NBC Nightly News with Tom Llamas - ‘Here’s the Scoop’ – an all-new podcast from NBC News

Episode Date: June 25, 2025

Listen to today’s episode of Here’s the Scoop, the new daily news podcast from NBC News. Click below to follow the podcast on your favorite platform and add it to your evening routine:Apple PodcastsSpotifyAmazon Music

Hey, everybody. I'm Yasmine Vesugian. You're listening to an episode of Here's the Scoop, the new daily podcast from NBC News to help you get caught up on the day's biggest stories. Enjoy the episode. Hey, guys. It's Yasmine Vesugian with Here's the Scoop from NBC News. Lots going on today.

We got NATO leaders meeting in the Netherlands, a surprise in New York's Mayoral Primary, and a far out way to keep depression at bay. But our top story today, it's actually a question. Just how successful was the US strike on Iran's nuclear facilities? Well, everyone has a different take on that. President Trump has repeatedly said it was a total success. He said so again today at NATO.

It was called obliteration. No other military on earth could have done it. And now this incredible exercise of American strength has paved the way for peace. But now an early assessment leaked from the Defense Intelligence Agency might complicate things. Our senior national security correspondent Courtney Qubee is joining us now from the Pentagon. Hey, Court. Hey, how are you? I'm good.

I want to talk about this Intel assessment that we're getting from the Defense Intelligence Agency. What's in it? What does it say? So the first thing we have to say whenever we're talking about this assessment is it's preliminary. It's very early. It was based off the first day, maybe a little over a day after the US took these military strikes

in Iran. But the reason it's getting so much attention is because it really dispels some of the things that we've been hearing from President Trump and people close to him about the word they've been using obliteration of Iran's nuclear sites and their nuclear program more specifically. Now this it's based off of satellite imagery as well as some other intelligence means that the US has used in analyzing the three sites that the US hit in specifically focusing in on Fordo where the US used those massive ordinance penetrators, the 30,000 pound bombs. It found that while it did do damage to the infrastructure there,

the damage was such that it could be repaired and it could be back potentially online in as little as three to six months. How are they able to gather this intelligence so quickly, four days out from this strike, and make this assessment? Where is it coming from? A big part of it is satellite imagery. Something like this, I mean, a normal battle damage assessment can take days or weeks.

When you have Iran, where the US doesn't have people on the ground, one of the most critical parts of this is going to be people actually getting eyes on these facilities. At this point, we don't know if that happened. Now, President Trump, through this huge curveball at the press conference today, saying that there are people on the ground who've been able to if that happened. Now, President Trump threw this huge curve ball at the press conference today saying that there are people on the ground who've been able to make that assessment. We don't know who they are, but that would be a huge part of it.

We know that the US at least, and presumably other intelligence agencies, including the Israelis, were able to gather satellite imagery pretty quickly after the strikes occurred. So that's at least one point of reference. But another thing that they would definitely want to gather would be signals intelligence. So intercepts to hear what the Iranians are saying and get a sense of any kind of assessment that they have as well. Well, I got to say, Courtney, and talking about the wrench that the president threw in there, that can't necessarily bode well with the Iranians if they feel as if there's still folks on the ground gathering information on how bad the damage was actually done, if

in fact that's what the president was referring to. I mean, yes, it's a stunning admission. If in fact he was talking about the possibility of there being intelligence assets on the ground at these three sites, presumably within the last 48 plus hours. And to acknowledge that was absolutely stunning. What do you make of the fact that the president is sticking with his guns and saying, we obliterated the sites? And by the way, the Iranians are saying, quote unquote, they were badly damaged as we heard from a spokesperson in the foreign ministry.

And the Israelis saying the same, that at least Fordow was very badly damaged and set back a number of years. I mean, it does appear that the president is sort of picking and choosing which intelligence assessments he wants to listen to or he wants to put credence in. The reality is, there is more information coming in probably as we speak. And so this could change. But there's no question about the fact that this first assessment out of the US said three to six months. How can we trust assessments at this point when you have this initial assessment in which the president of the United States is denying coming from his own intelligence?

And now, I mean, what does that say to the intelligence professionals who are putting together the next one? It's not like they're going to do this one and then there'll be a final one. Like, presumably there will be, you know, periodic updates where they'll give the latest on what they've learned and how that has changed any kind of an assessment. Well, now you have the president and the secretary of defense and others around them lashing out and the intelligence community in general calling into question, is that going to impact their assessments going forward?

And then how does anyone put any credence in it? I mean, it's really uncharted territory right now where we are, where you have the president of the United States very publicly lashing out against his own intelligence community here. We heard that the President's saying that he's going to hold talks with Iran next week. Do we know what that means, what they're talking about? We don't. We don't know exactly where, when, or who.

We think that this could involve conversations with his special envoy, Stephen Whitcoff, perhaps his Secretary of State. Obviously, Dool had it right now as the acting national security advisor, Marco Rubio, that there may be some sort of talks, there may be some sort of an agreement that they're going to try to put together. But that announcement that he made very casually at the press conference

caught a lot of people by surprise. So we're still trying to figure out exactly what that means. At this point, the officials we're talking to, they are not saying anything about the possibility of President Trump himself meeting with any kind of an Iranian official. It seems that it would be high level but lower down than that level. Kourtney Qubi, thank you so much. Thanks.

Alright, we got to take a quick break, but coming up we're calling in a nuclear expert. Don't go anywhere. Welcome back to Here's the Scoop. There are still a lot of questions about Iran's nuclear capabilities. So we decided to call in someone you don't hear from every day. A nuclear expert. James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is joining us now. Hi, James. Thank you so much for having me. Thanks for being here.

So we just heard that the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities may not have been as effective as President Trump is actually claiming. How do you see it? So the debate that's going on about their effectiveness at the moment concerns how much damage was done at a big underground plant at Fordham. And honestly, I think that debate's a little bit of a red herring, I have to say. The big question in my mind is not the fate of what we targeted. It was the fate of what we didn't target, the things that we didn't attack in the airstrikes.

Which would be what? I worry that Iran has left highly enriched uranium, centrifuge components, and expertise. That combination taken together, I think, risks giving Iran the capability to rebuild its nuclear weapons program very rapidly. We did, though, have some reports that Iran may have moved some of that enriched uranium from some of these facilities. How quickly, how easily can you actually move uranium? So the highly enriched uranium that comes off centrifuge plants is in a form called

uranium hexafluoride. This is stored in small cylinders that are roughly the same size and shape as scuba tanks. Wow. All of the evidence suggests, including statements directly from the International Atomic Energy Agency Director General, that Iran removed this material before strikes began.

That's very easy to do. It could literally been as simple. In the words of the IEA Director General, as like putting these cylinders in the back of cars and potentially dispersing them around the country. So you could put these cylinders in the back of a bed of a truck. Literally could be the trunk of a car. Wow. Like they're literally the size of scuba tanks.

And how many are we talking? I don't know exactly the number that there would have been. We know from the IAEA's very diligent inspections that Iran had about 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium. Now, this could not be used practically in nuclear weapons directly. It's not highly enriched enough. But it's technically very easy to go from 60% to the level that you most want for weapons,

which is about 90%. That's a relatively quick process. And there would be enough material for several nuclear weapons. How quickly could they rebuild their program if in fact they've been set back a couple of months? So rebuilding the entire program to the scale it was would take many years, but a much smaller program would suffice to get to the bottom. Let me give you an example here.

To go from 60 percent to 90 percent, they could do that job in three weeks, maybe less. That could be built in a small industrial facility in downtown Tehran. That could be done in a mountain much deeper underground than Fordow was. So they don't need a massive program to get their first few nuclear weapons. And the big fear is they could hide that program or they could bury it so deep that it's beyond the reach of US bunker busters. So if in fact the program was not, quote unquote, obliterated, like the president is claiming it was, is that because of the way in which these sites were struck, you think, or because

it can't be obliterated because of the way the Iranians have built the program? The latter. I don't think there was ever a good military option against Iran. You could destroy what you knew about. You could destroy the large fixed sites. But the problem was that unless you're going to invade and occupy the country, there is no military way of reliably depriving Iran of expertise, centrifuge components, and highly enriched uranium. If you are someone that believes that Iran should not have a robust nuclear program, are we better off today than we were 14 days ago before this war started? I absolutely believe Iran should not have nuclear weapons, and I believe we are worse

off today than we were 14 days ago. James Acton, a really eye-opening conversation. And I'm super appreciative for you joining us today. And I'm thankful because our producer on hand told us she, in fact, is not a nuclear expert, but you are actually in real life a nuclear expert. So thank you for that. Thanks so much for having me.

Thank you, James. Moving on now to some headlines. Eight months after launching this campaign, with the vision of a city that every New Yorker could afford, we have won. It was a big night for State Assemblyman Zoran Mumdani with former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo conceding the primary for New York City Mayor. But it is not quite over.

Cuomo has said he may run as an independent in the general election in November. And guess who else is running as an independent? Current New York City Mayor Eric Adams. It's gonna be a fun one. And... Turns out magic mushrooms might actually be magic. A new study presented at the Psychedelic Science Conference found that a single dose of psilocybin, that's the main psychoactive ingredient in magic mushrooms,

kept 67% of people depression-free for years when combined with therapy. Think calmer minds, brighter moods, and better everyday functioning. Experts say more research is needed, but if these results hold, the future of mental health might just be trippier than we thought. And thank God the research is finally keeping up with my weekend activities. Just kidding. Let's talk basketball for a moment.

The 2025 NBA draft officially tips off tonight at the Barclays Center here in New York. A staggering 59 picks set to reshape the league's landscape. All eyes on Duke's sensation, Cooper flag, widely projected to go number one overall to the Dallas Mavericks. Coop's versatile two-way game has scouts raving. Today, co-host Craig Melvin talked to him ahead of tonight's draft. What's the one thing that you're most excited about?

I think just, you know, sharing this moment with my family. You know, I think it's a dream come true for all of them and me as well. You think you'll be emotional? I know my mom's gonna be bawling her eyes out when my name gets called. Yeah, that is what moms do. Draft night tickets start around $37 for upper level seats

with lower level spots hitting $200 to $300 on resale sites. Not exactly pocket change, but when rumor has it that Cooper Flags about to ink a 62.7 million dollar rookie deal. $300 to say that you were there doesn't sound so bad. One last one before we go. After more than six decades of riffing for Ireland, The Edge from U2 is finally officially Irish.

David Howe Evan. Yeah, The Edge has a real name. He was born in England. He was raised in Dublin, and then waited 62 years to get around to get in a passport. A little tardy with the paperwork, he joked at Monday's naturalization ceremony in Killarney. After a lifetime of playing to the world

as an Irishman in spirit, it's now official. One love, one band, one passport. I'm here again Friday, folks. That's gonna do it for us today at Here's the Scoop from NBC News. I'm Yas again Friday, folks. That's gonna do it for us today at Here's the Scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Vassoulian. Thanks for hanging with us, and we'll see you tomorrow with whatever the day may bring.