctions. So we tried with the Stuxnet cyber-attack. It's what were -- what the Israelis tried with sabotage and assassination. And now, we're trying outright bombing.

But as you heard, you know, we think Natanz has been hit, was hit probably out of operation before they hit it. We have no idea what the inside of Fordow looks like. I'm sure it's not pretty, but we don't know how shut down it was, what was moved out.

And the biggest mystery of all is Isfahan. The one people talk least about. That's where they were storing, two weeks ago, the fuel that you could turn into a nuclear weapon. And presumably they moved it, but we don't know that for a fact.

[11:10:05]

RAJU: Yes. What are you hearing from -- from your sources about whether or not this had the intended impact that the administration says, that it would significantly set back their nuclear program, but because as David said, the ambition is still going to be there. They're still going to want to build a nuclear weapon based on past history.

KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, we have satellite videos that have come out showing what look like tunnels into one ridge where the Fordow facility was.

But we also have satellite photos from the past few days showing a large number of trucks pulling up to Fordow and pulling away with goodness knows what's in them. So, to me, it shows that no matter what kind of damage this strike did, Iran retains the intent to rebuild its nuclear program.

And what we really have to watch now is the Iranian foreign ministers trip to Russia because I think what this is going to do is drive Iran, Russia, North Korea, China closer together.

And if Russia guarantees Iran, hey, we're going to help you rebuild that program. And, hey, hold on your response. Let's humiliate the Americans another way at the U.N., et cetera, I think all of that will have a lot of bearing on what comes next.

RAJU: And what comes next will be in the eyes of Iran, how they viewed this attack, whether they're worried about the threats from the administration that they will -- they'll be with U.S. retaliation if they go after U.S. assets in the region.

This is how Vice President Vance this morning described this attack and why he said this had to happen now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: We're not at war with Iran. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program.

We had a narrow window of opportunity. We might not have been able to carry out this attack six months down the road, it would have been irresponsible, I think, for the president not to take the action that he did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: What are you hearing about what went behind the scenes in the White House? And -- and what do you make of that argument that Vance is making right now?

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think we had known publicly from the president that he had been growing very impatient. I mean, we had heard several times over the last several days that, look, Iran had 60 days of potential diplomacy that they could have come to the table, done something to eliminate or to -- to curb their nuclear program. And in the words of President Trump, they did not. And he had been, you know, making these threats clear at least for several days.

And as Jeff noted earlier on Thursday, the White House said, action will come within two weeks. Now, obviously came a lot earlier within two days.

And now, I think it's just really whether, first of all, looking at the substantive fallout, whether Iran does strike the U.S. assets in the region or what kind of global consequences there are from that, but also the political fallout.

I mean, we have been talking for several days now about what his true believers, the America first supporters, the MAGA -- you know, the MAGA faithful, how they would react to any sort of military action on Iran because no issue splits that coalition more than foreign policy.

I know there's some who think that President Trump's sheer political power could bring a lot of those people on board with the -- to politically support the -- to attack.

But I think the administration still has a lot of work to do in making -- making their case to them and to the American people why this attack was needed.

RAJU: And one of the things they're trying to say that there's -- we heard from Vice President Vance right there is that this is a limited mission in sculpt. This is limited. And you -- you actually reported about some of this too. They're trying to compare this to the Bin Laden.

SANGER: Yes. They want to -- they want to --

RAJU: Can -- can this be a limited mission?

SANGER: Well, the comparison to Bin Laden is a little bit flawed. First of all, Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda killed 3,000 Americans and they were going after him in retaliation. The Iranians have threatened, you know, we believe they are headed toward a nuclear weapon and actually built one yet. So it's -- it's not a great -- great comparison.

The reason they like the Bin Laden comparison is that it was sort of a one and done. Everybody understood it and went back, right?

I don't think anybody believes the Iranians are not going to retaliate. It may be on the bases, as you've heard. It may be in terrorism. It may be cyber-attacks on our financial system or something like that.

And it may be that they take the facilities that still exist, the ones that they've been digging down deep in recent times that have not been hit. And they come to the determination that if there's one lesson from last night, it's that they need a nuclear arsenal because no one's messing with North Korea, right?

RAJU: Yes.

SANGER: After it got 60.

RAJU: Right. That's --

SANGER: And the North Koreans were, 15 years ago, where the Iranians are today.

RAJU: Yes. It's clear. We don't know exactly now where their story goes next, but huge consequences ahead.

And when we come back, Colonel Cedric Leighton will join me at the Magic Wall to break down what we're learning about the success of this mission.

[11:15:05]

Plus, he says Trump strikes were unconstitutional. I'll go one-on-one with one of president's big -- one of President Trump's biggest Republican critics, and that's Congressman Thomas Massie. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: We just got brand-new details about Operation Midnight Hammer from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Now here with me at the Magic Wall to break this all down and for about what we know is return -- retired Colonel Cedric Leighton. Colonel, thank you so much for being here.

Take us through this mission, because it had been in the planning for quite some time.

[11:20:59]

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: It really has, Manu. And this is the graphic that the DOD provided us with this.

So they started -- they -- they've been planning this for, in some ways, for over a year. And in other ways, they've been doing exercises that kind of did the same thing for up to two or more years.

RAJU: A lot.

LEIGHTON: But the key thing is this, the actual operational planning really started a few weeks ago once the direction came from the president to do this kind of thing.

So, when they left Whiteman Air Force Base, they did it basically right after midnight on the 21st of June. And then they came through and struck the targets in Iran about 18 hours later, 18 hours and 19 hours later. And they hit the three sites that we've been talking about before. These are the ones that, of course, have become famous now, Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

And these are the ones that, of course, not only because they've been in the news, but because of what they had, became important from an operational perspective to actually eliminate. And that's why they had the kind of payload that they did on the B2s.

RAJU: And there's been a lot of discussion about the Fordow facility in particular. And the Pentagon says they've obliterated Iran's nuclear capabilities.

But Fordow, in particular, how hard is that to penetrate?

LEIGHTON: So take a look at this right here, Manu. When you see the security perimeter right here, and then in just a second, we'll get some more details here because you've got to the support building and tunnel entrances. This is way deep underground, almost 300 feet underground.

So when you look at the layout of this, you've got those tunnel entrances that I talked about, that support building. And this mountain covers the centrifuges. The centrifuges are the key part to them doing what they need to do to, in essence, enhance the uranium to get it to the level that they need.

So, when you look at what this looked like before June 20th, this is what the fuel enrichment facility looked like from a satellite view.

Now, take a look at what happened here. Every single thing that you see here has been actually changed a bit.

When you look at this, the June 20th slide, take a look at the facilities up here and over here. Now look, this is gone.

RAJU: Wow.

LEIGHTON: This right here is also gone. So, these are the kinds of things that happen.

And another thing that's really interesting about this, take a look -- this is that support building that we showed earlier. Everything looks intact. These are the tunnel entrances.

Now, let's take a look. When you go over here, you see that these tunnel entrances have -- have been damaged beyond repair. There's what appears to be smoke damage right here at the support building.

And then when you look here, see these things right -- right in this area, right here. These are penetration holes right where the bombs hit.

And when you look at -- there's actually a further one when you go this way, right up in this area, right -- right here, which shows that there are very key, precise impacts that they -- that they struck.

And the idea here was to get at the centrifuges and use it with multiple bombs so that they could go down deep enough to eliminate the possibility of them even enriching the uranium.

RAJU: And we'll see if they've done that, the Pentagon says this thorough evaluation is still ongoing.

And meantime, there's this concern, real concern about retaliation from the Iranians against U.S. assets in the region. There are a lot of them, tons, thousands of troops as well.

LEIGHTON: Yes. Basically, 40,000 troops throughout the Middle East, Manu, and especially concentrated in the Persian Gulf region. What's across the Persian Gulf? Iran itself.

So, that means that it's within missile ranges of not only the long- range missiles, obviously, but short-range missiles as well as the Iranians could easily lob into the areas such as the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Iraq.

So, those are the kinds of things that our forces have to worry about from a force protection standpoint. But each one of these areas really makes it very clear that every single one of our troops is definitely within range, but that doesn't mean that they can't defend themselves.

They will be able to defend themselves if the proper measures are taken, and if we have the right intelligence when it comes to Iranian intentions.

RAJU: Yes, that's everything that where U.S. is watching for right now, that next step that the Iranians may take.

Colonel Leighton, thank you so much for breaking this all down for us.

LEIGHTON: You bet, Manu.

Wolf, back to you.

BLITZER: All right, Manu.

Joined now by CNN national security analyst, Beth Sanner. Beth, thanks so much for joining us.

What kind of intelligence gathering is happening right now to ensure that the Pentagon's original assessment that had been made public, that these Iranian assets were obliterated, is actually accurate?

BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Right. So, there are going to be multiple different kinds of sensors and overhead imagery, as well as trying to maybe listen in on -- on what people are saying.

The Israelis have a human network of spies. So, all of these things will come together in the intelligence community. We call it all source intelligence. We're taking things in from everywhere we can to put together a picture of what happened inside that hall.

[11:25:00]

But in addition to that, everybody, at least all of us on the outside are asking the question, where is all of Iran's highly enriched uranium and their centrifuges? Can we say that with these three sites hit, that there aren't other -- that the HEU, the enriched uranium and the centrifuges, haven't been secreted away to covert facilities that I would say we would be crazy to think they didn't have? It was a double negative.

BLITZER: The U.S., as you know, Beth, is now in a heightened state of alert in the region for possible retaliation. How is the U.S. intelligence community now monitoring any potential Iranian-related threats?

SANNER: Well, a couple of different ways. Again, looking at all the groups that are very well known that have been tracked over many years, because they have attacked U.S. troops throughout the region for, you know, a long time.

And we are also, I'm sure, working with our liaison partners in these countries. For example, the Iraqis have been fantastic partners. They don't like to talk about it, of course, and we don't either.

But, you know, obviously you need to work with the governments to help ensure that U.S. troops are not attacked. And we will be holding some of these countries accountable as well for doing what they can to keep the lid on these militia groups in their countries.

So, we will be working with our partners and then also independently to be tracking all of this heightened alert.

BLITZER: Still a very, very dangerous situation, indeed. All right. Beth Sanner, thanks so much for joining us.

SANNER: Thank you.

BLITZER: And coming up, do President Trump's military strikes risk alienating his own America first allies here at home? We have much more coming up right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:31:18]

BLITZER: We're learning more about last night's strikes against three Iranian nuclear sites. Joining us now is CNN's Jerusalem Correspondent, Jeremy Diamond. He's in Tel Aviv for us at the scene of an Iranian strike earlier this morning.

Jeremy, I take it you're in Ramat Aviv, which has always been a relatively high-end part of Tel Aviv.

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, that's exactly right, Wolf. And this is also where one of those Iranian ballistic missiles struck around 7 a.m. this morning. People fled into their bomb shelters, and very shortly thereafter, the impact happened.

You can see right behind me some of the destruction of this scene. These are two residential buildings, one across from the other. You can see some of it has been just completely destroyed by the power of this blast.

People are now down there trying to recover what personal belongings they can at this stage. And we've watched rescue workers coming in and out, but the question now for so many people as they try and pick up the pieces here, take what personal belongings they can from their homes, is to know, you know, what more will come in terms of that Iranian retaliation.

We know that the Israeli people now, they are not going to schools, they are not going to workplaces, as they brace for what could be much worse than just a barrage of 20 missiles that we saw this morning that already wrought this extremely significant destruction.

And so Israelis here, Wolf, I can tell you, are bracing for what may come, and a lot of uncertainty about what that will look like.

Wolf?

BLITZER: Yeah, those pictures are devastating indeed. All right, Jeremy Diamond in Ramat Aviv in Tel Aviv for us. Thanks very much for that update.

Manu, back to you.

RAJU: Thanks, Wolf. President Trump's own party is divided this morning on his support for his strikes, drawing some harsh rebukes from even some MAGA-minded Republicans.

My excellent panel is back.

So, just to look at a review of the reaction from overnight, you had some of the more conservative members of the House GOP, Congressman Warren Davidson, Thomas Massie, who we're going to speak to next, questioning the constitutionality of this move. Marjorie Taylor Greene, even a longtime Trump, perhaps one of his biggest defenders, said that every time America's on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war.

But then you see the real divide in the GOP. Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, Mitch McConnell, no fan of Donald Trump, the former Senate GOP leader, supporting what happened here. John Thune, the current Senate GOP leader, Lindsey Graham calling it the right call, really exemplifies the split within the GOP right now.

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right, right. I know there was some thinking. Steve Bannon was one of the people too, and others as well, who are arguing that if the president did go ahead and make the decision to strike Iran, that he would be able to rally most of the party behind him because he is the one who defines America first.

I mean, that phrase comes from President Trump himself and sort of he kind of defines what that foreign policy means. But I think the reaction that we're seeing right now shows that's not necessarily the case. The fact that Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is probably his most ardent supporter on Capitol Hill, is not on board, has not been on board. Remember, we saw that she was talking about how she was saying I side with Tucker Carlson on this when there was that Tucker versus Donald Trump, you know, debate, if you will. That shows that he has not yet bring those skeptics on board with his action just yet.

RAJU: Part of the divide is about notifying Congress ahead of time or getting approval, really explicit approval, from Congress ahead of time. But presidents routinely ignore that notification requirement when it comes to engaging in strikes overseas.

KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Yeah, they make the argument that this was an imminent threat. And as you heard Secretary of Defense Hegseth say this morning, they notified Congress within moments of the strike. They will make the argument that they couldn't let Congress know because Congress is leaky and they couldn't endanger U.S. forces going into danger by letting someone leak it out. The same sort of reason that was given for keeping notification to such a small group of people for the Osama bin Laden raid.

[11:35:28]

RAJU: Right. And we'll see how Republicans react. Before you jump in, David, the -- how does the public view what's happening here? This is a poll that was taken before the strikes happened overnight from the "Washington Post," just a few days ago. The support of U.S. airstrike on Iran, 45% of the American public were opposed. There are a significant amount who are unsure, 30%, but just a quarter of the people polled here supported that idea.

And then you look at the breakdown by party. Just 47% of Republicans were in support of this idea and just 20% of independents. That 47% number is somewhat surprising because Republicans tend to agree overwhelmingly with Donald Trump. What is your take away from that?

DAVID SANGER, WHITE HOUSE & NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: The number that jumped out at me there was only 9% of Democrats were in support.

RAJU: Yeah.

SANGER: I wonder how the Democrats would have viewed it if in 1994, when Bill Clinton came this close to doing a very similar strike on North Korea when they pulled out of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and began racing for a bomb, whether or not they would have supported it then. And it was interesting, the other day, Rahm Emanuel was on CNN. He said he sort of regretted that debate. He wished they had acted given -- given what happened.

If President Obama had been in office, how would they have felt about that had the nuclear negotiations with Iran fallen apart? And they came very close on several occasions.

Look, the fact of the matter is, since World War II, presidents have not gone for a war declaration. What they have said is, this is my constitutional duty as commander-in-chief. I'm acting as a one-and- done to go in. And then, of course, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, it got more complicated. I suspect that this concern that the Republicans have will go away if the president is successful in keeping us from having to do repeated attacks.

RAJU: And if he has to.

SANGER: Right. And if he has to, he's in new territory.

RAJU: Yeah, no question about it.

All right, coming up next, he's a Republican who suggested Trump's strikes against Iran were an act of war. I'll go one-on-one with GOP Congressman Thomas Massie on why he opposes Trump's strikes. That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:42:15]

RAJU: Welcome back to a special edition of INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. President Trump is facing some new blowback this morning from members of his own party who say that the president did not have the authority to attack Iran without congressional consent.

Joining me now is GOP Congressman, Thomas Massie.

Mr. Massie, thank you for joining me this morning. Really appreciate it. The Vice President said this morning that it would have been, quote, "irresponsible for the United States not to act immediately." And there was a, quote, "narrow opportunity to attack now to significantly set back Iran's nuclear program."

So, what do you say to him?

REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): Well, I would say go back and look at the first Iraq war where the president came to Congress and we debated and voted before they waged war. Look at the war in Afghanistan, same thing, the second Iraq war. And even you can look at 2013 when President Obama wanted to get us involved in a war in Syria and he said he would put it up to Congress.

And I was here for that one and Congress said, no, thanks, we didn't even vote on it. And so we didn't go to war in Syria. And the notion that this isn't an act of war, I find ludicrous. This is a hot war. There are two nations, Israel and Iran, trading volleys of missiles every night, every day. And we're a co-belligerent now in this war.

RAJU: I mean, the Vice President went on to say that they needed to act now because there was a narrow window. And if they waited, it could have been too late. It needed to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Do you not share that concern?

MASSIE: No, I don't share that concern. I'm also, but I have another concern. And that is that three bombings to neutralize Iran may turn out to be the 2025 version of two weeks to slow the spread.

This could turn into a protracted, prolonged engagement. And I'm here to represent the, you know, the base of the MAGA party that got Trump elected. Most of us were tired of the wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. And we were promised that we wouldn't be engaging in another one. Yet here we see this happening. And there's a, you know, the President and the administration say, "Oh, we're done. We've had our little bombing and now this is over."

But what happens if this drags on between Israel and Tel Aviv gets pummeled by Iran? Is President Trump going to say we're going to sit by and not do anything in that instance? I just -- I'm leery of this given everything that's happened before.

RAJU: Let's talk about how the Speaker of the House has handled this military escalation. The Speaker said that Trump, quote, "Evaluated the imminent danger and that outweighed the time it would take for Congress to act."

But one of your former colleagues, Justin Amash, wrote on X that Johnson should, quote, "step down or be immediately removed" because he has completely abrogated his and Congress' responsibilities under the Constitution.

[11:45:09]

Do you agree with Mr. Amash's assessment that the Speaker should be removed or step down?

MASSIE: Well, I think there's a conundrum there with the Speaker's assertion that there was an imminent threat. If there was an imminent threat, he should not call us back from our recess. We were on recess last week and I went to special effort to offer a war powers resolution while everybody was on vacation.

I was able to put it in the hopper during a pro forma session. But in reality, if Speaker Johnson thought that America was in danger imminently, he should have brought us all back to Congress. Yet he did not.

RAJU: But should he be removed or should he step down, in your opinion?

MASSIE: I'm not a fan of the Speaker, but I will tell you this. I think he's the Speaker as long as Trump wants him to be the Speaker.

RAJU: Yeah.

MASSIE: If Trump gets tired of Speaker Johnson, he better clean out his desk because that's -- that's how he's Speaker. He's just hanging on by doing whatever Trump wants. And in this case, it's an abrogation of our responsibility to debate matters of war. That's what Trump wants and that's what Mike Johnson gave him. That is wrong.

And by the way, whether you agree with my war powers resolution that I co-introduced with Ro Khanna, a Democrat. By the way, we're up to 50 co-sponsors now. Whether you agree with it or not, surely you agree or your listeners agree that the Constitution requires Congress to weigh in on this. There's some argument that, oh, there was an imminent threat so the president can act for 60 days without a vote of Congress.

But here's the reality, after 60 days, he has to stop unless there is a vote. So at some point, Manu, I think we're going to be able to force a vote unless Speaker Johnson pulls some shenanigans with the Rules Committee.

RAJU: Yeah. I wonder, you mentioned the politics of this. You mentioned about the MAGA base. And I want to talk to you about that because given Trump, he campaigned on ending U.S. involvement in foreign wars. We've heard some criticisms from the likes of Tucker Carlson and the like that it would amount to a middle finger to voters who thought Trump would put America first if the U.S. did in fact strike Iran. So do you think that this move by the president could alienate him from the base?

MASSIE: Well, he doesn't have to run for reelection, but it will, I think, fragment our party, this action that he's taken. And it's going to hurt us in the midterms. We could lose the majority over this one issue and, you know, because people become disillusioned, disaffected, apathetic and don't show up to vote.

And then the Democrats get in the majority and end up impeaching him again. I think this was a bad move politically, but it's also just a bad move legally and constitutionally and policy-wise.

RAJU: And yes or no, did he break Trump -- did he break a campaign promise on this?

MASSIE: Absolutely, he broke a campaign promise. And there are a lot of -- the base will say that, although not too many of my Republican colleagues will say that. They're frankly afraid of him, and they're also afraid of the Israel lobby in Congress that's given millions and millions of dollars to so many of my colleagues.

RAJU: All right, Mr. Massie, we're going to have to leave it there. Thank you so much for joining me and sharing your perspective. Really appreciate it.

MASSIE: Thanks, Manu.

RAJU: Thank you.

And what do Trump's strikes against Iran overseas mean for Americans here at home? How U.S. officials are preparing for what could come next. That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:53:14]

BLITZER: Federal officials are warning about the potential retaliation from Iran in the wake of the U.S. attack on three Iranian nuclear facilities. This morning, Iran's Foreign Minister warned that they have to respond, and the U.S., quote, "crossed a very big red line," end quote. Joining us now, CNN's Homeland Security Analyst, Juliette Kayyem.

Juliette, thanks so much for joining us. What do you think? What are Homeland Security officials doing right now under this heightened alert? How concerned are they?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: They are concerned. We are hearing that there's going to be more focus on the domestic intelligence side of potential Iranian sleeper cells. We don't know to what extent they are formed and ready to activate, but it is something worth watching.

We've talked a lot about the denigration of Iran's capabilities to launch major attacks in the United States, what happened to Hezbollah in Syria. But nonetheless, it's -- those capabilities have not been eliminated. I think there's going to be a focus on the potential homeland security threat, different than a threat against U.S. interests abroad, and that will include internal investigations as well as, of course, a focus on border crossings.

BLITZER: President Trump's former Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, is warning that the attack could have Iran activate what are called sleeper cells. Is that the biggest concern for potential retaliation from Iran?

KAYYEM: I think it's the biggest homeland security concern, but I don't think it's the most likely scenario. From Iran's perspective, going after U.S. interests abroad is going to be easier. We have lots of troops there. We have lots of U.S. interests abroad, including in the Strait of Hormuz. So -- so, it's going to be easier for them to launch attacks.

[11:55:02]

But we would be silly and naive to think that Iran had not thought through day two planning. They knew that this was coming either from Israel or us. And so those sleeper cells, which may have been followed for some time, they may have gone dark, that is the kind of thing that a very aggressive FBI is going to have to look after now.

And a homeland security department, which has been really focused on ICE enforcement, is going to have to shift gears and focus on both cyber potential attacks or, of course, physical attacks here. Whether they have the capacity or the manpower now, we don't know. But if they're looking to the concerns here in the homeland, that's what they're going to need to do at the Department of Homeland Security.

BLITZER: Juliette Kayyem, as always, thank you very much for joining us.

KAYYEM: Thank you.

BLITZER: And much more continuing coverage of all the breaking news on the U.S. strikes against Iran. That's coming next on State of the Union. Today with Kasie Hunt filling in.

I'll be back for special coverage of all of this at 2 p.m. Eastern later today. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)