Iranian phone call on US strikes leaked to media, White House responds


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Intercepted calls

Leaked U.S. intelligence reveals Iranian officials privately downplayed the impact of recent U.S. airstrikes, calling them less damaging than expected.

White House responds

The White House condemned the leaks and defended the operation’s effectiveness, calling claims of minimal damage “nonsense.”

Intel divided

Intelligence assessments remain divided, with some reports indicating minor setbacks and others citing major destruction at nuclear sites.


Full story

The Washington Post reported new, leaked information from anonymous U.S. officials related to the recent U.S. airstrikes on Iran. According to the report, the U.S. intercepted phone calls between Iranian leaders who downplayed the damage.

Intercepted calls claim limited damage at nuclear facilities

The intercepted communications reportedly show Iranian officials expressing doubts that the airstrikes caused serious damage. The calls, cited by four anonymous sources speaking to The Post, reveal the Iranian leaders said the strikes were “less devastating than they had expected.”

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

This follows a previous leak, on June 24, of a preliminary Defense Intelligence Agency assessment that similarly suggested damage from the U.S. strikes was not as thorough as first reported by the White House. That report indicated Iran’s nuclear ambitions may have been delayed by only a few months. Officials said the assessment could change as more intelligence is gathered.

White House denounces leak, defends strike’s impact

The White House responded by condemning the release of classified intelligence to the media and pushing back on the claim that the operation failed to deliver a significant blow to Iran’s nuclear program.

“It’s shameful that The Washington Post is helping people commit felonies by publishing out-of-context leaks,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told The Post. “The notion that unnamed Iranian officials know what happened under hundreds of feet of rubble is nonsense. Their nuclear weapons program is over.”

Investigation underway, Trump suggests media pressure

The Pentagon and FBI have both confirmed that an investigation is underway to determine who leaked the preliminary intelligence assessment.

Over the weekend, President Donald Trump told Fox News that investigators may soon pressure journalists directly to identify their sources.

“They could find out if they wanted,” Trump said of investigators. “They could find out easily.”

Trump says investigators could soon ask reporters directly and said, “I suspect we’ll be doing things like that.”

Intelligence conflicts on airstrikes’ effectiveness

As for the effectiveness of the airstrikes, assessments remain conflicting.

While the preliminary DIA assessment and the intercepted Iranian calls suggest limited damage, other reports — including from the CIA, Israeli Defense Forces and international nuclear watchdogs — point to extensive destruction at Iranian nuclear sites. Straight Arrow News’ Ryan Robertson released a new report featuring an interview with a retired Air Force lieutenant general who discussed conflicting intelligence, suggesting it may take months before a full picture emerges of what was damaged beneath the rubble.

Jack Henry (Video Editor) and Devin Pavlou (Digital Producer) contributed to this report.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Why this story matters

The conflicting intelligence reports and government responses to the recent U.S. airstrikes on Iran raise questions about both the effectiveness of the operation and transparency in the handling of sensitive information.

Intelligence reliability

Discrepancies between preliminary Defense Intelligence Agency assessments, intercepted Iranian communications, and reports from other agencies highlight uncertainty over the true impact of the U.S. airstrikes.

Government transparency

The controversy surrounding leaked classified intelligence and the administration's condemnation of these leaks illustrate ongoing debates over public access to sensitive information and national security.

Political and international consequences

The airstrikes' effectiveness, claims from various officials, and active investigations into leaks all have potential implications for U.S. policy, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and broader international relations.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 73 media outlets

History lesson

Previous incidents, such as the Israeli airstrikes on Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 and ongoing sabotage efforts against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, show that military actions often temporarily delay but do not eliminate nuclear capabilities. Historical patterns underline the resilience of scientific knowledge and the challenges of achieving lasting setbacks through force alone.

Global impact

The strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities affect regional stability, with implications for diplomatic relations and potential nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. The response of the international community, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, highlights ongoing concerns over monitoring and future nuclear developments in Iran. The risk of escalating conflict also attracts global scrutiny.

Context corner

The events occur in the context of longstanding tensions between the U.S. and Iran over nuclear proliferation, following cycles of diplomatic engagement and confrontation. Previous agreements, like the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, had attempted to address enrichment and monitoring, but recent years saw the return of military and economic pressure from Washington.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left challenge Trump’s narrative by using emphatic verbs like “obliterates” and “shreds” to portray leaked intelligence as decisively undermining claims of successful strikes, emphasizing administration suppression of dissent and highlighting human costs such as casualties in Israeli attacks on Tehran’s Evin Prison.
  • Not enough unique coverage from media outlets in the center to provide a bias comparison.
  • Media outlets on the right adopt a more supportive tone toward Trump’s assertions, describing White House rebuttals as “fierce” and CIA affirmations of a “years-long setback” with charged skepticism toward Iranian communications, labeling them as “unreliable indicators” to bolster the strikes’ credibility.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

73 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • Intercepted Iranian communications suggested that the damage from U.S. attacks on nuclear facilities was less damaging than stated by President Donald Trump.
  • White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt affirmed that the Iranian nuclear program is over, but she disputed claims from intercepted Iranian communications that downplayed the U.S. strikes' impact.
  • U.S. intelligence reports indicated the strikes caused damage but set back Iran's nuclear program by months, not years, conflicting with Trump's assertions.
  • Iranian officials speculated in an intercepted call that the strikes were not as destructive as expected, raising questions about the effectiveness of Trump's military strikes.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Sunday, The Washington Post reported intercepted Iranian communications downplaying U.S. strike damage, contradicting Trump’s claims of total destruction.
  • The U.S. ordered strikes on Iran's nuclear sites in Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan to disrupt its nuclear program, though full damage remains uncertain due to limited intelligence.
  • Leaked Pentagon summaries reveal tunnels remain intact, setting Iran’s nuclear program back only months, with full damage assessments expected to take weeks due to limited visibility.
  • White House Press Secretary Leavitt dismisses leaked Iran damage reports as nonsense, threatens prosecution of leakers, amid Trump's claims of total destruction of Iran's nuclear program.
  • Officials say a full damage assessment may take weeks amid ongoing debate over the strikes' effectiveness and credibility of intelligence reports.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • Intercepted Iranian communications suggest that the damage from U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear program was downplayed, according to The Washington Post, citing four sources familiar with U.S. classified intelligence assessments.
  • A preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency warned that the strikes might have only delayed Iran's nuclear program by months.
  • President Donald Trump claimed that the strikes "completely and totally obliterated" Iran's nuclear program, while U.S. officials admitted it would take time to assess the full impact of the attacks.
  • Iran's Foreign Ministry acknowledged damage but claimed that key materials were moved earlier, limiting long-term harm, contrasting views within U.S. intelligence and the White House.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Timeline

Timeline