Trump Accuses CNN and NYT of Collaborating to Undermine Iran Strikes

June 25, 2025 — President Donald Trump has launched a fierce attack on CNN and The New York Times, accusing the two news organizations of collaborating to “demean” the recent U.S. military operation targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, known as Operation Midnight Hammer. The president, posting in all caps on his Truth Social platform, asserted that the nuclear sites in Iran were “completely destroyed” and dismissed reports from both outlets as “fake news” aimed at undermining what he called “one of the most successful military strikes in history”.

Trump’s comments come in response to a CNN report, based on a leaked preliminary assessment by the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which indicated that the U.S. strikes only temporarily set back Iran’s nuclear program. The report stated that while above-ground infrastructure at sites such as Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan was damaged, deeply buried enrichment systems and uranium stockpiles remained largely intact. The New York Times and other outlets also cited similar intelligence, contradicting the administration’s claims of total destruction.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and other administration officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, have defended the operation as a “historic success,” with Leavitt stating that “everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration”. Hegseth, in a press briefing, called the leaked intelligence “preliminary, low confidence,” and accused the media of spinning the report for political motives. He also announced a joint Pentagon-FBI investigation into the leak, labeling it a threat to national security.

Critics of the media outlets, including Trump’s allies, have slammed the reports as “treasonous” and demanded accountability for those responsible for the leak. Meanwhile, defenders of CNN and The New York Times argue that their reporting is based on credible intelligence and that the public deserves transparency regarding the effectiveness of military operations.

The controversy has reignited debates over media credibility, the handling of national security information, and the role of journalism in holding power to account. As tensions remain high following the strikes, the dispute over the operation’s outcome continues to dominate political discourse in Washington and beyond.