WASHINGTON, D.C. — It’s déjà vu in the war room. Former President Donald Trump is once again at odds with the U.S. intelligence community, this time over whether his latest show of military might actually crippled Iran’s nuclear program—as he claims—or merely scratched the surface.
A leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) said the strikes set Iran’s nuclear efforts back just a few months. Trump dismissed the intel as “flat-out wrong,” declaring that Iran’s capabilities had been “completely and fully obliterated.”
🕵️ Trump’s Long War With U.S. Intelligence
The friction is familiar. Trump’s presidency was marked by a deep suspicion of federal spy agencies, often painting them as part of a "deep state" conspiracy out to undermine him.
From the Mueller probe to his infamous 2018 press conference with Vladimir Putin, Trump has repeatedly dismissed U.S. intelligence assessments in favor of his own instincts—or, occasionally, the word of foreign adversaries.
“I don’t see any reason why it would be [Russia],” he said at the Helsinki summit, contradicting U.S. intelligence on election interference.
Now, with a fresh foreign policy crisis unfolding between Israel and Iran, the pattern is repeating.
💣 Did the Iran Strikes Work? Depends Who You Ask
According to Trump, the answer is a resounding yes:
“We blew it all up. Tunnels collapsed. Satellites show it’s burned black.”
He even hinted that Israeli agents had boots on the ground in Iran to confirm the aftermath.
But the DIA’s leaked memo paints a murkier picture. It says the strikes hit key facilities but did not destroy Iran’s nuclear program, which could be back online within months.
Intelligence officials say their findings are “low confidence”—standard bureaucratic language meaning the conclusions are early, uncertain, and subject to change.
Still, the White House isn’t waiting.
🔥 Who’s Telling the Truth—Gabbard, Ratcliffe, or Trump?
Trump’s intelligence leaders, including Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, have walked a fine line.
Gabbard slammed media reports as cherry-picked and “propaganda,” while Ratcliffe claimed fresh intel from a “historically reliable source” proves Iran suffered long-term setbacks.
But that hasn’t stopped the internal drama.
-
Gabbard previously clashed with Trump over testimony that Iran wasn’t currently building a bomb.
-
She later fired two veteran intelligence officers after they contradicted Trump on Venezuela.
-
Trump reportedly told aides, “I don’t care what she said,” about Gabbard’s Iran remarks.
“His instinct is to assume they’re out to get him,” said Larry Pfeiffer, former CIA Chief of Staff. “It’s not about the data—it’s about the narrative.”
⚠️ Morale, Mistrust, and the Price of Politicizing Intel
Former FBI counterintelligence head Frank Montoya Jr. called Trump’s attacks “demoralizing.”
“Nobody is looking at this stuff from a political perspective,” Montoya said. “They’re analyzing the data. And when the policymaker-in-chief calls it fake? That just destroys morale.”
Even John Negroponte, the nation’s first DNI under George W. Bush, urged caution.
“Avoid the temptation to rush to judgment,” he warned. “It’ll take weeks or months to know what really happened.”