Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump: U.S. Strikes "Totally Obliterated" Iranian Nuclear Program; Big Win For Trump As NATO Nations Agree To Hike Defense Spending; Zohran Mamdani Poised To Win NY Democratic Mayoral Primary; National Democrats Grapple With What Mamdani's Shock Win Means. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired June 25, 2025 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Today on Inside Politics, battle damage assessment. President Trump insists the U.S. strikes on Iran, quote, obliterated the regime's nuclear capabilities. But even has he tries to make that a headline and a reality, he also conceded that it may be too early to really know how much was destroyed

Plus, a Gotham groundswell. A 33-year-old Democratic Socialist toppled a former governor, not to mention many in the Democratic establishment. Is the New York mayoral contest, a one-off upset, or a blueprint for progressives moving forward. And quote, I am not anybody's henchman. The president nominated his former personal lawyer and enforcer for a seat on the federal bench. We're tracking a key Senate hearing as he tries to convince senators, he can be fair and impartial on the bench.

I'm Dana Bash. Let's go behind the headlines at Inside Politics.

President Trump is now heading back here to Washington after a whirlwind 24 hours on the world stage. He persuaded NATO leaders to boost their defense spending and used the NATO summit to tout his role in brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, even while admitting to reporters that the fighting could, quote, maybe start again soon.

But it was the unprecedented U.S. strikes on three nuclear sites inside Iran that dominated the president's news conference, which wrapped up little more than an hour ago. My colleague Kaitlan Collins, asked about the early intelligence assessment that questioned whether the attack was as successful as President Trump claims.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Who decided Israeli intelligence on these attacks? Earlier, you said, U.S. intelligence was inconclusive. Are you relying on Israeli intelligence for your assessment of the impact of strikes?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: No. This is also Iran made the statement, and it's also if you read the document that was given that he can talk about, if you'd like. The document said it could be very severe damage, but they didn't take that. They said it could be limited or it could be very severe. They really didn't know.

Since then, we've collected additional intelligence. We've also spoken to people who have seen the site and the site -- the site is obliterated, and we think everything nuclear is down there. They didn't take it out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: I want to bring in CNN's Anderson Cooper, who is live in Tel Aviv. Anderson, I've been speaking to intelligence officials, people who have been looking at intelligence of all kinds for years and years. And what they say is that with this kind of attack, it is simply way too early to really know what it is that the U.S. got and that the U.S. did not get. What are you hearing inside Israel from sources there?

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Yeah. I mean, Dana, this is what the chairman of the joint chiefs said on Sunday, that essentially this -- it is too soon to come out with a full assessment of the damage that was done. All of this is because the president initially came out and said, you know, it was completely obliterated.

That language has been echoed by his secretary of defense and others -- the White House spokesperson, but military personnel, the chairman of the joint chiefs has said, sensibly, it takes time, essentially, and that is accurate. It takes time to get proper battlefield damage assessments.

Some have described them as an art more than a science. People look at it. Different agencies look at it. What came out yesterday was an early Defense Intelligence Agency assessment. Later on, Defense Secretary Hegseth said, it's a low confidence assessment. And if that's the case, then it's a low confidence assessment that and it was leaked out by people for whatever motivation.

It is too early to know, frankly, and it's obvious that, you know, this is kind of getting ripped up. I think, in trying to prove the president right, people in the administration are, but they're using the word totally obliterated. In reality, it's just going to take time.

[12:05:00]

BASH: That's exactly right, which, of course, our reporting was extremely clear that it was one intelligent report, and it was very, very preliminary. Let's look ahead to what happens next, and President Trump, at that press conference, says he doesn't care if Iran makes a deal now. But that the U.S. will be talking to Iran next. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're going to talk to them next week, with Iran. We may sign an agreement. I don't know. To me, I don't think it's necessary. I mean, they had a war, they fought. Now they're going back to their world. I don't care if I have an agreement or not. We -- the only thing would be asking for is what we were asking for before, about we want no nuclear, but we destroyed the nuclear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Now, Anderson, I don't need to tell you that the whole notion of U.S. negotiations with Iran never sat well with Israel's leadership in the first place. What about now that we have seen this war that went on between Israel and Iran, and of course, what the U.S. did with Iran's nuclear sites on Sunday?

COOPER: You know, I think it's a hard -- it's hard to parse the president's statement there. I know Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who's also the National Security Adviser, and I think, also head of USAID now, said that they will be, you know, wanting to meet, but only directly with Iran. They want negotiations between directly the U.S. and Iran, that has not been the case in prior years. Not sure that's something that will happen.

It's very interesting to hear the president say, essentially, he doesn't really care so much about a deal anything, no matter what happens here, even if fighting continues, there ultimately has to be some sort of a deal in which Iran allows IAEA inspectors or somebody to look at their nuclear sites to monitor their nuclear capabilities.

The president there had said, and he now believes, and he has continually said he believed, all the Iranian (Ph) was not moved out of any of those facilities. I'm not sure anybody actually really knows that for sure. I'm quite sure nobody knows that for sure.

There seems to be some -- we saw some images that might indicate there were trucks outside one facility. Whether the material was loaded away, we don't know. But again, all of that takes time, and no matter what there will ultimately has to be some sort of direct -- some sort of conversation with Iran about the future of their nuclear program.

BASH: Yeah. And how those talks take shape will be really interesting. You mentioned all of the jobs that Marco Rubio has. Think the only person on the planet who has more jobs than Marco Rubio is you, Anderson Cooper, and now that includes stellar reporter from the middle east. Thank you so much for being here. We'll talk to you later in the show, Anderson.

And I'm joined by a terrific group of reporters here at the table. CNN's Phil Mattingly, Akayla Gardner of Bloomberg, CNN's Jamie Gangel and CNN's David Chalian. What a morning everybody. Jamie, what are you hearing from your sources about where things stand right now in terms of how to assess the U.S. strike, but much, I wouldn't say, more importantly, as important what happens now?

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: So, first of all, one of the things that's important. Here is the context of long-term policy. What Anderson said is 1,000 percent true. And a lot of it has to do with the words that are being used. President Trump does not like being contradicted and his words completely and totally obliterated. Don't match up with, as Anderson said, this very early preliminary assessment.

A very senior intelligence official once said to me, low confidence, we joke around is no confidence. That doesn't mean that the DIA assessment is incorrect. We just don't know yet. So, I think the real question here that both my military sources and intelligence sources have said this morning is, we don't know what we don't know yet, and where is this going forward including, no matter how much damage was done. A former senior White House official once said to me, you cannot bomb knowledge. So, if this is put back months, years, still, what is the long-term goal here?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR & WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: I just think I'm amazed over these last couple days. It feels like talking past each other, two totally different conversations, right? President Trump is on a political project to declare his bold move that was executed quite well by the military, a success for him. And, you know, put a label on it, 12-day war, tie a bow around it, put it to the side.

[12:10:00]

That's what he's doing with totally obliterated. That is totally separate and distinct. That's not an actual assessment from Donald Trump about intelligence, right? That's different from --

BASH: Branding.

CHALIAN: -- right. That's what I'm saying, he's having some political branding conversation over here. And over here, we are trying to report out what the American government is actually assessing to be the real-world facts on the ground of what happened, and that that is going to be an evolving assessment as more and more intelligence comes in.

You heard the president today in the Netherlands, talk about that he has now seen more intelligence. Talk to some people who have been able to be on the ground and visit there. I'm sure that's going to feed into future intelligence assessments. That's all still being developed, the actual fact.

BASH: And it's going to take a long time for that to happen. I was talking to somebody who was reminding me that they might -- they probably -- they can't do it from satellite imagery. They might not be able to do it from capturing signals, because the Iranians could be, you know, trying to do a bait and switch. It's going to be some time, and there will be a lot of technical data to go through.

Having said all of that, CNN first reported a preliminary, early assessment by one intelligence agency, the DIA. And you see the exclusive reporting there on the screen, and that did not sit well with the president, who jumped on a few reporters during his press conference, including our friend Kelly O'Donnell at NBC, who was asking questions about that single initial assessment. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: And you know, you should be proud, you, especially you should be proud of those pilots, and you shouldn't be trying to demean them. Those pilots flew were at great risk, big chance that they'd never come back home and see their husbands or their wives.

Let me just tell you, you and NBC fake news, which is one of the worst, and CNN New York Times, they're all bad. They're sick. There's something wrong with them. But you know what, you should be praising those people, instead of trying to find something -- by getting me, by trying to go and get me, you're hurting those people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Now, we wanted to play that for a couple of reasons. Number one, because Kelly O'Donnell did a great job, trying to get information out of the president in the face of sort of some personal attacks on her and the rest of us. But much more importantly, this was not anything to do with the U.S. military or their abilities, or their, you know, patriotism, anything at all. This was a report on an initial assessment by one intelligence agency full stop.

And as you said, the president didn't like it, but it has nothing to do with the men and women of the U.S. military. And that was a tell the fact that he keeps harping on that and is trying to manipulate the conversation to make it like the reporters who are reporting on something that part of the U.S. government is trying to figure out has to do with not liking the military, which is just ridiculous on its face.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, it's conflation for political gain or political advantage. I don't think there's any question about that. I think what's important to note, this actually kind of drives into something I've been thinking a lot about, which is the parallel conversations, or cross cutting conversations David was talking about.

Plus, this element that the president and his team continually bring up, even though it is not in any of the reporting of the assessment itself, are not in and of themselves, mutually exclusive pieces of debate, right? The president could have had a very successful strike and made a very strong stand that will probably define or help define his foreign policy for the next three and a half years. His willingness to make that call. That can be true.

It can also be true that that strike did not accomplish the level of success that he has proclaimed. It can also be true that the pilots that carried out the strike and the military operation that was put into place was incredibly successful. And I think by all accounts, for those of us who have been covering this for many years, was about as good and went as well as it could possibly go. Those things can all be true at the same time.

And I think what that obscures is the fact that the reason why these questions are important. The reason why understanding these assessments early, low confidence, whatever they are as they evolve going forward, is there are critical next steps here that are going to involve decision making by the president, by the Israelis, by the Iranians, that will dictate whether or not U.S. forces have to get involved again. What the actual military conflict is going forward, whether the ceasefire can hold, whether Iran still has some capability left, which it seems like they do, and we don't really know what that means yet.

BASH: And I don't want to lose sight of the up until this press conference and the intelligence reports aside, the kind of atmosphere at this NATO summit in and around this topic. Just listen to one exchange that the president had and the flattery that was bestowed on him.

[12:15:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: They had a big fight, like two kids in a school yard. You know, they fight like hell. You can't stop him. Let them fight for about two, three minutes. Then it's easy to stop him.

MARK RUTTE, SECRETARY GENERAL OF NATO: And then daddy has to sometimes use strong language

TRUMP: We have to use strong language. Everyone said, well, you have to use a certain word.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Akayla?

AKAYLA GARDNER, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, BLOOMBERG NEWS: I couldn't totally hear that exchange.

BASH: It was, who's your daddy --

(CROSSTALK)

GARDNER: President Trump went into this summit with NATO allies, really wondering if he was going to commit to Article 5, whether he was going to commit to even 5 percent spending, which he floated himself on the campaign trail. And I think he's leaving with the win for at least Mark Ruda. He wanted to secure those things, but the president still left the door open in the future, potentially to not keep those commitments, but it seems, at least for now, that this charm offensive worked.

In some regards, he's committing to both of those things, leaving the summit. But at the same time, President Trump has these deeply held beliefs that the U.S. has been treated unfairly, and he feels that in some ways, that he has to undo that, and that includes with defense spending. And in Ukraine, which he continues to talk about Europe at this place that the U.S. does not have involvement in, that they should not have the same stakes as European allies.

BASH: Yeah. I mean, there was a lot of news. Even on the Russia front, he conceded that it is possible that Vladimir Putin could go beyond Ukraine, which is quite a statement from the president.

All right, everybody standby, because coming up. There was a political earthquake here in the United States. How a Democratic socialist is on the verge of potentially becoming New York City's next mayor. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: The aftershocks of last night's political earthquake in New York City are still reverberating throughout New York and well beyond. 33- year-old state assemblyman Zohran Mamdani effectively won the Democratic mayoral nomination.

Mamdani is a self-described democratic socialist, and he won more than 43 percent of the vote in the first round of rank choice voting. Beat out the one-time political powerhouse Andrew Cuomo, who quickly conceded. Mamdani capitulated -- excuse me, Mamdani catapulted to the top of the pack, mainly on a message of affordability and change.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ZOHRAN MAMDANI (D) NEW YORK MAYORAL CANDIDATE: If this campaign has demonstrated anything to the world, it is that our dreams can become reality. Dreaming demands hope. And when I think of hope, I think of the unprecedented coalition of New Yorkers that we have built.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: My panel is back. David?

CHALIAN: Yeah. I mean, it is a political earthquake, as you described it. There's no doubt about that. And I think in a bunch of different directions, the aftershocks will be felt. Clearly there is an active conversation going on inside the Democratic Party right now. A party that has already been soul searching since the 2024 loss to Donald Trump last fall.

And now that soul searching is going to get turbo charged, because what they've just seen here is a potential road map to success in New York in a primary context. But they're trying to figure out now, well, how do we apply this to more purple areas that they need to win in order to be a successful national party again? And there's no easy answer to that, because there's a debate here. Is it Mamdani's progressive policies? Lots of centrists, say no. That's not it, though.

AOC and Bernie Sanders will tell you that is exactly part of the winning formula. Or is it that a young person appeal to young voters in an authentic way and was a consistent messenger about affordability and the policy specifics are not part of the necessarily need to be part of the winning equation. That somebody, a more centrist Democrat, can also present an authentic way of reaching young and new voters with a consistent message on something like affordability and have success that remains to be seen. But my goodness, look at the full spectrum inside the Democratic Party is on display today in terms of the reaction to that.

BASH: Let's just look at one of his YouTube ads on the issue of affordability.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAMDANI: It's working and middle-class New Yorkers who are being pushed out of this city because it's the most expensive one in the country. So, I'm going to ask you one more time, we're running to freeze the?

CROWD: Rent.

MAMDANI: To freeze the?

CROWD: Rent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Jamie, New York native.

GANGEL: I just want to say this is not a new issue. Does anyone remember Jimmy McMillan, the campaign? The rent is too damn high.

CHALIAN: He didn't win, though.

GANGEL: He did not win, but I'm just saying the economic issues are there, and there's also a real question. If he's elected, can he, you know, come through with some of these promises that he wants in a very expensive city? I would add two things to what David said. One is, I think you cannot ignore there was a big anti Andrew Cuomo vote. People do not like him. And we saw that on display.

[12:25:00]

And then just the question of New York versus national. There are two very high-profile governor's races, your home state, New Jersey. Mikie Sherrill in Virginia, Abigail Spanberger, these are centrists who look as if they could really win those states very different from New York.

BASH: Absolutely.

MATTINGLY: Jump off that, because I think it's a really important point because of the two candidates specifically there, which I think are representative of -- Democrats right now are in this kind of very Democrat space of trying to figure out how to position themselves in relation to the likely Democratic nominee because they're unsure about his policies, and they know that if you're in a certain district or you're a certain state, you're going to get killed if you back him or support him, or even acknowledge his existence on some level. What I think stood out more than anything else was how he campaigned, the authenticity of his campaign, which is Mikie Sherrill, which is Abigail Spanberger. What they -- the class of 2018 kind of the folks who got the majority for Democrats in the House in 2018 were very representative of that.

We saw a little bit, you know, Pat Ryan, who's, I think, in his third term now in Congress. Ruben Gallego in the Senate as well. It's not necessarily the specific policies that have to be cookie cutter for every single race or every single district. It's the approach and the willingness to engage.

BASH: So, those are all critical points when you look at what this means nationally. On that, if you look at the other side of the aisle. What Republicans are saying, particularly in New York, they're loving this, just not necessarily as the mayor of New York, but just on their political good fortune, the way that they see it.

Elise Stefanik, who is a member of the House Republican congressional delegation, potentially somebody who will run for governor in New York, said the following. Kathy Hochul, the worst governor in America, you just got a communist antisemite elected as the Democrat nominee for mayor in New York City. You have refused to disavow his dangerous rhetoric and policies, and you will be held accountable by New Yorkers. And mark my words, Kathy Hochul, we are going to fire you in 2026 to save New York.

OK, so that's --

MATTINGLY: Are they potentially running for Democrats?

BASH: Republican side, but this is important, and this is -- we just got this from Congresswoman Laura Gillen. Now she is a Democrat representing New York. She unseated a vulnerable Republican. Again, this is a fellow Democrat who just said the following socialist, Zohran Mamdani is too extreme to lead New York City.

His entire campaign has been built on unachievable promises and higher taxes, which is the last thing New York needs. Beyond that, Mr. Mamdani has called to defund the police and has demonstrated a deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments, which stoke hate at a time when antisemitism is skyrocketing. He is the absolute wrong choice for New York.

GARDNER: Well, there is reason for Democrats to be worried. Donald Trump gained significantly on Kamala Harris in November, including in New York City, which, of course, is this huge blue stall war. So, there is reason for people like her to be concerned about that trend.

But at the same time, you have Mamdani, who really talked about some of these economic issues that Trump was so good at, really appealing to working class voters. And that was something that Harris really struggled with. He's talking about rent freezes. He's talking about raising the minimum wage. Those are things that she didn't necessarily fully commit to. So, I think that is a real opening for him. But at the same time, we still have to see how he performs in the general. You have Eric Adams still running as an independent. Cuomo is opening the door potentially to running as an independent. So, I'm really watching that election.

BASH: One of the quickly, one of the through lines of Stefanik statement and the Democrat Laura Gillen was, what Gillen says, unacceptable antisemitic comments. This is something that he struggled with during his campaign, and it is not going to go away. A whole series of things that he has said and tried to, in some instances, get right on.

CHALIAN: And I would imagine Eric Adams is going to have that front and center in his campaign as he goes forward for this general election.

BASH: Yeah. All right. Everybody stand by, up next. President Trump's former personal attorney may soon be heading to the federal bench. We have the latest from Emil Bove's confirmation hearing after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)