Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Maddow Blog-White House slams intel that suggests Trump-backed strikes didn't destroy targets in Iran
The president said Iran’s nuclear facilities were “completely and totally obliterated.” Reports of a new intelligence assessment suggest otherwise.
Takeaways from today’s reporting:
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-06-24T20:16:54.187Z
- Preliminary intel assessment suggests US strikes failed to “obliterate†Iran’s nuclear sites, only setting the program back by a few months
- If the intel is correct, Trump lied to the public
- The White House keeps condemning US intelligence it doesn’t like
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/iran-strikes-assessment-trump-white-house-rcna214844
As for why the president seems so sensitive about this, it might have something to do with an alleged intelligence assessment that appears to contradict Trump’s premature boasts. CNN reported:
The CNN report added that while the intelligence assessment might yet change as more information becomes available, these early findings are “at odds” with Trump’s claims.
The New York Times published a related report minutes later, adding that, according to the unreleased classified intelligence assessment, the preliminary findings suggest Saturday bombings “sealed off the entrances to two of the facilities but did not collapse their underground buildings.”
NBC News soon after confirmed key details, reporting that the Defense Intelligence Agency's initial assessment concluded that the U.S. airstrikes "were not as effective" as Trump claimed, and that the mission set Iran's nuclear program "back by only three to six months."
The White House didn’t deny the existence of this intelligence assessment, though officials did take issue with it.....
For his part, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had a related statement: “Based on everything we have seen — and I’ve seen it all — our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons. Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target — and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran, so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the president and the successful mission."
Of course, Hegseth, whose credibility is suspect given his troubled tenure, also said the Iranian targets were "obliterated," before claiming, “Many presidents have dreamed of delivering the final blow to Iran’s nuclear program, and none could, until President Trump.”
In other words, the beleaguered Pentagon chief has an incentive to downplay the preliminary assessment from his own department's intelligence office.
There’s no shortage of moving parts to a story like this, which may very well continue to evolve, not just in the coming days, but even in the coming hours. But as things stand, what we have is some preliminary evidence, not only that the mission fell short of its objectives, but also that the American president misled the public about the efficacy of his controversial and unpopular policy, all while White House officials once again discard intelligence assessments from their own country that told Trump and his team what they didn’t want to hear.
The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by three people briefed on it. The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US strikes, one of the sources said.
The CNN report added that while the intelligence assessment might yet change as more information becomes available, these early findings are “at odds” with Trump’s claims.
The New York Times published a related report minutes later, adding that, according to the unreleased classified intelligence assessment, the preliminary findings suggest Saturday bombings “sealed off the entrances to two of the facilities but did not collapse their underground buildings.”
NBC News soon after confirmed key details, reporting that the Defense Intelligence Agency's initial assessment concluded that the U.S. airstrikes "were not as effective" as Trump claimed, and that the mission set Iran's nuclear program "back by only three to six months."
The White House didn’t deny the existence of this intelligence assessment, though officials did take issue with it.....
For his part, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had a related statement: “Based on everything we have seen — and I’ve seen it all — our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons. Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target — and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran, so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the president and the successful mission."
Of course, Hegseth, whose credibility is suspect given his troubled tenure, also said the Iranian targets were "obliterated," before claiming, “Many presidents have dreamed of delivering the final blow to Iran’s nuclear program, and none could, until President Trump.”
In other words, the beleaguered Pentagon chief has an incentive to downplay the preliminary assessment from his own department's intelligence office.
There’s no shortage of moving parts to a story like this, which may very well continue to evolve, not just in the coming days, but even in the coming hours. But as things stand, what we have is some preliminary evidence, not only that the mission fell short of its objectives, but also that the American president misled the public about the efficacy of his controversial and unpopular policy, all while White House officials once again discard intelligence assessments from their own country that told Trump and his team what they didn’t want to hear.
trump and Hegseth are lying about the bomb damage assessments
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Know the g.o.p. record for lying, it's a safe bet that much of what they are saying in this instance is a lie.
We shall see. 
