Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
And for Morris promise, I want to bring in Democratic
California Senator Adam Schiff, who just got out of that
classified intelligence briefing there on the Hill. Cendorshift, thank you
so much for joining us on a very busy day today.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Good to be with you.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
My first question really is who were you briefed by?
Was anyone from the intelligence community involved in us.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
John Radcliffe was involved in the briefing, as well as
Secretary Heigseet, Secretary of Rubio, and General Kine, And I
think it was a useful briefing. Some of the briefers
were more useful, more helpful than others. We got I
think little more than political spin from Secretary Hegseth, but
others had substantive things to say. And I think at
(00:42):
the end of the day, my takeaway is we still
don't know a great deal in terms of the damage assessment.
We really don't I think, have a good understanding, good
comprehensive understanding, of how much the Iranian program was set back.
I mean, clearly we hit three important sites, and off
to the skill of our military conducting those operations, but
(01:04):
I think it's really premature to draw any general conclusions Certainly,
the conclusions the President announced right from the get go
were way premature, but that is I guess to be
expected from the president. But we demand more from the
intelligence community. We want some precision in understanding how much
this set back the ran in program or didn't set back.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
The program exactly, And it seems like potentially time will
tell here. And I'm being careful. I know this was
a classified briefing, but were they able to provide to
you any evidence or objective analysis of the extent of
the damage to those nuclear sites.
Speaker 3 (01:41):
I think what we got was still very early, very
preliminary information. There are really two timelines that are key here,
and they're often conflated. Sometimes they were conflated during the briefing.
They're often conflated in terms of the public discussion. That is,
how long would it have taken the Iranians to enrich
uranium to weapons grade? Others how long would it take
(02:01):
them to develop the mechanism of the bomb. And there
were certain estimates public estimates of those timelines before the strike,
And what I'm most interested in is how have those
timelines been affected? And you have to really analyze both
of them to get a sense of what it would
take the Rundians to break out and actually develop a
(02:21):
nuclear weapon. So on that score, still we need a
lot more information to make any kind of determination of
whether the run and program was set back by a
short period of middle period or a longer period.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Certainly an important question that remains to be answered. I
do want to share with you Republicans and Intelligence Chairman
Tom Cotton, he also emerged from the meeting. He called
it a brilliantly executed mission. He also condemned the earlier leak.
I want to play a little bit for you of
what he had to say.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
I think it's safe to say that we have struck
a major blood alongside our friends in Israel against Iran's
nuclear program that is going to make America, our friends
in the region safer and protect the world from the
risk of an Iranian nuclear weapon.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
He also went on to say Centership that he felt
like Democrats should be satisfied. So simply are you satisfied?
Speaker 3 (03:17):
I don't know what he means by satisfied. Look his
judgment that this makes it safer for the United States
or Iran or Israel or whatever his conclusion was. We
simply don't know the answer to that, A lot depends
on what the Iranian reaction is to this. Prior to
this attack, and I heard nothing to contradict this today.
(03:38):
Part of this attack, as the Director of National Intelligence
said in March, the Iranian regime had not made a
decision to build a bomb, was not pursuing the mechanism
of a bomb, even though it was enriching or anything.
So has that calculation changed for the regime. Are they
now going to try to make a dash for the bomb?
Do they now want to be more like North Korea
(04:00):
and be a nuclear state and a nuclear threshold state.
We don't know, and it will take time before we
do know. So I think it's very premature for Senator
Cotton or anyone else to be claiming victory here. There
are just too many unknowns.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Did you learn anything in this briefing that would discredit
those earlier leaks?
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Look, I don't know that I can say definitively one
way or another whether those leaks were accurate or not accurate.
I don't want to comment on any intelligence product, but
I can't say this. There shouldn't be a rush to
judgment about how successful the attacks were.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Look.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
I hoped that the attacks would have obliterated everything, destroyed,
everything destroyed, uranium destroyed, the facilities, incapacitated or on. They're
a malign regime that is the predominant sponsored tear in
the world, and then must never get a nuclear weapon.
But the reality is there is still so much we
don't know, including how much this operation achieved, and I'm
(05:02):
going to reserve judgment until i hear the facts.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
I think that that's fair. One last question here, were
you given any proof of the location of that enriched uranium?
Speaker 3 (05:14):
You know, I really can comment on what the discussion
was on that subject.
Speaker 1 (05:18):
All Right, Centator Shiff, thank you again for coming on
with us. I know it is incredibly busy today today
and we really appreciate the readout, So thank you for
being with us.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
That could be with you.
And for Morris promise, I want to bring in Democratic
California Senator Adam Schiff, who just got out of that
classified intelligence briefing there on the Hill. Cendorshift, thank you
so much for joining us on a very busy day today.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Good to be with you.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
My first question really is who were you briefed by?
Was anyone from the intelligence community involved in us.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
John Radcliffe was involved in the briefing, as well as
Secretary Heigseet, Secretary of Rubio, and General Kine, And I
think it was a useful briefing. Some of the briefers
were more useful, more helpful than others. We got I
think little more than political spin from Secretary Hegseth, but
others had substantive things to say. And I think at
(00:42):
the end of the day, my takeaway is we still
don't know a great deal in terms of the damage assessment.
We really don't I think, have a good understanding, good
comprehensive understanding, of how much the Iranian program was set back.
I mean, clearly we hit three important sites, and off
to the skill of our military conducting those operations, but
(01:04):
I think it's really premature to draw any general conclusions Certainly,
the conclusions the President announced right from the get go
were way premature, but that is I guess to be
expected from the president. But we demand more from the
intelligence community. We want some precision in understanding how much
this set back the ran in program or didn't set back.
Speaker 1 (01:26):
The program exactly, And it seems like potentially time will
tell here. And I'm being careful. I know this was
a classified briefing, but were they able to provide to
you any evidence or objective analysis of the extent of
the damage to those nuclear sites.
Speaker 3 (01:41):
I think what we got was still very early, very
preliminary information. There are really two timelines that are key here,
and they're often conflated. Sometimes they were conflated during the briefing.
They're often conflated in terms of the public discussion. That is,
how long would it have taken the Iranians to enrich
uranium to weapons grade? Others how long would it take
(02:01):
them to develop the mechanism of the bomb. And there
were certain estimates public estimates of those timelines before the strike,
And what I'm most interested in is how have those
timelines been affected? And you have to really analyze both
of them to get a sense of what it would
take the Rundians to break out and actually develop a
(02:21):
nuclear weapon. So on that score, still we need a
lot more information to make any kind of determination of
whether the run and program was set back by a
short period of middle period or a longer period.
Speaker 1 (02:35):
Certainly an important question that remains to be answered. I
do want to share with you Republicans and Intelligence Chairman
Tom Cotton, he also emerged from the meeting. He called
it a brilliantly executed mission. He also condemned the earlier leak.
I want to play a little bit for you of
what he had to say.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
I think it's safe to say that we have struck
a major blood alongside our friends in Israel against Iran's
nuclear program that is going to make America, our friends
in the region safer and protect the world from the
risk of an Iranian nuclear weapon.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
He also went on to say Centership that he felt
like Democrats should be satisfied. So simply are you satisfied?
Speaker 3 (03:17):
I don't know what he means by satisfied. Look his
judgment that this makes it safer for the United States
or Iran or Israel or whatever his conclusion was. We
simply don't know the answer to that, A lot depends
on what the Iranian reaction is to this. Prior to
this attack, and I heard nothing to contradict this today.
(03:38):
Part of this attack, as the Director of National Intelligence
said in March, the Iranian regime had not made a
decision to build a bomb, was not pursuing the mechanism
of a bomb, even though it was enriching or anything.
So has that calculation changed for the regime. Are they
now going to try to make a dash for the bomb?
Do they now want to be more like North Korea
(04:00):
and be a nuclear state and a nuclear threshold state.
We don't know, and it will take time before we
do know. So I think it's very premature for Senator
Cotton or anyone else to be claiming victory here. There
are just too many unknowns.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Did you learn anything in this briefing that would discredit
those earlier leaks?
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Look, I don't know that I can say definitively one
way or another whether those leaks were accurate or not accurate.
I don't want to comment on any intelligence product, but
I can't say this. There shouldn't be a rush to
judgment about how successful the attacks were.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Look.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
I hoped that the attacks would have obliterated everything, destroyed,
everything destroyed, uranium destroyed, the facilities, incapacitated or on. They're
a malign regime that is the predominant sponsored tear in
the world, and then must never get a nuclear weapon.
But the reality is there is still so much we
don't know, including how much this operation achieved, and I'm
(05:02):
going to reserve judgment until i hear the facts.
Speaker 1 (05:05):
I think that that's fair. One last question here, were
you given any proof of the location of that enriched uranium?
Speaker 3 (05:14):
You know, I really can comment on what the discussion
was on that subject.
Speaker 1 (05:18):
All Right, Centator Shiff, thank you again for coming on
with us. I know it is incredibly busy today today
and we really appreciate the readout, So thank you for
being with us.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
That could be with you.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.