Maddow Blog-trump's response to intelligence assessment on Iran strikes takes an incoherent turn

[LetMyPeopleVote]

The intelligence about the U.S. strikes on Iranian targets can’t be conclusive and inconclusive at the same time.

At his NATO presser, Trump suggested that US intel doesn’t know for sure what happened to Iran’s nuclear sites as part of Saturday's strikes.

He also said Iran’s nuclear sites were definitely obliterated.

He seemed oblivious to the incoherence and contradictions. www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddo...

— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-06-25T13:08:42.838Z

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-response-intelligence-assessment-iran-strikes-takes-incoherent-rcna214937

On Tuesday, the world learned of a preliminary intelligence assessment from the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency, which jolted the public and political debate. As NBC News confirmed, the initial assessment concluded that the U.S. airstrikes “were not as effective” as Trump claimed, and the mission set Iran’s nuclear program “back by only three to six months.”

The day after this assessment reached the public, the president responded to the news in a decidedly Trumpian way. NBC News reported:

Trump and his top Cabinet officials are disputing reports that indicate the U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities set Iran’s nuclear program back by only a few months — despite his initial claim that the U.S. ‘obliterated’ the program. Speaking to reporters in the Netherlands today, Trump repeatedly referred to the strikes as causing ‘obliteration.’ He claimed that he thinks the U.S. strikes set Iran back decades.

Predictably, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed the president’s comments. (The New York Times reported that Trump has “closely monitored” which members of his administration have used the specific words he wants to hear.)

There were some key problems with the Republican’s rhetoric at his NATO press conference, starting with the fact that he kept contradicting himself in incoherent ways.

https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:aunpu65mdrhwfie7ynymlzeh/post/3lsghvg7gsc2z

Link to tweet

Pressed on the efficacy of the mission and the accuracy of the intelligence, Trump said, “The intelligence was very inconclusive. The intelligence says we don’t know. It could have been very severe. That’s what the intelligence says. So I guess that’s correct. But I think we can take the ‘we don’t know.’ It was very severe. It was obliteration.”......

Even by Trump standards, this has become bizarre. Indeed, he can’t have it both ways. On the one hand, the president wants the public to believe the Iranian targets were “completely and totally obliterated” and “completely destroyed,” as part of “one of the most successful military strikes in history.” On the other, he also wants the public to believe the intelligence on the mission was “very inconclusive” and the United States simply doesn’t know, despite the initial assessment that concluded that Trump’s claims were simply at odds with the facts.

In recent months, the Republican has earned a reputation for dishonesty, recklessness and expressing indifference to his own country’s intelligence. The story of the Iranian strikes he approved has quickly reached the point at which Trump is checking all of these boxes at the same time.

[Troth_Aint_Truth]

1. Liar in Chief

Only the most gullible would not doubt and question any statement Trump makes. A documented, habitual and self-serving liar (30,000 exposed his last term) has zero credibility. That he has certainly obliterated.