Donald Trump has no credibility about the outcome of the bumper busting bombing while Army intelligence reports enriched uranium is only set back

Exclusive to CNN: Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say. Reported in CNN by Natasha Bertrand, Katie Bo Lillie, Zachary Cohen

Donald Trump has zero credibility because he continuously lies about everything❗

CNN —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 four 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 analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear ambitions is ongoing, and could change as more intelligence becomes available. But the early findings are at odds with Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also said on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear ambitions “have been obliterated.”

Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely “intact.”

“So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops,” this person added.

The White House acknowledged the existence of the assessment but said they disagreed with it.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt  (alias "3-D printer Barbie) told CNN in a statement: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”

(Okay....total obliteration of what❓ Obliteration of nearly empty caves❓)

The US military has said the operation went as planned and that it was an “overwhelming success.” -( i.e., an overwhelming operational success, but, duh?....the mission did not succeed its intended purpose.)

It is still early for the US to have a comprehensive picture of the impact of the strikes, and none of the sources described how the DIA assessment compares to the view of other agencies in the intelligence community. The US is continuing to pick up intelligence, including from within Iran as they assess the damage.

Israel had been carrying out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities for days leading up to the US military operation but claimed to need the US’ 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs to finish the job. While US B-2 bombers dropped over a dozen of the bombs on two of the nuclear facilities, the Fordow Fuel Enrichment plant and the Natanz Enrichment Complex, the bombs did not fully eliminate the sites’ centrifuges and highly enriched uranium, according to the people familiar with the assessment.

Instead, the impact to all three sites — Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan — was largely restricted to aboveground structures, which were severely damaged, the sources said. That includes the sites’ power infrastructure and some of the aboveground facilities used to turn uranium into metal for bomb-making.

The Israeli assessment of the impact of the US strikes also found less damage on Fordow than expected. However, Israeli officials believe the combination of US and Israeli military action on multiple nuclear sites set back the Iranian nuclear program by two years, assuming they are able to rebuild it unimpeded which Israel would not allow. But Israel had also stated publicly before the US military operation that Iran’s program had been set back by two years.

Hegseth also told CNN, “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 (the problem ❓ the wrong targets❗) 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.“

Trump continued to repeat his (fake❗)belief that the damage from the strikes was significant.

“I think it’s been completely demolished,” he said, adding, “Those pilots hit their targets. Those targets were obliterated, and the pilots should be given credit.”

Asked about the possibility of Iran rebuilding its nuclear program, Trump responded, “That place is under rock. That place is demolished.”

While Trump and Hegseth have been bullish about the success of the strikes, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine said Sunday that while the damage assessment was still ongoing it would be “way too early” to comment on whether Iran still retains some nuclear capabilities.

Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, the chairman emeritus of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, would not echo Trump’s claims that the Iranian program had been “obliterated” when pressed by CNN on Tuesday.

“I’ve been briefed on this plan in the past, and it was never meant to completely destroy the nuclear facilities, but rather cause significant damage,” McCaul told CNN, referring to the US military plans to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. “But it was always known to be a temporary setback.”

Jeffrey Lewis, a weapons expert and professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies who has closely reviewed commercial satellite imagery of the strike sites, agreed with the assessment that the attacks do not appear to have ended Iran’s nuclear program.

“The ceasefire came without either Israel or the United States being able to destroy several key underground nuclear facilities, including near Natanz, Isfahan and Parchin,” Lewis said, referring to the ceasefire between Israel and Iran that Trump announced on Monday. Parchin is a separate nuclear complex near Tehran.

“These facilities could serve as the basis for the rapid reconstitution of Iran’s nuclear program.”

Earlier on Tuesday, classified briefings for both the House and Senate on the operation were canceled.

The all-Senate briefing has been moved to Thursday, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

Two separate sources familiar told CNN the briefing for all House lawmakers has also been postponed. It was not immediately clear why it was delayed or when it would be rescheduled. (Ultimately, the briefing was cancelled by the Republicans who do not want to be in a defensive position about having to defend an expensive mission without evidence to support the outcome.)

Democratic Rep. Pat Ryan of New York said on X on Tuesday that “Trump just cancelled a classified House briefing on the Iran strikes with zero explanation. The real reason? He claims he destroyed ‘all nuclear facilities and capability;’ his team knows they can’t back up his bluster and BS.”

As CNN has reported, there have long been questions about whether the US’ bunker-buster bombs, known as Massive Ordnance Penetrators, would be able to fully destroy Iran’s highly fortified nuclear sites that are buried deep underground — particularly at Fordow and Isfahan, Iran’s largest nuclear research complex.

Notably, the US struck Isfahan with Tomahawk missiles launched from a submarine instead of a bunker-buster bomb. That is because there was an understanding that the bomb would likely not successfully penetrate Isfahan’s lower levels, which are buried even deeper than Fordow, one of the sources said.

US officials believe Iran also maintains secret nuclear facilities that were not targeted in the strike and remain operational, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

This story has been updated with additional details.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Jim Sciutto, Lauren Fox and Annie Grayer contributed reporting.

Steve Bannon "look alikes" - Kim Jong-Un and Joseph Goebbels

Steve Bannon was a low ranking US Naval officer, but in his mug shot he looks more like a drunken sailor than the man Donald Trump appointed, without vetting, to sit on the National Security Council, representing the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In other words, low life Bannon will be in a position of being able to speak for the Generals and Admirals, who earned the privilege of being on the NSC.  

Curiously enough, Steve Bannon resembles North Korea's tyrannical dictator Kim Jong_un (probably just coincidental ya'think?)

Kim Jong-un- leader of North Korea

Joseph Goebbels - Nazi propaganda minister for Hitler

For those who believe in reincarnation- it's possible Steve Bannon is the Joseph Goebbels reincarnated, Reich Chancellor; appointed by Adolf Hitler before he committed suicide. Goebbels also died by suicide on May 1, 1945 with his wife and children.

Steve Bannon- Brietbart_barfcart news CEO
Former Annapolis graduate low ranking Navy officer
WannaBe Joint Chiefs representative on National Security Council- is a slob.
Steve Bannon: Claims of Anti-Semitism, Ties to the Alt-Right and Now a Powerful Job

With National Security Council Shakeup, Steve Bannon Gets A Seat At The Table- "Gosh darn Dad, I always wanted to sit at the big people's table!"

President Trump has reorganized the National Security Council by elevating his chief strategist Steve Bannon (a former low ranking USN officer and Annapolis grad who served in the Navy for 7 years) and demoting the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

MERRIT KENNEDY- reported for BBC
Now, Bannon will join the NSC's principals committee, the top inter-agency group for discussing national security. The National Security Council is the staff inside the White House that coordinates decision making by the president on such matters, in coordination with outside departments including the State Department and the Pentagon.

It's an unusual decision, NPR's Mara Liasson reported. "David Axelrod, for instance, who had a similar job as Bannon in the Obama administration, never sat in on Principals meetings," she added. When such figures seen as part of the political wing of the White House have participated in broader National Security Council meetings, it's sparked sharp criticism from the national security establishment.

Before joining Donald Trump's inner circle during the 2016 campaign, Bannon was the head of Breitbart News (Breitbart_barfcart), a far-right media outlet that has promoted conspiracy theories and is a platform for the alt-right movement, which espouses white nationalism.

Bannon was extremely influential during the first week of the administration – he is said to be part of a small group inside the White House driving the flurry of executive actions this week, Mara Liasson has reported.

Some of those orders have provoked criticism that Bannon and other administration officials are not coordinating with other agencies on major policy changes, Mara says, such as the chaos and detentions at airports following Trump's (illegal) executive order on immigration.

The NSC principals committee is defined as "the Cabinet-level senior interagency forum for considering policy issues that affect the national security interests of the United States." 

The NSC is chaired either by national security advisor Michael Flynn or homeland security advisor Tom Bossert and now includes the secretaries of state, defense and the Treasury, plus the attorney general, White House chief of staff and the president's chief strategist, which is Bannon's position.

On the other hand, the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will now attend Principals Committees meetings only when "issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed," according to the presidential memorandum issued on Saturday.

As NPR national security editor Philip Ewing explains, Trump "is shaking up the wonky process by which the executive branch makes its toughest decisions on national security – the big question is how much that will matter." Here's more:

"On paper, these are big changes: Past administrations ran their National Security Councils with a Great Wall of China-separation between the political team at the White House and the nonpartisan specialists who help with decision-making. The explicit inclusion of Bannon means that Trump's top adviser on messaging, strategy and other partisan issues means he could also be part of decisions about policy toward adversaries, military actions and other such decisions.

"What does it all mean, in practical terms? It's too soon to say. 

(But it's dangerous to have this former low ranking officer in charge- like Hitler who never made sergeant ie "the little corporal" now Bannon is a self appointed senior officer NOT!) 

Former national security council staffers say their day-to-day meetings and process were not governed by whatever formal instruction issued by their respective presidents. 

Political staffers from the White House have attended meetings in the past. The committees invite who they think they need to invite given the topics under discussion – something that will likely continue under [National Security Advisor Michael] Flynn."

Top security officials from the Obama administration are blasting the decision.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who served under Obama and George W. Bush, called the demotions a "big mistake" in an interview with ABC News. " I think that they both bring a perspective and judgment and experience to bear that every president, whether they like it or not, finds useful," Gates said.

Former National Security Advisor Susan Rice called the move "stone cold crazy." In a sarcastic tweet, she said: "Who needs military advice or intel to make policy on ISIL, Syria, Afghanistan, DPRK?"

White House press secretary Sean Spicer (the creator of alternative facts "Spicerfacts) responded in an interview with ABC News. "That's clearly inappropriate language from a former ambassador," Spicer said. "We are instilling reforms to make sure that we streamline the process for the president to make decisions on key, important intelligence matters. You've got a leader in General Flynn who understands the intelligence process and the reforms that are needed probably better than anybody else."

Spicer also defended Bannon's qualifications. "Well, he is a former naval officer (a low ranking officer- never advanced beyond junior status after 7 years). He's got a tremendous (not) understanding of the world and the geopolitical landscape that we have now," Spicer said. (Spicerfacts on steroids!)

Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, told CBS News, "I am worried about the National Security Council. Who are the members of it and who are the permanent members? The appointment of Mr. Bannon is something which a radical departure from any National Security Council in history."

McCain added that, "One person who is indispensable would be the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in my view."