Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Hegseth Gives Heated Briefing On Iran Strikes; Trump Slams GOP Holdouts On Megabill As "Not Good People"; Tomorrow: Supreme Court To Rule On Blockbuster Cases. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired June 26, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
LT. COL. ADAM KINZINGER (RET.), AIR NATIONAL GUARD, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, (R) FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE - ILLINOIS: --I will give the administration this. Congress leaks like a sieve. And so, most of these briefings, they say they're top secret. A lot of them are edited down, unless you're on specific committees, like Foreign Affairs, or Intelligence, and things like that.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Former Congressman, Adam Kinzinger, I really appreciate your time tonight. Thank you very much.
KINZINGER: Me too. You bet.
COOPER: Obviously, a lot to learn in the coming days and weeks and even months. This is a story that is going to continue. We'll continue to cover it.
The news continues right now. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight, one classified briefing, two very different takeaways. My source tonight was one of the senators in the room.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, after a day of briefings, both in front of the cameras and behind closed doors, there's still no clear picture of the impact of the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear program.
Senators heard from President Trump's top national security officials today, in a classified setting, after which several Republicans emerged and echoed the President's assessment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Their operational capability was obliterated. There's nobody working there tonight.
SEN. ERIC SCHMITT (R-MO): You can use the word, Obliterated. They have no capabilities. SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): In technical terms, we knocked the living crap out of our three targets.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now I'll speak with Senate -- Democratic senator, Chris Murphy, who was also in that room, in a moment, given he left there with a much different view than what you just heard.
Still, tonight, when it comes to questions on the specifics here, like the status of Iran's enriched uranium, answers remain hard to come by.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Do you have some sense of where the enriched uranium is at this point? Has the intelligence community figured that out at this point?
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): I don't have a comment on that. I will say, it was not part of the mission to destroy all their enriched uranium or to seize it, or anything else.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: At the Pentagon, this morning, the Secretary of Defense didn't do a lot to clear things up on that front. Instead, launching into a defensive appearance, where he criticized reporting on a preliminary intelligence assessment that was produced by the Pentagon's own intelligence arm.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: We're here this morning because, in hunting for scandals all the time, in trying to find wedges and spin stories, this press corps and the press corps miss historic moments.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: The President was watching that, and clearly liked what he saw and heard. He declared it, One of the greatest, most professional, and most confirming News Conferences I have ever seen.
What the Secretary did not do today was provide new intelligence, to bolster the White House's argument, that Iran's nuclear program was flat-out obliterated, or offer any new assessments about what did happen to those nuclear sites. Instead, often referring questions to the intelligence community.
Officials emphasized what has also been clearly reported, that this was a preliminary information, and that could change as soon as more information was learned. While they criticized reporting, on early assessments, officials did acknowledge that the President offered his own initial early assessment, within hours of the strike.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: First of all, the President, without, knock on wood, having a single American casualty, obliterated the Iranian nuclear program.
HEGSETH: Iran's nuclear ambitions have been obliterated.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, the press corps, at the Pentagon, is filled with some of the most veteran reporters, who have covered both Republican- and Democratic-led administrations. And as they attempted to glean new information or get answers from the Defense Secretary today, Hegseth, at one point, assailed his former colleague from Fox News.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENNIFER GRIFFIN, CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved?
HEGSETH: Of course we're watching every single aspect. But Jennifer, you've been about the worst -- the one who misrepresents the most intentionally.
GRIFFIN: I don't think that's fair, sir.
HEGSETH: What the President says--
GRIFFIN: I was -- I was the first to report--
HEGSETH: I'm familiar--
GRIFFIN: --about the ventilation shafts on Saturday night. And in fact, I was the first to describe the B-2 bombers, the refueling, the entire mission with great accuracy. So, I take issue with that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I'll note here that Jennifer Griffin, the reporter that you heard from there, is an esteemed reporter, who is well-respected by her colleagues in Washington.
And again, there was no real clear answer on the accounting of Iran's enriched uranium, which was the question there. Just Secretary Hegseth, saying that he was, quote, Not aware of any intelligence that anything was out of place.
The Defense Secretary did suggest coverage that he would like to see.
[21:05:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HEGSETH: How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours? Has MSNBC done that story? Has Fox? Have we done the story how hard that is? Have we done it two or three times so that American people understand?
How about how difficult it is to shoot a drone from an F-15 or -16, or F-22 or F-35, or what it's like to man a Patriot battery, or how hard it is to refuel mid-air, giving the American people an understanding of how complex and sophisticated this mission really was?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Many outlets, including this network, have done just that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This was a very complex and secretive operation that was carried out, beginning early Saturday morning, when a fleet of B-2 bombers took off from Missouri.
JIM SCIUTTO (ph), CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Some headed west and flew over the Pacific as a decoy. A U.S. submarine also launched more than two dozen Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles.
BERTRAND: The U.S. deployed six B-2 bombers all the way, starting at their main base, here in Missouri, at Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, and they traveled about 37 hours to their target in Iran.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: One thing that the Secretary did shed light on today was how he views his role in the President's administration.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: You bring the Chairman here, who's not involved in politics. He doesn't do politics. That's my lane to understand and translate and talk about those types of things. So, I can use the word, Obliterated. He could use, Defeat, Destroyed, Assess, all of those things.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: The person he was referring to, standing next to him, was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, who laid out a compelling case when it comes to the details of the planning that went into this attack, and how it dates back to 2009, including with the need to create weapons that were designed specifically to strike a facility, so deep underground, like Fordow.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEN. DAN CAINE, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: The cap was forcibly removed by the first weapon and the main shaft was uncovered. Weapons two, three, four, five were tasked to enter the main shaft, move down into the complex at greater than 1,000 feet per second and explode in the mission space.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My lead source tonight is CNN's Natasha Bertrand, who covers national security, and was one of the reporters on this exclusive story that CNN broke the other day.
And Natasha, it's great to have you here tonight.
Just in terms of what we are hearing today, and that briefing that we saw from the Defense Secretary, this morning, which the President, I should note, announced, as they were flying back, last night, together, from the Netherlands. I wonder what you made of what he said, and what you know based on your reporting.
BERTRAND: Well, look, Kaitlan, I think that the big takeaway from this briefing was that the Secretary of Defense confirmed our reporting.
He confirmed that there was this very preliminary DIA assessment that, in his words, and as we have confirmed, was low confidence in nature, because it was produced very soon after these strikes took place. It was an initial look at just what kind of damage was done by these U.S. military strikes.
And I think, the DIA assessment, according to our sources, it said that the strikes did not appear to have destroyed, at least at first glance, given all the information that they had available to that time -- at that time, the core components of Iran's nuclear program. And said that, based on that, because it was unclear, at that point, just how much damage these bombs had done to the underground facilities, where those core components are stored, including the enriched uranium, including the centrifuges. Then, it appeared at that time that the program had only been set back by a few months.
Now, the briefing today did not do much to give us any new information that would dispute that. And that is largely because, the intelligence community is still gathering intelligence about it. That is what they are expected to do, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, said earlier today. He said, Look, we're not going to do the battle damage assessment. That is up to the intelligence community.
But he did lay out, as you said, a lot of interesting and really fascinating details about all of the decade-plus work that went into preparing, for this kind of military operation, making sure the bombs hit their targets at exactly the right angle, the right speed, the right time. I mean, that is enormously difficult.
And he did say that those bombs were believed to have gone down those ventilation shafts at Fordow nuclear facility, which is enormously important, because, of course, if they go down those shafts, that indicates that there's going to be an explosion below ground, which is really key.
COLLINS: Yes.
BERTRAND: But I think, one of the biggest questions also is what happened at the other facilities? Because the U.S. military carried out strikes on Natanz nuclear facility, on Isfahan nuclear facility, and we don't know what the impact there was, because the press -- the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman, really did not touch on that. So, still a lot to be learned, I think, about this military operation, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Yes. Natasha Bertrand, great reporting. Thanks for joining us tonight.
And as I mentioned, the other briefing that happened, not in front of the cameras today, happened behind closed doors, as all members of the Senate got what a lot of them had been asking for, in terms of a classified briefing, from the administration, on these strikes.
[21:10:00]
My inside source tonight is the Democratic senator of Connecticut, Chris Murphy.
And it's great to have you here, Senator.
Because, I wonder if this briefing today -- I know you can't get into the specifics, for obvious reasons. It was classified. But did the briefing, as a whole, change your mind, on whether Iran's program was, to quote the President, Obliterated?
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Well, listen, I thought it was a good briefing. But these Republicans, who are saying the program is obliterated, are doing it without the facts to back it up.
As your reporting describes, there -- you cannot obliterate a program if you still have both centrifuges and enriched uranium up to the 60 percent level that still exist. And that is what has been reported. And I didn't hear anything today that disputes that reporting.
It's true, these strikes did a lot of damage to those three facilities. But if Iran still has the knowledge as to how to run a nuclear program, if they still have centrifuges, if they still have uranium that is enriched to the 60 percent level, then it is true that you have only set back the program by months.
So, the strikes were impressive. And of course, our soldiers, and our airmen, and our sailors, did the job that they were asked to do. But it doesn't appear as if the program has been anywhere close to obliterated. And then that's the real danger here, is that the President seems to be deliberately misleading the public, when in fact, Iran still has the potential to rush to a bomb in a matter of months.
COLLINS: Is there a way how you would describe the current status of the nuclear program, based on what you heard today?
MURPHY: Well, again, you cannot bomb knowledge out of existence. So, it's true that Israel has targeted a lot of the scientists. But Iran still has the knowhow to put back together a nuclear program. And if they still have that enriched material? And if they still have centrifuges? And if they still have the capability to very quickly move those centrifuges into what we call a cascade? Then, we have not set back that program by years. We have set it back by months.
And the strikes potentially could have the impact of convincing this regime, in Tehran, or the next regime, that they now have no choice but to rush to a nuclear weapon. And we already know that they have some capabilities that are so far underground that we can never reach them. So, they have the ability to move a lot of what has been saved, into areas where there's no American bombing capacity that can reach it.
COLLINS: Who from the administration did most of the talking today?
MURPHY: Kaitlan, I know there's been reporting about that, that Secretary Hegseth didn't speak as much. I heard them all give their opinion.
I do think it's really interesting that the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was not allowed in the room. I mean, I've never, ever been part of a major Cabinet level classified briefing, where the Director of National Intelligence was banned from the room.
And I think it stands to reason that they knew that she was not going to toe the line, that she was likely going to refuse to say what the administration wants, which is that the program was obliterated. Again, the evidence suggests that the program was not obliterated.
And obviously, Gabbard was kept out of that room, even though she would normally be leading that briefing, I assume, because she was going to tell some version of the truth.
COLLINS: So, you think they didn't invite the Director of National Intelligence, because they wouldn't like what she had to say?
MURPHY: I don't -- listen, I don't know why she wasn't there, but there's clearly a reason.
And it's well-known that when it comes to the pre-strike intelligence, Gabbard was telling a story that was very familiar to us, that Iran was still a long way away from a deliverable nuclear weapon, and that the regime had not made the choice to actually pursue or speed towards a nuclear weapon.
That was inconvenient for our President that wanted to strike without congressional authorization. Because if Iran hadn't even decided to get a nuclear weapon, then there is no imminent threat, and you would have to come to Congress first.
I have to assume that there was some story she was going to tell, some interpretation of the intelligence she was going to give today, that rubbed the White House the wrong way. Why else would the Director of National Intelligence not be leading a classified briefing, on the interpretation of intelligence regarding these strikes?
[21:15:00]
COLLINS: Did anyone address her absence, or explain why she wasn't there?
MURPHY: Again, Kaitlan, I'm not going to talk about the specifics inside the--
COLLINS: OK.
MURPHY: --the briefing today.
COLLINS: Can I ask, just based on what you learned, as a whole, from this, would you say that U.S. forces and U.S. allies in the region are safer as a result of the U.S. strikes on Saturday night?
MURPHY: Well, I don't know that they're safer. I mean, obviously, Iran is weak. And so, there is a real possibility that we have seen the beginning and the end of Iran's response.
It is also possible that Iran is still formulating plans for future responses, or that there will be regime change as a consequence of the national embarrassment that has come from the operations, over the last few weeks, and that that next regime may choose to strike at our forces.
So, I don't know that U.S. forces are safer today than they were, even though it is true. We have not seen this spill over into the kind of regional war that many people thought was--
COLLINS: Yes.
MURPHY: --a real risk, if we struck at these facilities.
COLLINS: Can I get your take, before we go, on the Pentagon briefing today, and what we saw happening in front of the cameras, and how the Defense Secretary handled those questions?
MURPHY: Yes, sure, Kaitlan. Listen, I mean, what Hegseth was doing is tried and true. Trying to bully reporters, and the public, and politicians, into silence, saying that You're being unpatriotic, or You're criticizing the troops, if you criticize a choice made by elected leaders.
The fact of the matter is, our military heroes did everything we asked them to do, in Afghanistan, and in Iraq, and those wars still went very badly for the United States. There are limits to what our American military heroes can accomplish. And so, what the airmen did as part of this attack was extraordinary. But they were asked to do something that was likely impossible, destroying, obliterating, for good, Iran's nuclear program.
And they are not served, when our political leaders, including the President of the United States, lie, obfuscate, mislead the American people, as to the impact of these attacks. That makes our entire national security apparatus much more weaker. It loses credibility in the public, when our leaders aren't truthful about the impact of our activity in the Middle East.
COLLINS: Senator Chris Murphy, thanks for your time tonight. Thanks for joining us, after that briefing.
MURPHY: Thank you.
COLLINS: I want to turn now to Amos Hochstein, a longtime diplomat who served as President Biden's Senior Advisor for Energy and Investment.
And I think one question that regular people will have, listening to what came out of that briefing, today on Capitol Hill, from Republicans, from Democrats, is, what should they take away, when there is such a divide, between the politicians, over what is the fate of Iran's nuclear capacity, and where that stands tonight. What do you think?
AMOS HOCHSTEIN, FORMER SPECIAL PRESIDENTIAL COORDINATOR FOR GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE & ENERGY SECURITY: Well, first, Kaitlan, it's good to be with you.
Look, I think the most important thing is to separate out what's politics, and what is happening on the ground. Over the last year, year and a quarter, last April, Iran launched a missile attack against Israel, which was a 100 ballistic missiles, accompanied by 200 or so UAVs. The United States military coordinated a response, and defeated that attack.
But that was really the first time that Iran had used its own territory to attack Israel. They did it again in October. And again, the United States supported Israel, and with regional partners, as well as European countries, to defeat it.
And now, since then, Iran has lost most of its deterrence power. They had three things going for them. They had proxies, meaning, terrorist organizations in Lebanon, in Syria, in Iraq, in Yemen, that supported them. The second was the missiles. And the third was a threat of a nuclear -- weaponization of their -- of their nuclear capabilities.
Most of their proxies are either weakened to the point they can't respond, or are choosing now to distance themselves from Iran. Their missile capability has been proven to be less effective, because of the United States' ability to defend the region. And now, their nuclear capability is likely at least set back.
Now, the whole idea of obliterated or destroyed, these are political terms that are not really relevant, and I would urge Americans not to really pay attention to those words.
[21:20:00]
What we do know? We know that as a result of the -- both the Israeli, and the American strikes, the nuclear program was set back significantly. How much, we don't really know. Most Israeli military analysts and generals that I've spoken to, over the last 24, 48 hours, think this has gone from a six-months breakout timeframe to two years. So, an 18 month or two-year delay in their program. But here's the thing. They have also lost other capabilities. They've lost their command and control. They've lost military leaders. They've lost scientists. And they lost their conversion. So, they're clearly weakened.
And lastly, Israel has proven that they have an intelligence capability, inside Iran, that if they try to reconstitute, we'll -- we, the United States, Israel--
COLLINS: Yes.
HOCHSTEIN: --other European allies will know about it.
COLLINS: That's a really good point, just in terms of the state that they are in, and the concerns that people had before that now have just dissipated.
The President suggested, when we were in the Netherlands, at the press conference, yesterday, that talks with Iran could happen next week. The White House said today that no date had been set.
But if Iran comes to the table there, what would their approach be? I mean, if you were sitting across from them, how do you think they'd be showing up to that table?
HOCHSTEIN: Well, look, the one thing we have to understand is that before the strikes, there are those who say, We could have reached a deal to delay their nuclear program significantly with a deal. And that's what Steve Witkoff was working on. That's what the White House had wanted originally, before Israel had--
COLLINS: Yes.
HOCHSTEIN: --convinced them to strike.
You still need a deal. That's the problem. You have a ceasefire now, and you don't know what the Iranians are going to do. Yes, you can watch it for a few months. But Iran could end up wanting to reconstitute its program. So it's very important, regardless of the strikes, to reach a deal now with Iran that puts their ambitions in a box.
You have to have the inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency present. You have to have some kind of arrangement that Iran is not going to reconstitute a program that can reach weaponization. So regardless of the strike, we still need that deal.
Second, we still need to do some kind of codification of the ceasefire. Because Israel was saying, Wait a minute, we have a ceasefire, which means Iran can do whatever it wants now, and we can't do anything because the President just got really angry when Israel tried to do something just the other day. So, we want to know that the ceasefire is not with no rules attached to it.
COLLINS: Yes. HOCHSTEIN: So, there's a number of arrangements that have to be negotiated very quickly with Iran. They're very weak. But we don't know what their posture is going to be, because we don't understand the political crisis, and how it's going to play out that's happening today inside Tehran.
COLLINS: Yes, I think that was the expletive heard around the Middle East.
Amos Hochstein, great to have your take on this. Thanks so much for joining us.
HOCHSTEIN: Of course.
COLLINS: Up next. My White House insiders are going to join me. What they were hearing from officials, throughout the day, after they returned from the Netherlands, about what's the strategy on the messaging, and also what we heard at that White House press briefing today on Iran's nuclear facilities.
[21:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, as Iran's Foreign Minister says, there is no agreement, at least for the moment, to resume nuclear talks with the United States, as you just heard how important that is for my last guest.
The other side is eager to talk, at least face-to-face, with the President. The Israeli media is reporting tonight that Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, could visit Washington in the coming weeks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The Prime Minister has expressed interest in coming to the White House to meet with the President and come to Washington. The President is obviously very open to that. But we don't have a date. When we do, we'll let you all know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And my insiders are here tonight. Shelby Talcott and Jeff Mason are joining me.
And Jeff, when you hear the White House saying, this is an option, they're not sure, there's no dates yet. I mean, one, it comes after, obviously, an opportunity for the two of them to appear together, for the first time since Israel strikes in Iran, and the White House strikes in Iran.
But also, the President yesterday was calling on Netanyahu's trial, his criminal case, in Israel, to be called off, essentially.
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: Yes, it's this fascinating relationship right now. Certainly, I think Prime Minister Netanyahu has gotten almost everything he wants from President Trump, starting at the top of that list with the U.S. strikes on Iran.
But there has also been a sense that President Trump can, I don't want to say, order him around, but get him to give him something back in return, as exemplified by the fact that that the President called on him to have his planes turn around when they were heading back to Iran, when there was a brief sort of blip in the ceasefire.
But certainly, meeting at the White House would solidify that relationship, and give them a chance to talk about next steps. Obviously, the administration is very keen, right now, to suggest that Iran's nuclear program has been obliterated. But Israel may have other views on that, and may want to talk about what else needs to be done, should Iran decide or start to make action or take action to rebuild.
COLLINS: Yes, and it comes after what we know was that tense phone call, to put it lightly, that Trump and Netanyahu had, after the ceasefire had been put in place.
Shelby, I wonder what you're hearing from officials, just about this, generally, or including on this meeting that they're saying could happen with Iran, and how that could shake out in the next few days, and their hopes for something like this.
SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Well, the White House officials have made clear, publicly and privately, that this is a focus, this meeting with Iran. They want to get a deal done, regardless of what language that they use. And we have heard several different explanations as to the how effective the U.S. strikes were.
[21:30:00]
Regardless of all of that, the ultimate goal for administration officials, and for the President, remains getting an official deal done with Iran. And so, in the White House's eyes, this is really all just beginning. And even though they did these strikes, they said, that was sort of step one of several steps, in accomplishing Trump's ultimate goal, which is Iran can't have a nuclear weapon.
COLLINS: Jeff, is there any sense, as this has become a multi-day story that has developed, from the White House, in terms of how the President came out, on Saturday night, and initially talked about these strikes, and whether or not if he had just used slightly different language? Severely damaged. Profound damage, is what we heard from Director Clapper, the other night. That maybe this would not be such a focus, in terms of the focus on whether or not the program was obliterated.
MASON: Yes, I think it's a good point.
The President is someone who is a big communicator, and he is also sometimes prone to exaggeration. That is not a surprise to your viewers. That doesn't mean that they don't feel that it was obliterated. And some of the evidence that they're citing is, A, the President noting, while he was in The Hague, that it led to the end of the war. And B, just the photos, or what they're seeing in terms of the rubble that's left.
It is not hard to conclude, as a reasonable person, that dropping a 30,000 -- 30,000-ton bomb on these sites had a huge impact. But wording is -- the precision of that wording has absolutely led to this longer story, in addition to the intelligence that's come out.
COLLINS: Yes, I thought it was a fair point that after the strikes happened, obviously Iran and Israel, with the United States, brokered that deal to where they were going to stop firing on one another, after what we've been seeing -- what we've seen playing out.
Shelby, what are officials saying about Secretary Hegseth's press conference, this morning?
TALCOTT: I mean, the White House is, I think, unsurprisingly, pretty happy with how Pete Hegseth came out in that press conference.
And I think what is really -- what I found, really interesting, was there were really two different, very different personalities at that press conference.
You had Pete Hegseth, who was sort of aggressively focused on the media, something that Donald Trump really likes to see. He likes when people go after the media. He likes to see these sort of aggressive personalities.
And then you had General Caine, who really kept politics out of his remarks, and focused more on the nitty-gritty thing.
And so, together, White House officials felt like that was a really good briefing for them, even as we came out of it without really any new official assessments about what happened on the ground in Iran.
COLLINS: Yes, that's a good point there. Two very distinct approaches to that press conference.
Shelby Talcott. Jeff Mason. Great to have both of you and your reporting here tonight.
Also, in Washington, we're following another big story, as the clock is ticking on Congress, when their time to pass what the President has described as his big, beautiful bill. He wants it done by the end of next week. But today, there was a major hurdle, up on Capitol Hill. We'll speak to a Democrat and a Republican to get their reaction, next.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, President Trump is pressuring Republicans to pass, what he calls, the big, beautiful bill by July 4th, targeting those who he believes might be considering voting against it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I shouldn't say this, but we don't want to have grandstanders where one or two people raise their vote -- We are -- We don't know, and they do it to grandstand. That's all. They're not -- not good people. They know who I am -- who I'm talking about. I call them out. But we don't need grandstanders.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That was at the White House today.
But up on Capitol Hill, there's a major complication to meet that deadline. That's because the Senate parliamentarian, who is basically the Chamber's non-partisan referee, struck down several key pieces of the legislation for not meeting Senate rules. A key violation, proposed changes to taxes that states can impose to help pay for Medicaid.
And that's where my congressional sources are from tonight.
Democratic congressman, Adam Smith of Washington.
And Republican congressman, Tony Gonzales of Texas.
And it's great to have both of your perspectives here.
And Congressman Gonzales, I want to start with you, because I do think one question, before we get to the parliamentarian today, is, can you get this done by July 4th? Can it get back to the House where you guys have time to read it and process it before you actually vote on it?
REP. TONY GONZALES (R-TX): I think not only can we get it done, I think we should get it done. The sooner we can get it done, the safer our country will be.
I'd also say too, never underestimate the Senate wanting to get the hell out of town as quickly as possible, right? They've proven time and time again, where they can speed up the clock and get it back over to us.
The House is going to break for the weekend, and we'll come back on Monday. We're ready to go. I think there's a good chance we can get this bill to the President -- the President's desk, before the Fourth of July.
COLLINS: Can I just follow up with you on the parliamentarian? There are people calling for her to be overruled, or outright fired, because of this today. Is that something you agree with, on either front?
GONZALES: No, I mean, that's probably good politics. But the parliamentarian is there to make sure that the process isn't (ph) a lottery, that vetted legislation is going to the President's desk to be codified into law. That's a serious issue.
[21:40:00] What I don't say is, I think it does put a lot of pressure, on Republicans, over the next 18 months, to codify President Trump's agenda. We're going to have to do more than just this bill, this reconciliation bill. We're going to have to pass appropriation bills. We're going to have to do serious legislation to shore up, I guess, the things that are not in this -- that are not going to be ultimately in this bill.
COLLINS: Yes.
Congressman Smith, how are Democrats watching this play out on Capitol Hill, as they're coming up against this deadline?
REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): Well, it's pretty clear that they don't -- the Republicans do not care about the substance of this bill. And this is a bill that's going to have a profound impact on millions of people.
The cuts to Medicaid alone are going to drive, depending on where they finally land, somewhere between 9 and 12 million people off of health insurance. And they don't care. They want to pass it by July 4th. There is no reason for that deadline. They're just pushing forward, because President Trump just wants a bill, he just wants a victory.
And this is a bill that's going to add $3 trillion to the debt. All we heard from Republicans, last cycle, was, The debt is out of control. We are fiscally irresponsible. The deficit is bearing our children. It's this horrible, terrible thing. They can't, in good conscience, deal with that.
And here they have a bill that is literally going to add to the debt. And they're out there arguing, We must pass this because we are in a fiscal calamity.
If they didn't pass it, we would be in a much better fiscal situation. They are giving trillions of dollars, in tax cuts, to people who already have a lot of money, and taking health care and food, away from poor people. I really fail to see the urgency of inflicting this upon the American people, by July 4th, or period, for that matter.
COLLINS: Congressman Gonzales, what's your response?
GONZALES: Yes, my response is the people that, that are going to get this money, are the people watching this show, and the money should not stay here in Washington. It should be back home in our pockets. So, the tax cuts, I think that's going to help everybody. It's going to certainly help the economy.
And the other sense of urgency is securing our border, and making sure that these convicted criminals that are loose in our country, to the tunes of hundreds of thousands, that ICE and DHS have the resources to go out and make sure our border is secure, not only along the border, but also in the interior, to keep us safe.
SMITH: And that's fine. But are you OK with the $52 trillion debt? I mean, yes, the money, people -- yes, if they have more money in their pockets, it's going to be better. But then why not have a $75 trillion debt?
GONZALES: You know?
SMITH: I mean, how can we possibly be OK with driving the debt up by this much, after everything we've heard from Republicans about how important that issue is?
GONZALES: This is how we solve the debt problem, is we pass appropriation bills. That's Congress' job is to get -- let's get back. We're the original DOGE.
SMITH: I agree.
GONZALES: Let's get back to Congress.
SMITH: Let's pass them.
GONZALES: Let's do it.
SMITH: But that's not going to solve the problem.
GONZALES: It's going to -- it's going to chip away at the problem. So, step one is doing our job. We haven't passed appropriation bills in decades, right, since the Clinton days.
SMITH: Yes.
GONZALES: So, it's time that the House pass appropriation bills. No longer -- no more CRs, no kicking the can down the road, no blaming the parliamentarian or somebody--
SMITH: Can I hold you to that?
GONZALES: --it's somebody else's fault. Yes--
SMITH: Can I hold you to that in a couple of months, when you guys pass a bunch of CRs?
GONZALES: You can hold it to me right now. I'm a no on the CR. If we--
SMITH: All right.
GONZALES: If a CR comes up in September, you can count me and probably Tom Massie as a no.
SMITH: Yes, we've heard--
COLLINS: OK. We're going to--
SMITH: --we've heard a lot of those noes before they turn into yeses at the end of the day. We'll see what happens.
COLLINS: Well, and including from Speaker Mike Johnson, who's acknowledged the hard reality of governing with a small majority.
Congressman Gonzales, though, we keep hearing about the debt, and what this looks like, from Republicans. Obviously, we hear it, when Republicans are not in power.
I think the question is, from voters, and some of your more hardliner colleagues, who want to address it right now, and take this opportunity to do so, people like Thomas Massie, who are getting heavily criticized by the President, is if you don't do it when you have the chance, when you're in power, I mean, can you really complain about it, when Republicans are no longer in power?
GONZALES: Well -- I think this isn't the only bite at the apple. And once again, this puts -- it puts additional pressure on House Republicans to get the job done, not just talk about it.
This reconciliation package is only the first of many things that we have to do. We have an 18-month timeline, in order to codify President Trump's agenda. Part of that is, once again, making sure we're not overspending, that we're finding -- we're cutting the fraud and the waste.
And we're asking -- you know, we're asking the tough questions, what do you do here? Why does this program exist, you know? And so, I think that's an important thing that Congress needs to take -- needs to kind of--
COLLINS: Yes.
GONZALES: --take that power back.
SMITH: Right.
COLLINS: Yes--
SMITH: Medicaid exists so that people have health care, that that's why Medicaid exists. I don't think there's any big, big question mark on that.
GONZALES: Yes, Medicaid is--
COLLINS: Congressmen--
GONZALES: --Medicaid is there for the vulnerable, right? The seniors and those that -- if you can work, you should get to work.
SMITH: Well--
GONZALES: We have a saying in Spanish called huevon (ph), meaning you're--
SMITH: And I don't have -- I don't a problem what--
GONZALES: --you're lazy.
SMITH: I don't have a problem, whatsoever, with work requirements. You go way--
GONZALES: There we go. There we go.
SMITH: --you go in way beyond work requirements--
COLLINS: Wow.
SMITH: --and cutting people off of Medicaid, whether they're working or not--
GONZALES: We also don't want people that aren't U.S. citizens to be getting Medicaid, right?
SMITH: --just because they're poor.
GONZALES: So, it's some simple things. I think Congress needs to do its job beyond just this bill--
COLLINS: Yes.
GONZALES: --getting it out.
COLLINS: It is fascinating to see, though, how Republicans in the Senate are saying their cuts to Medicaid, they believe, go too far, and they want to go back to what the House does. We'll see if that ultimately works out.
[21:45:00]
Congressman Tony Gonzales, Adam Smith, it's great to have a perspective from each side of the aisle, and here joining us tonight, respectfully. Thank you for both being here.
GONZALES: Thanks, Kaitlan.
SMITH: Thank you.
COLLINS: There's a major day coming up at the Supreme Court, tomorrow. We're going to get some big opinions in some of the most major cases we've been watching this term, including on birthright citizenship. Elie Honig, here next, to break it down for us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:50:00]
COLLINS: We're just hours away from what is expected to be a historic day at the Supreme Court, tomorrow, because the nine justices are expected to hand down their final decisions of the term, one that has been dominated by appeals centered around President Trump's agenda.
The High Court is going to rule, on the President's attempts to significantly narrow birthright citizenship. Whether parents can pull their children from class lessons involving LGBTQ issues. And that challenge to a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from watching online pornography.
My source tonight is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig.
And Elie, I think whenever these decision days come down, obviously everyone's bracing for what is it, like, 10:00 a.m.?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: Yes.
COLLINS: And waiting.
What are you going to be looking for--
HONIG: 12 hours and 10 minutes.
COLLINS: --at 09:59, you know?
HONIG: 12 hours and 10 minutes from now.
COLLINS: Yes.
HONIG: So the biggest thing we're going to learn is, can a single district court judge, a federal trial-level judge, block an order of the President?
Now, of course, that applies to the Trump administration, right? He's been blocked dozens of times here, including on immigration, including on birthright citizenship. But this is a problem that's been dogging presidents, going back to George W. Bush, Obama, Biden, Trump. So, this is going to redefine the balance of powers between the presidency and the courts.
And what I think the court's going to do? I'm going to make a prediction now. On your show, I'm back tomorrow night. You can hold me accountable.
COLLINS: Always safe to do on cable news.
HONIG: I'm happy to do it. And hold me accountable, tomorrow, when I'm back on THE SOURCE. I think they're going to find a middle ground. I think they're going to say--
COLLINS: That's exactly what I was going to ask.
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: Is it going to be like a yes or no, or is it going to be some half-and-half?
HONIG: It's going to be a half-and-half. They're going to say, You can't block the President at will, but you do have the power to block him in certain narrow circumstances. So, I think they're going to split it there.
COLLINS: OK. And so, any surprises that you were expecting tomorrow?
HONIG: Well, a couple other big cases.
You referenced a case about religious freedom, relating to parents who want to pull their students out of public elementary school, in Maryland, when the school teaches LGBTQ themes, stories and characters. I think the parents are going to win that one. I think the justices are going to say, It infringes on their free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. That's one.
There's a Texas law you referenced about requiring verification of adult status before someone can view pornography. I think the court is going to uphold that Texas law, and say it's OK, it doesn't violate free speech.
COLLINS: Yes.
HONIG: And then there's a big one about Louisiana's redistricting. And I think the court is going to strike down Louisiana's map.
So, there you go. Bunch of predictions.
COLLINS: Justices, like, jet out of town the second they're done tomorrow--
HONIG: Yes, you know, it was a surprise. Because we thought they were going to carry over to next week. Roberts said today, We're doing all six that are remaining, tomorrow. They want to get out of D.C.
COLLINS: I mean, it's pretty hot in D.C., right now.
HONIG: Understandably.
COLLINS: Elie Honig, we'll be watching tomorrow morning, 10:00 a.m.
HONIG: Thanks.
COLLINS: Thanks so much for that.
Up next. I'm going to take you behind-the-scenes. President Trump, this week, announced a strike on Iran's nuclear program. He made his way to the global stage, at the NATO Summit, where he was called, Daddy. All the highlights ahead.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: In the five days since President Trump ordered U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, there have been major questions about the results and also the rationale behind them.
Here's some behind-the-scenes look, from Washington, to the Netherlands, this week.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRUMP: Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.
ON SCREEN TEXT: MONDAY, JUNE 23.
COLLINS: The President has been closely tracking the coverage of these strikes ever since he made the decision to go ahead with this, and ultimately culminated in those strikes on these three sites, that we saw playing out, on Saturday night. There are still real questions about the extent of the damage that was done. Also the question of regime change.
LEAVITT: If they refuse to engage in diplomacy, moving forward, why shouldn't the Iranian people rise up against this brutal terrorist regime? That's a question the President raised last night.
COLLINS: In just over 12 hours from now, President Trump is scheduled to leave the White House to go to The Hague, in the Netherlands, where he's expected to attend a NATO Summit with other world leaders, that is obviously going to be dominated by what is happening right now between Israel, Iran and the United States.
ON SCREEN TEXT: TUESDAY, JUNE 24.
TRUMP: We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f**k they're doing. Do you understand that?
COLLINS: There were real questions about whether or not this ceasefire, that he had announced just hours before, was actually going to hold.
One thing that we've been working on today is getting the White House's reaction to an exclusive report from CNN, on an early assessment that, so far, the damage from those strikes did not have as much impact as the President has been saying. He's been arguing that it completely obliterated and destroyed Iran's entire nuclear program. That's not what we're seeing, from our sources, inside this preliminary report.
ON SCREEN TEXT: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25.
COLLINS: We're here at the NATO Summit at The Hague in the Netherlands. President Trump is already here, meeting with world leaders. He's so far gotten a pretty big concession from them on boosting defense spending, something that has been at the core of the President's beliefs ever since he was first elected.
Right now, we're being brought into the area where all of the press is kind of hanging out, waiting, as the world leaders are meeting with one another, and of course, waiting for the press conferences that are ultimately going to happen.
Do you believe that Article 5 is subject to interpretation?
MARK RUTTE, NATO SECRETARY GENERAL: You know, Article 5 is absolutely clear. And at the same time, we have always said we will never go into details when exactly Article 5 will be triggered. And why not? Because we don't want to make our adversaries any wiser.
TRUMP: You should really say how great our soldiers and our warriors are.
[22:00:00]
COLLINS: I think everyone appreciates our soldiers and our warriors.
Are you relying on Israeli intelligence for your assessment--
TRUMP: No. No.
COLLINS: --of the impact of the strikes?
TRUMP: The document said, it could be limited or it could be very severe. They really didn't know. The site is obliterated. And we think everything nuclear is down there, they didn't take it out.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Thank you so much for joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is up next.
